1. Post #81
    The Kakistocrat's Avatar
    November 2011
    1,353 Posts
    Socialism -> More than likely yes.

    Communism -> Definitely not.

    If you want an example why, compare many of the fairly Socialist countries like Japan or The Netherlands, to the extreme communist Best Korea.
    Japan is socialist? Does no one know the difference between communism, socialism, and mixed markets?

  2. Post #82
    MEGA SENPAI KAWAII UGUU~~ =^_^=
    Megafan's Avatar
    September 2008
    14,608 Posts
    Japan is socialist? Does no one know the difference between communism, socialism, and mixed markets?
    Apparently so.

  3. Post #83
    Gold Member
    Scoooby's Avatar
    April 2008
    1,326 Posts
    you two are cute.

    Edited:

    I'm not calling you mentally incapable, I just can't understand your posts. They're pretty incoherent.


    Who are you thinking of as 'the people'? I know Fox and CNN mocked OWS, but I can think of other organizations that gave it fairer treatment, like MSNBC or The Young Turks.

    Edited:


    I've said it before and I'll say it again, North Korea is not Communist. The workers do not own the means of production and the state is totalitarian, not gone.

    Japan as well can hardly be described as a 'socialist' country, because they too do not have cooperative ownership of industry.
    Umm, are you supposing I'm not for MSNBC or The Young Turks or however this modern society wants to vocalize the same message I am? Oh my god. Our society is becoming aware of the top 1%. And it's what is driving Ron Paul right now. Is that realization.

    Quote me.

  4. Post #84
    MEGA SENPAI KAWAII UGUU~~ =^_^=
    Megafan's Avatar
    September 2008
    14,608 Posts
    Umm, are you supposing I'm not for MSNBC or The Young Turks or however this modern society wants to vocalize the same message I am? Oh my god. Our society is becoming aware of the top 1%. And it's what is driving Ron Paul right now. Is that realization.

    Quote me.
    You think awareness of wealth inequality is what drives Ron Paul? I'm well aware of it and would love to see someone combat it, but Ron Paul is not that someone.

  5. Post #85
    Gold Member
    Scoooby's Avatar
    April 2008
    1,326 Posts
    You think awareness of wealth inequality is what drives Ron Paul? I'm well aware of it and would love to see someone combat it, but Ron Paul is not that someone.
    Then who is? Nobody. Because no fucking federal funding is being put into the campaigning OF REAL PATRIOTS.
    Because CONSUMERISM (once again) controls MEDIA. The internet is there to defraud everything corrupting the US.

  6. Post #86
    MEGA SENPAI KAWAII UGUU~~ =^_^=
    Megafan's Avatar
    September 2008
    14,608 Posts
    Then who is? Nobody. Because no fucking federal funding is being put into the campaigning OF REAL PATRIOTS.
    Because CONSUMERISM (once again) controls MEDIA. The internet is there to defraud everything corrupting the US.
    All campaigns should be publicly funded, patriot or not.

  7. Post #87
    Gold Member
    Scoooby's Avatar
    April 2008
    1,326 Posts
    All campaigns should be publicly funded, patriot or not.
    Any campaign for a new fucking idea is a good campaign IMO!

  8. Post #88
    MEGA SENPAI KAWAII UGUU~~ =^_^=
    Megafan's Avatar
    September 2008
    14,608 Posts
    Any campaign for a new fucking idea is a good campaign IMO!
    Well they should at least be good ideas.

  9. Post #89
    Gold Member
    Scoooby's Avatar
    April 2008
    1,326 Posts
    Well they should at least be good ideas.
    People are moved by movements.
    Gay Rights are like the fucking eye candy of society.
    But it's "important" in the eyes of Wall Street, who endorse classes never realizing they've never been oppressed in the first place.
    Oh and they also endorse the repeated debates of these issues. Because nobody's pointing them out.

    Romney is 1%. Obama is 1%. We are the 99%.
    Oppressing the occupy wallstreet movement is oppressing legitimate public concerns.
    And I hear fucking factory workers telling "those losers to get a job". I worked in a factory temporarily with my parents.
    And all of those factory workers and my parents are watching bullshit television.
    Yet we have internet access. Internet is the embodiment of world opinion.

    Intellectualism is the key.

