Strange one - I don't care what you SAY communism is. What you say is a mythic fairy land, which violates all common sense. I care what people who call themselves communist DO, and what they DO is murder, repress, and subjugate their own people!

How many million bodies do you people get before we say enough is enough!

The propaganda the United States produced showing how the USSR and the PRC were totally communistic was very well received in America. That both of the aforementioned counties were serial dictatorships with a veneer of socialism to keep the serfs in line is not worth discussing as it falls outside the pravda most americans have grown up with. Just as National Socialism had a national health care system, and american right-ies will scream till dawn that socialism is even in its name for the love of ghad, illustrating all the other inherent aspects that define fascism is just a waste of effort.

Commies are still dropping bombies on their mommies.

2Wolves

So you will agree we must stamp out Christianity before communism though? Far more people who call themselves Christians have killed than those who call themselves communists.

Do you Hitler was a member of the Catholic Church all his life? Does this mean Christianity committed all of the crimes of Hitlerism?

No, because my radical friend, while all communist countries, murder, repress restrict and subjugate their own citizens, not all Christian countries do. Therefore the correlation fails. I really know this is wasted effort, your are blind to your idiology and it does grow tiresome, but try coming up with better arguments.

Also those who called themselves communists have killed about 125 million people.

Thats more then those that call themselves ANYTHING else, much less Christians.

I know math is hard.

EDIT: Forgot that murder thing

1, You are still counting famine, which is part act of God, part honest mismanagement, part enforced by the Westen embargo's against these nations, and part cruelty of someone like Mao or Stalin.

2, Christians have killed more than 125 million people throughout history.

3, The Paris Commune and the Israeli Kibbutz are the only societies in the world that have been close to communistic, they did not opress their own citizens, murder them, mistreat them, or anything else like this to a greater degree than openly reactive countries in the West, in fact freedoms in the commune and Kibbutz are far greater.

4, Really, your whole argument is just doublethink, "these people have the label of communist, therefore all communist societies lead to dictatorship, and often to murderous leaders." Calling oneself a communist country does not make one a communist country. China calls itself a "Democratic Republic" does it not? Why do you not count the deaths in Mao's China and after as deaths caused by democracy and those who believe in - when the Chinese government clearly calls itself "democratic"?

While i am not a fan of Christianity, you do realise that Christianity has caused the deaths of 125 million people in 2000 years, while Communism has cause that many deaths in a 100. Do the math and find out who is the greater threat.

Or we could apply Strange Famous logica and say anyone that has killed was not a Christian, as Christians don t kill so Christianity didnt kill anyone.

So Strange Famous, by your standards, Christianity never harmed a fly.

Again, you have no proof to offer, and the Israel Kibbutz are built on land stolen from people that lived their for 2000 years. So much for you "communism" they are also in part funded by the Capitalistic Israel government. The Paris Commune I assume is protected by , defended bye educated by and in the middle of a nice capitalistic nation so your proof is once again laughable.

The difference is no one is FORCED to be in a Kibbutz or commune. Communism can work in a small group, though I can't be sure it would work for a long time ( with the kids who might think differently), but it can work. What it can't do is work when you have millions of people who want no part of it. The solution of course is killing those people right?

Why do I keep responding....why do I keep responding....why do I keep responding...mmmmm donuts

The problem is that some people seem to lack understanding of what the word "communist" means, they cannot it seems free themselves from Cold War propoganda and the "Red Menace".

Communism does not, never has, never will, mean Stalinist Russia, Maoist China, or any other Nation State in the twentieth century.

Communism is a worldwide phenomona, which will be estabished by the collapse of capitalism, there will not be "communist countries" at war with "capitalist countries" - what will happen is the unity of working men and women across the world to rebuild the world into a communistic utopia, out of the ashes of a collapsed and failed capitalism.

What will destroy capitalism? One final world war? Ecological disaster? The sheer irresistable will of the people who long for a democratic communist world, or will the free market simply implode and grind to a halt, unable to function anymore through its inherent contradictions?

These are the questions - not childish comments that communists must be murdered because Stalin was a murder, and Stalin admired Lenin who admired Marx...

Too bad communism means stalinist russia, Maoist China, and any other communist state in the twentieth century.

How does communism handle people who do not want to help produce anything? You know people that just want to sit at home all day and play video games. Do they get the same check that everyone else does?

Robotic answer, " in communism, that will never happen as peopel will magically WANT to work, and work hard. NEver shirking, and being happy and content, while dancing with bunnies."

To bad the reality of communism is fammine, death and failure.

Strange Famus please answer my question.

How does communism handle people who do not want to help produce anything? You know people that just want to sit at home all day and play video games. Do they get the same check that everyone else does?

They get a bullet and a mass grave.

I have another question. What is to stop this? Some workers just dont work. They slack off, they call in sick, they do shoddy work. Can they be fired in your Communist uptopia? What is the incentive to the other workers to work harder? Do they get individual raises? More time off? Shorter waits on the line for cheese?
If I realised that I was not going to get a raise, and I see others slacking off, and not getting fired, why should I work hard?
If they do get fired for slacking, what happens? Do they stop getting paid? Do they loose their house? Do they get another job and slack off?
How is the hard worker rewarded and the slacker discouraged?
Does the manager get more pay than the worker? If not, what is the benifit of being the manager? If so, then that is not sharing, as the worker, by defintion of communism, is the most important part of a company.
Why be a doctor? Why goe through all that schooling, and stress to not be rewarded for your hard work.
Why open a store at all? If you open a shop, it doesnt belong to you. So the government will open Comic Book Stores? Porno Shops? Art Movie THeaters?
Why will I make a movie? How can I profit off it? Why risk such a hit or miss proffesion if I can just make an easlier living slacking off in some office?
Why write a book? I wont be able to keep the rights of the book, it will belong to the state, and I will not recieve the compenstion if it is a hit.
Can I move if I dont like my home? What is to prevent anyone from living in the best homes in say, Beverly Hills, or the slums in East LA? What is the criteria for those places? Can I choose to live in a nice mountain estate, or will the government decide that i have to live in a flat in Brooklyn?
What if I dont like my job? Can I switch jobs? What about my doctor? What if he is one of those slackers? Do I have to stay with him? How many grocery stores will the government fund in my area? What if my only store is filled with slackers?
Why should the meat inspector work hard? What is his insentive? Again, can he be fired, and if so, does he share in this communist utopia?


All these things, can and did happen and still happen in Communist states. This is why their econonmies slowed down, and crashed.

I'm a newbie, so forgive my intrusion. But I have to laugh to myself at the idea that the US economy is somehow <i>harmful</i> to developing nations.

The fact of the matter is that since the US became engine for the world's economy, nation development has occured at an unprecedented rate of speed. The standard of living in across the globe has improved rather dramatically since the end of WWII.

US consumerism is GOOD for the people of developing nations. The US trade imbalance is GOOD for the standard of living in formerly impoverished countries.

The reason for the dominance of the US economy is that the government places fewer burdens on businesses than do other nations. As a result, the best and brightest from all over the world have come to this country to seek their fortunes, and have built a country that continues to enjoy an unprecedented prosperity while contributing to the prosperity of the rest of the world.

OK, enough rhetoric; here's some data for you to consider before you go bashing the impact of the US on world prosperity. Facts speak much louder than academic polisci theorizing:

http://www.undp.org/hdr2003/pdf/hdr03_HDI.pdf

Thanks Madp,

I was going to ask for proof that America is crippling third world nations, since a lot of that talk was flung out, but I guess I got distracted by the loonie Commie praising.

So anyone have any data that shows that American capitalism is destroying the third world?