  10. Post #90
    lulzbocksV2's Avatar
    April 2011
    1,418 Posts
    No. Communism has been an utter failure for every nation or community that has ever attempted it. They always follow a very similar cycle: mass deprivation and starvation, then rapid growth, then stalling and collapse or stagnation, necessitating the introduction of market reforms after which the country ceases to be "communist".

    And yes there have been many attempts at communism, even though you might claim that "they were never true communists!" it has become apparent through the thousands of people who supported it and attempted it that yes, those were actual attempts at communism, you are talking about something else.

  11. Post #91
    Gold Member
    trotskygrad's Avatar
    June 2011
    8,513 Posts
    Japan is socialist? Does no one know the difference between communism, socialism, and mixed markets?
    yes, you expected the idiots here (WHO MISPELLED COMMUNISM IN THE TITLE) to know the difference? lol.

    only country that has a perhaps slight chance is russia, where communists are the second largest party. However, a lot of the UR voter block is just anti-communist in general so I wouldn't count on it.

  12. Post #92
    Gold Member
    Dennab
    February 2006
    3,001 Posts
    In the third world and lots of former warsaw pact states it's more of a question of when. In the west marxism is going to have to trump centre left liberalism and social democracy first, once again. All it takes is heightening class struggle and financial attacks on the working class.

  13. Post #93
    Gold Member
    trotskygrad's Avatar
    June 2011
    8,513 Posts
    In the third world and lots of former warsaw pact states it's more of a question of when. In the west marxism is going to have to trump centre left liberalism and social democracy first, once again. All it takes is heightening class struggle and financial attacks on the working class.
    I wouldn't say they would go full communist, in fact most of the former warsaw pact (and current CIS) is strongly averse to communism. Socialist reforms might happen with redistribution of wealth, however I don't see redistribution of capital and land happening any time soon.

  14. Post #94
    Gold Member
    Dennab
    February 2006
    3,001 Posts
    I wouldn't say they would go full communist, in fact most of the former warsaw pact (and current CIS) is strongly averse to communism. Socialist reforms might happen with redistribution of wealth, however I don't see redistribution of capital and land happening any time soon.
    The governments perhaps, but they end up digging their own grave anyway. The former eastern bloc and yugoslavia has a prevalent communist nostalgia problem that leaves people desiring thing that cannot either be reformed into existence or be funded by the state. Most former bloc countries have yet to surpass their old selves economically, which may never happen without the old socialist trade bloc and generous soviet subsidies.

    Eastern europe is a sick man that's already, only 20 years after the collapse, disgruntled with liberal capitalism. It just doesn't work there, and we will see it either take a right wing national capitalist direction or a communist one. Both will probably be benefiting from the reminiscing of the old days and telling the west to piss off.

  15. Post #95

    January 2012
    2 Posts
    Communism would work better in a small community. In countries it fails because it is not employed properly.
    It actually works best in small communes where everyone knows each other. It begins to flail and fail in anything larger most of the time.

    Though in the foreseeable future, the only candidate for militant communism (under a new name of course) is the US, depending on how much wider the economic divide becomes.

    Most former Warsaw pact states are staunchly opposed to the idea of a resurgence of it and usually anyone below pension age is going to fight it tooth and nail.

  16. Post #96
    Gold Member
    trotskygrad's Avatar
    June 2011
    8,513 Posts
    The governments perhaps, but they end up digging their own grave anyway. The former eastern bloc and yugoslavia has a prevalent communist nostalgia problem that leaves people desiring thing that cannot either be reformed into existence or be funded by the state. Most former bloc countries have yet to surpass their old selves economically, which may never happen without the old socialist trade bloc and generous soviet subsidies.

    Eastern europe is a sick man that's already, only 20 years after the collapse, disgruntled with liberal capitalism. It just doesn't work there, and we will see it either take a right wing national capitalist direction or a communist one. Both will probably be benefiting from the reminiscing of the old days and telling the west to piss off.
    not really, if they're so anti-western why are so many seeing EU membership?

    "soviet subsidies" might have enhanced their economy in the past when the soviet union was still intact, but I doubt Russia will be subsidizing anyone.

  17. Post #97
    Gold Member
    Dennab
    February 2006
    3,001 Posts
    not really, if they're so anti-western why are so many seeing EU membership?
    When did I say they were anti-western? I said they could end up radically changing their direction and break with the liberal west. This is close to what happened with them and their politics in the interwar period. They will come to a crossroads and shit will hit the fan.