If you take the time to examine the data I posted on the UN's human development index, you'll see that practically all of the nations on the dangerously low end of the scale are African.
The African continent's woes are clearly more directly related to European colonialism, corruption in organized governments, and civil war among tribes thrown together in "countries" designated by British, French, and Dutch colonialists.

In sum, Africa's problems are HARDLY the fault of the U.S.

Third time is a charm, maybe he will answer it now. If he doesn't we all know that he is a naive optimisit.


Strange Famus please answer my question.

How does communism handle people who do not want to help produce anything? You know people that just want to sit at home all day and play video games. Do they get the same check that everyone else does?

This is an honest question. Because communism in theory sounds great but in practice it never seems to work because of problems like this.

These people will not exist in a communist society. If there is a person who is pathologically lazy, they will be educated and socialised to understand the fulfillment they can find in work and contributing to the social fund.

Endymon

There will be no porno theatre's in a communist society

;)

hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha
hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha
hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha
hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha
hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha
hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha
hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha
hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha
hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha
hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha

Your optimism is refreshing. But as many have pointed out, your predictions are naive and fly in the face of everything we know about human nature. In all previous attempts at "communism," these people have been killed or jailed. People don't WANT to be "educated and socialized" (all buzzwords for indoctrination, brainwashing, and koolaid drinking).

Many people will find your Utopian vision to be more of a nightmare, and will be willing to fight tooth and nail to prevent leaders of you ilk from ever obtaining power. How will you overcome us?. . *ahem*. . .I mean "them"?

I think there is one thing you do not understand, people WANT to work, people want to be creative and productive. In Capitalism, people are alienated from their labour, mentally, physically, financially... people appear "lazy" in capitalism because they reject capitalist exploitation.

In a communist work, nearly all people, 99.9%, will be HAPPY to work, because their work is truly creative, and alienation ceases when all contribute to the social fund that all have equal access to.

But this is somewhat off topic.

1, As stated already in other threads and here, but I will repeat, there has never been an actually existing communist state.

2, There will be counter revolutionaries and reactionary forces that will resist the revoluton. These people will be overcome, by the working class of every state, by whatever means necessary.

If possible, we all want the revolution to be peaceful, and total, for the reactionary forces to be swept aside by the force of revolution itself... but if these forces use violence against the working class, and if they use violence and terror to try and deny the democratic will of the huge majority of people and the best interests of all people... then they must be swept aside still.

The communist says to the reactionary forces, "we do not want violence, we do not want to fight... communism is the opposite of war, communism is peace... but we will defend our revolution, and if you insist on violent conflict, know that you will be beatenm you will be swept aside, your forces will be destroyed, because the revolution is inevitable, and the forces of revolution will surge on and on and on and never cease until its goals are realised"

Pie in the sky.

If what you say is true, we're going to have a world filled with bad garage bands and even worse poets, yet noone who wants to pick up the garbage, work in school cafeterias, or mine for needed coal, metals, and minerals.

Do we all have to draw straws to decide who works in the sulfur mines vs. who gets to write poetry and music?

And what's this nonsense about "no porn"???
;)

Wow. I've been here two days, and I already have a true enemy who would kill me for resisting his communist revolution. This has got to be some kind of record.

See you on the battlefield!

Wow Strange Famous is completly brainwashed.

If people want to work explain all my friends who don't want to work. I have friends that are highly educated and very intelligent, border line guienesses. The only problem is they lack motivation to do work, instead they would rather just sit around all day, watch movies and play games. People will always rather do leasure activities than work activities as long as there is no opportunity cost of the leasure activities (ie work sallary). This is part of human nature and will never change. For the most part people are more interested in instant gratificatin than delayed gratification.

You are increadably nieve to think that people will always want to work and contribute to society if they don't have to, unless you plan to do some sort of brainwashing or to have them live in complete fear of the government.

The revolution is won in the hearts and minds of the people, only the most illogical and cruel would fight against it. Now, in a capitalist society, where your whole life you have been the victim of the indoctrination of the capitalist state, education system, media/propoganda system, the capitalist church... you cannot see your own best interests and your own will. The cruelest alienation of all is that capitalism has alienated you from yourself, you believe you do not want communism but of course you do... as the revolution nears, as it becomes reality, people will see the truth at last, and they will turn on the capitalist superstructure that is their enemy with great anger.

These people do not want to do capiatlist work, that is all.

See I called his answer before he responced. Dont you love how he just says a line from a pamphelt without even one shred of evidence to back it up? And I love how he can say that Christianity was bad, but Communism is good. His logic that there were no communists is laughable.

Again, waist of typing here, do you have ANY proof of this?

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
I love how you can claim to know what WILL happen when you cant even see what DID happen. Good luck with your mastubatory communist day dreams. Too bad the rest of the world passed you by.

It WILL happen

Aside from charitable volunteering, capitalist work is the <b>only</b> kind of work I'll do.

And then you will have to get off your 300bls ass and acutally do something. LOL

For the upteenth time, you have any proof?



Does anyone beside me realise that everything Strange Famous has said was been with out support and all his points have been wrong?

And then we are supposed to belive that a communist revolution will happen? He slays me....

OK Strange Famous. What you are speaking of sounds more like a religious dogma than a reality-based political philosophy.

Your argument is circular, and your claims can't be held up to any rigorous, scientific study.

Is there ANY event or fact you can conceive of which would lead you to acknowledge that your vision of communist utopia is wrong? Anything at all?

Strange Famus until you come up with some pragmatic evidance of your claims people are going to laugh at you. I challenge you to find pragmatic evidence to support your claims that people will want to magically work, that capitalism is the source of lethargicness, and that the world is on the brink of a communist revolution.

You sound a bit like a cult leader the way you talk.

read Das Kapital

Given that youve lost a lot of weight yourself, Im surprised you want to make fun of other people because they are overweight.

Waiting for your explaination please explain in your own worlds why this will all happen, as I could direct you too a hundred books that say the opposite.

Please think for yourself for once.



And I lost weight because I did something about it. I dont blame anyone for excess weight, nor do I blame anyone for my weight loss, except myself.

I have spoken a great deal about why it will happen, refer to the "war between socialists and liberty" thread.

Keep off the personal BS or be moderated.

And you were shedded apart in that thread.

I am reposting this cause it was ignored by Strange Famous. I would like a reply to this, one that is not just a link to a book, or a cut and paste from a socialist website. Nor would I like a one sentence " COmmunism will clear all pimples and smell pine fresh" answer. I would like you to explain, in your own words, siting examples to back up your points. Not a robotic, cult like answer from some pamphlet.

Communism is such a dream for some people because it will allow them to do nothing and live off the work of others. It is capitalism in sheeps clothing, except that instead of capital outlay or hard work, the owners of the means of production are the ones who yell loudest on the street corner. Honestly, what have you ever seen any communist aggitator contribute to society?






*crickets chirping*

How can he cite examples if it's never existed?

I for one am not a believer in communism but I don't doubt that it's only a matter of time before the world is forced to fundamentaly change. How long can we maintain a world system so dependant on exploitation? Who knows. What I do know is we created this system and we can change it. While I'd predict a form of capitalism will be the driving force for some time, at the rate we're going the capitalism we practice now is going to be the end of us.


SLM3

I, for one, welcome our new communist overlord. He shall bring peace to mankind.



Strange Famous, I suppose you don't want anyone to live over thirty either.

You watch too many science fiction movies. A utopia that you're suggesting is certain is a pipe dream. There are too many lazy jackasses that have opinions to let that happen.

Plus there are too many rich people unwilling to give up their moneys.