    If I were you, I wouldn't consider their flirtations with the EU to be any different from third world nationalists allying with the USSR or the PRC during the cold war. It's opportunism.

    "soviet subsidies" might have enhanced their economy in the past when the soviet union was still intact, but I doubt Russia will be subsidizing anyone.
    Thus communist nostalgia and yearning for the past, which will only become more severe as states continue burdening their populations with austerity and public debt.

  18. Post #98
    Gold Member
    SystemGS's Avatar
    June 2007
    2,855 Posts
    Communism is an ideology that needs specific focus on just the ideology to work properly. The sum of the parts is equal to the whole in this case, where all of the parts need to be working in the same direction as the whole. So to say, as many have said before, communism only works on a small scale. If it could work as selflessly as it was ascribed, that would be wonderful. However, because we're inherently flawed, we can never see it work perfectly.

    Communism will come and go like the tide, but I doubt it will ever have any permanence.

  19. Post #99
    Marddox's Avatar
    January 2012
    61 Posts
    Seeing the hierarchy situation the world has become no way can I see it coming back.

  20. Post #100

    August 2011
    294 Posts
    Seeing the hierarchy situation the world has become no way can I see it coming back.
    Given the hierarchy and the 1% ideas, Communism may make some return.

    Communism is an ideology much like Liberalism and Conservatism.
    All ideologies change over time and see a ressurgence in popularity (the neo-cons, the new libertarians etc.)

    Communism will return at some point but under what 'guise' is debatable.

    (People here really have no grasp of what Communism actually entails - USSR's totalitarian, state run economy =/= Communism)

  21. Post #101
    Awesome Member
    Dennab
    January 2006
    40,352 Posts
    communism hasn't gone anywhere.

    marxism is still incredibly influential in impoverished nations.

  22. Post #102
    Gold Member
    Scoooby's Avatar
    April 2008
    1,326 Posts
    communism hasn't gone anywhere.

    marxism is still incredibly influential in impoverished nations.
    This.
    To a Wall Street politician, marxist and socialist sound like the same thing.
    Education emphasizes definitions.
    Our idiocy is in Wall Street.

  23. Post #103
    HeatPipe's Avatar
    October 2007
    1,574 Posts
    Socialist ideas are spreading around fast.

    Really, only thing people need is one bat shit insane leader that will do a revolution.

  24. Post #104
    Gold Member
    trotskygrad's Avatar
    June 2011
    8,513 Posts
    When did I say they were anti-western? I said they could end up radically changing their direction and break with the liberal west. This is close to what happened with them and their politics in the interwar period. They will come to a crossroads and shit will hit the fan.

    If I were you, I wouldn't consider their flirtations with the EU to be any different from third world nationalists allying with the USSR or the PRC during the cold war. It's opportunism.



    Thus communist nostalgia and yearning for the past, which will only become more severe as states continue burdening their populations with austerity and public debt.
    they want to be part of the EU so they can freely travel and immigrate. That's stronger opportunism.

    Communism just won't happen, there's a significant stigma against in all classes of society in Eastern Europe. For them, communism often means "soviet oppression".

    I read a NYT article on this topic in Bulgaria a while back, let me see if I can find it.

  25. Post #105
    Gold Member
    Robbobin's Avatar
    June 2007
    8,041 Posts
    Communism is a type of anarchy.
    Nah definitely not.

    Unless it's some kind of communism backed with universal unanimous consent, the existence of a state that has a monopoly over power is contrary to anarchy. But if there was unanimous consent, the state would be meaningless because nobody would want to act against it. It would be telling someone who wants to eat that if they don't eat you'll kill them.

    Edited:

    Marxism is anarchistic.
    I don't really follow this position. The fundamental principle of anarchism is the non-aggression principle. Marx advocated the dictatorship of the vanguard. You can say "this is only for the transitory period!" as much as you like but the bottom line is that Marxism is not anarchism. If the state exists to coerce, it is not anarchy.

  26. Post #106
    Gold Member
    Dennab
    February 2006
    3,001 Posts
    they want to be part of the EU so they can freely travel and immigrate. That's stronger opportunism.
    I don't know what your point is.

    Communism just won't happen, there's a significant stigma against in all classes of society in Eastern Europe. For them, communism often means "soviet oppression".
    That's the dominant belief in the west, certainly, though not so much in most former warsaw pact countries and the fSU. Countries like Hungary, Romania, Poland, and the former GDR all have a significant 'ostalgie' trend with unusually high amounts of positive opinions of socialist pasts. People yearn for the job security, free housing, free healthcare, little crime, and stability there used to be. From a working class perspective, a lot was lost with the fall of the wall and there has yet to be any significant recovery.

    I read a NYT article on this topic in Bulgaria a while back, let me see if I can find it.
    Don't bother, there are many articles out there about ostalgie. It's a known fact.

  27. Post #107
    Gold Member
    trotskygrad's Avatar
    June 2011
    8,513 Posts
    I don't know what your point is.



    That's the dominant belief in the west, certainly, though not so much in most former warsaw pact countries and the fSU. Countries like Hungary, Romania, Poland, and the former GDR all have a significant 'ostalgie' trend with unusually high amounts of positive opinions of socialist pasts. People yearn for the job security, free housing, free healthcare, little crime, and stability there used to be. From a working class perspective, a lot was lost with the fall of the wall and there has yet to be any significant recovery.



    Don't bother, there are many articles out there about ostalgie. It's a known fact.
    from those who I've talked to in poland (and I know a lot, just ask Raygen) their opinions of the soviets are not very good.

  28. Post #108
    Gold Member
    Dennab
    February 2006
    3,001 Posts
    from those who I've talked to in poland (and I know a lot, just ask Raygen) their opinions of the soviets are not very good.
    Poland's no surprise, it compared to most warsaw pact countries did well after the collapse, and there's a significant nationalist presence. It still, like others, is split on whether things were better or worse, though it consistently has one of the larger generation gaps in opinions.

  29. Post #109

    January 2012
    2 Posts
    I don't know what your point is.



    That's the dominant belief in the west, certainly, though not so much in most former warsaw pact countries and the fSU. Countries like Hungary, Romania, Poland, and the former GDR all have a significant 'ostalgie' trend with unusually high amounts of positive opinions of socialist pasts. People yearn for the job security, free housing, free healthcare, little crime, and stability there used to be. From a working class perspective, a lot was lost with the fall of the wall and there has yet to be any significant recovery.



    Don't bother, there are many articles out there about ostalgie. It's a known fact.
    Says the American. Sure there's a nostalgic trends in some regards, similar like pensioners in the US remember the fifties or ninetees. But society as a whole? Not happening.

    Essentially as far as communism goes you have a massive split between age groups and some what less massively between urban dwellers and rural dwellers. The only country that's an odd one out is Ukraine and that's mostly due to the politiacal shithole they've gotten there now.

  30. Post #110
    Gold Member
    Dennab
    February 2006
    3,001 Posts
    Says the American. Sure there's a nostalgic trends in some regards, similar like pensioners in the US remember the fifties or ninetees. But society as a whole? Not happening.
    Is this supposed to be an argument? You can deny it or try to attribute it to 'pensioners' (and fail), doesn't change anything. It's not healthy to live in denial.

    By the way, I'm the son of polish immigrants. Go fuck yourself if you care so much about nationality.

  31. Post #111
    Marbalo's Avatar
    June 2011
    2,310 Posts
    While communism isn't necessarily a bad idea, it's almost impossible to execute properly on a fairly big scale. While capitalism has it's flaws as well, at least it works.
    Just because capitalism hasn't collapsed yet doesn't mean it works.

  32. Post #112
    Gold Member
    trotskygrad's Avatar
    June 2011
    8,513 Posts

    By the way, I'm the son of polish immigrants. Go fuck yourself if you care so much about nationality.
    you're not living in the system so you're less qualified to talk about it than he is.

  33. Post #113
    Gold Member
    Dennab
    February 2006
    3,001 Posts
    you're not living in the system so you're less qualified to talk about it than he is.
    Nobody is, so that's kinda moot. Besides, usually research > experience. You yourself weren't aware of ostalgie, this other moron thinks it's all pensioners, and now you're willing to take his opinions with greater legitimacy than cited fact because of where we live? What does that say about 'experience'? Quite the unreliable, subjective pair of goggles IMO.

  34. Post #114
    Gold Member
    elowin's Avatar
    December 2009
    7,787 Posts
    I better fucking hope it says dead with all the other shitty ideas that people made.
    In this case, it's not the idea that's bad, it's the execution.

  35. Post #115
    Gold Member
    Karlos's Avatar
    May 2005
    1,858 Posts
    none of you seem to have any idea what socialism or communism is

    before you have the faintest fucking idea, consider remedying this fact before you make bad threads

  36. Post #116
    Gold Member
    acds's Avatar
    October 2008
    14,934 Posts
    Hopefully not. Can't imagine something much worse than communism.

    The world will probably go along with the more "middle" systems, neither Capitalism or Communism. However the gist of it always has been, is, and always will be the same: Some have it good, some have it not as good. The lower classes will get improvements to life quality and so will the higher ones, we all get a better living but there will always be social classes (like it should be too, it's human nature and if someone worked for it, he has the right to more rewards than the guy who dropped out of elementary school).

  37. Post #117
    Chase827's Bitch
    SexualShark's Avatar
    January 2012
    4,200 Posts
    Psst.. Russia still has "communist ideology" in its borders.

  38. Post #118
    Gold Member
    Karlos's Avatar
    May 2005
    1,858 Posts
    The world will probably go along with the more "middle" systems, neither Capitalism or Communism. However the gist of it always has been, is, and always will be the same: Some have it good, some have it not as good. The lower classes will get improvements to life quality and so will the higher ones, we all get a better living but there will always be social classes (like it should be too, it's human nature and if someone worked for it, he has the right to more rewards than the guy who dropped out of elementary school).
    the "middle systems" (???) you're referring to are called liberal capitalism. the "human nature" you're talking about, intrinsic to the liberal ideology, is a product of capitalist society. the pseudo-intellectual "rational thought" you subscribe to and believe yourself to possess would probably cause you to come to the conclusion that "history proves" your idea of human nature; this is because human history is the history of class struggles - and there has, for centuries, existed only systems of oppression. your acceptance of the existence of "lower and higher" classes means you freely accept the exploitation of the labour aristocracy, the ruling class; your disavowal of marxist theory is the ignorance posited by this class. you don't know what it is you're supporting, you don't understand the democracy you represent, and you don't understand the ideology you're knee-deep in.

    you're just one of the many and i'm literally wasting my time here but whatever

  39. Post #119
    Gold Member
    wraithcat's Avatar
    December 2007
    12,884 Posts
    the "middle systems" (???) you're referring to are called liberal capitalism. the "human nature" you're talking about, intrinsic to the liberal ideology, is a product of capitalist society. the pseudo-intellectual "rational thought" you subscribe to and believe yourself to possess would probably cause you to come to the conclusion that "history proves" your idea of human nature; this is because human history is the history of class struggles - and there has, for centuries, existed only systems of oppression. your acceptance of the existence of "lower and higher" classes means you freely accept the exploitation of the labour aristocracy, the ruling class; your disavowal of marxist theory is the ignorance posited by this class. you don't know what it is you're supporting, you don't understand the democracy you represent, and you don't understand the ideology you're knee-deep in.

    you're just one of the many and i'm literally wasting my time here but whatever
    I'd like to point out that a class system stems from essentially basic human pecking order which exists in almost every species which has a group based mentality.

    Removing this part of us, you remove a giant load of drive people have and likewise will be trying to enforce something that is probably not in our nature.

    On top of that even in a class less society, which is unmanaged a class will emerge sooner or later most likely due to it's abilities as opposed to anything hereditary.

    But nevertheless they will.

    I mean take a look at any group of humans from a commune, to a high school clique to a company to who knows what. You virtually always begin to get a fairly stable leadership class in them which very often determines what one can do and cannot.

  40. Post #120
    Gold Member
    Vasili's Avatar
    December 2007
    10,817 Posts
    Poland's no surprise, it compared to most warsaw pact countries did well after the collapse, and there's a significant nationalist presence. It still, like others, is split on whether things were better or worse, though it consistently has one of the larger generation gaps in opinions.
    Polands economy has only been getting better and better at considerable rates since the collapse of the 'communist' party in Poland and its welcome into the EU. Any nostalgia goggles looking back on that period is merely remembering 'the good old days'. I think every Pole I have talked to who has immigrated here has a strong dislike for the soviets as well as the nazis.