*Logs on to TFP*
*Checks Tilted Politics*
*Clicks on page 4 of "is there any real proof that Usama Bin Laden organised the WTC attacks?"*
*Walks straight into a discussion about communist revolution around the world*
*^WTF Mate?*

Guys, we're going nowhere fast on the original issue here. Although I think that Strange Famous will continue to deny the actionable intelligence we give him that has been corroborated by multiple sources, I still want to discuss OBL and terrorism. Not the theories of Marx and Lenin, that's for another thread.

First off, it has. Second are you saying that Strange Famous is using a faith based system to define his world view, much like the dreaded Christians?:rolleyes:

LOL! You have a very valid beef.

As for the original thread, I found his videotaped trash-talking session with his flunkies re: 9-11 to be pretty damning evidence. It's not even the least bit controversial anymore from what I've seen and read.

Anyone have a reliable source that merits the re-examination of Bin Laden's culpability?

You are right and I agree.

Let's get back to the original topic, and make a new thread to discus communism. I will answer endymon's questions in that thread.

Also, to the moderator who commented here, I'm not trying to make personal comments about anyone, I apologise if it was construed as that, I just felt that (1) when someone is making comments about me being fat in a thread in which they are attacking communism this suggests they have run out of real arguments (2) although it doesnt really upset me, I was just surprised that the person who made the "maybe even you could get off your 300 lbs ass" comment would have said it, given the things that person has posted in other threads about their weight, thats all.

But to get back to Bin Laden... I understand that the tape in which he was talking about the mechanics of it was adjudged to be probably fake?

I am not unwilling to believe Bin laden was responsible, I just havent seen the evidence. I am well aware Bin Laden was pleased that the attack happened, and encouraged more like it to happen, but did he actually plan it, fund it, co-ordinate it? Or does he just incite warfare against the West?

I still believe that the attack did not require a great deal of technical skill. I understand that modern jet planes are very easy to fly indeed, I still think 4 groups of 5 people each with knives and a couple of flying lessons could have pulled it off - provided they have the will to die to enact their unjustified hatrid of a foriegn power.

With all due respect, SF, I don't think we're going to agree on this or any other politically related issue. The sources you find credible, I find laughable. The sources I find credible, you have ignored up to this point.

I guess we'll have to ATD (agree to disagree).

I can't say for sure tha bin Laden himself planned the attack. I would say that he was most likely in volved in the planning, at least of the targets and method of attack. The actual procedure was most likely outlined then developed and refined in the field by the operatives themselves.

I don't think there's much of a question that he funded the attacks, every soure of income that has been tracked is directly down the line from him. We know that he is rich, we know that he wants to kill Americans. We have him on a video tape saying something along the lines of "We didn't expect it to go so well." I see that you agree that he hates us and supports attacks against us, what I'm not sure of is your reason for questioning whether it was him specifically who planed it. Would I be correct to assume that your uncertainty about his involvement is linked to your belief that the war against terrorism is unjust and the basis is flawed?

I believe a war against terrorism is endless and self defeating... vengence is never satisfied, if US soliders kill Iraqi civilians to topple a regime they believe supports terrorists, they create more terrorists.

I am not defending UBL, I think he a religious bigot, a hate monger, and most likely a criminal.

But at the same time I think people want to believe in some kind of arch villian, because that is safer that what I believe is the truth - that an attack as terrible as the one on the WTC did not need huge funding, or a criminal mastermind behind it all, it was simple to carry out... and that is what people seem too frightened to think: that now we have so many ways to hurt each other, that it is so easy, there is simply no defence, and as long as a human race we chose to fight, there will never be any defence, the bomber always gets through, the innocent always die for someone else's war.

You are correct Strange Famous, we should not go after terrorists, we should just let them act out...

I believe we should address the causes of terrorism. We should indeed try to prevent and stamp out terrorism. I just do not believe the best way to do it is to declare war on Iraq and Afghanistan.

Yes lets try and understand this poor misunderstood victims. Puh-Leaze. Iraq is questionable, but your a moron if you think going into Afganistan wasn't a good idea.

I don't believe that there can be any nation in the world who's people have suffered more at the meddling hands of the two super powers than Afghanistan.

Afganastan is actually showing a lot of promise now days. The "meddeling" of the US definatly looks like has placed the Afgans in a better possition then they were prior to the US "meddeling". The potential for Afganastan is great.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,107291,00.html

http://english.aljazeera.net/NR/exer...292C56C095.htm

This is definatly better then life under the Taliban.

True, but then again America supported the Taleban and helped de-stabilise a socialist regime in Afghanistan that was friendly to Russia.

We never supported the Taliban. We supported Pakistan/the Mujahdeen, but we never supported the Taliban. The Taliban came into power in 1996, at which point we refused to recognize them as a legitimate government.

America supported the taliban is another of those leftiest lies. We did no such thing.

The communism/capitalism puppet wars of the past have always been unfortunate. They went on for many years and many people were hurt because of them. They however are not just the USAs fault but instead both the USSR and USAs fault (there are probably a lot more nations at fault also). I have never agreed with wars fought in the name of stopping communism.

But the whole US funding the Taliban is crap. When they were fighting the Soviets no one could have known the type of nation they would lead but at the time the US had one of 3 choices, stay out (unlikely because of the scare of communism), back the Soviets (even more unlikely) or back the Afganies. "The enemy of my enemy is my friend". Tough times call for tough relationships and decisions. Churchill once made a comment saying he would ally with Satin in order to defeat Hitler.

I completely agree that the state of Afghanistan should be blamed both on Russia and America. And the "enemy of my enemy" policy, gives you people like the Taleban (and Saddam Hussain)

Both Russia and America were playing politics with the fates of entire nations (just as the European colonialist state's did before them) and a lot of the world's problems today can be traced back to that.

Why not? Did you agree with wars stoping nazism? Their body count was a pittance compared to communism. The nazis killed about 13 million people. The communists killed 125 million. If you agree that stopping Nazis was good, then how can you not agree that stopping communism was better?

I agreed to stop Hitler. I can't say for sure if I would agree to stop Nazism because I'm not educated enough in what Nazism means, although i know it isn't simply Hitlerism. With that said communism does not condone killing it however is an unfortunate side effect of the past implimentations of communism.

I have problems with people forcing opinions of others onto them, now i'm not positive on the details of all the puppet wars of the past, but i know that many of them occured because the US wanted to stop a peaceful spread of communsim. I can see going in and defending a nation if they are being attacked but to go in just because a nation wants to be communism is silly. Let them do what they want with the nation and if they mess up either by human rights violations or other frowned upon activites then go in. Think of it this way you can tell a child to not do something over and over and they may or may not listen but in the end they need to learn for themselfs why something is bad.

It's a little different. Noone knew the death counts of communism back then, and essentially America went to war because they were afraid that communism might spread to their shores and take over the government. I'm sure if they had known the full atrocoties of the USSR, they would've done something, but they were just trying to stop communism as an ideal rather than the Soviet Union as a country.

Plus, noone knew the death count of the nazis either until their downfall.

n/m

Whoo. You actually made sense on that one. I agree with you there, at the time, stuff seems really great and then later on down the road, stuff gets really bad. While America never supported the Taliban, it did leave an environment for it to take over. We just simply didn't take responsibility (if we had started nation building back then, our job might be easier today). Yet, hindsight is 20/10, it would be great if we could look into a crystal ball and see if what we do now will screw something else up, but we can't. However, I do think that we are more wary of the actions that we take today than even we were 10 years ago.

Nothing could have been done. Because of the nuclear arms race, the only time it would have been plausible to make an overt assault on the Soviet Unioin would have been before the first Soviet nuclear weapon.

We did covertly support the anti-Soviet Mujahadeen in Pakistan by going through Pakistan in the 1970's and 1980's (Charlie Wilson's War is a great book about this.)

Really??!! Are you <i>sure</i> it was <i>really</i> socialist? If so, how could it possibly have failed?

(rhetorical question)

:crazy: