Welcome to Political Fever - The Political Debate Forums.

You are currently viewing our boards as a guest with limited access. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. You can also take part in our Private Debates where you can test your skills against an opponent. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today!

If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact contact us. After you Register the advertisements will disappear on the site!

Go Back   Political Fever - The Political Debate Forums > Political Parties Discussion > Political Parties and Ideologies

Political Parties and Ideologies Discuss all political parties and Ideologies here. Everyone is welcome to share their political beliefs here.

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
  #11 (permalink)  
Old 12-11-2007, 02:30 PM
Technocratic_Utilitarian's Avatar
Peoples Liberation Army
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Userid: 91
Location: New Jersassistan
Age: 24
Posts: 2,411
Rep Power: 4
Technocratic_Utilitarian will become famous soon enough
Default

Communism cannot work, because the conditions required for it to come to pass cannot work. So saying Communism doesn't work can be established by indicating the the precursors to "Communism" as outlined by Engles and Marx also do not work, and it' s just far too different from human nature to work properly, even if you got around the distribution and calculation problems.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #12 (permalink)  
Old 12-11-2007, 03:08 PM
Congressman
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Userid: 25
Posts: 1,315
Rep Power: 3
White Rabbit is on a distinguished road
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Technocratic_Utilitarian View Post
Communism cannot work, because the conditions required for it to come to pass cannot work. So saying Communism doesn't work can be established by indicating the the precursors to "Communism" as outlined by Engles and Marx also do not work, and it' s just far too different from human nature to work properly, even if you got around the distribution and calculation problems.
Are you speaking of theoretical communism as per the theory of Marx (independent of the Communist Manifesto pamphlet)? Or are you refering to the authoritarian socialist version much in evidence during the 20th century in the USSR, China, Cuba, N.Korea, etc. ?

If the former, you are mistaken and making strawman arguments. If the latter, than I agree.

Regarding your comment about "conditions required for it to come to pass...", I respectfully submit that it is indeed in progress as these conditions come to be. The USA is tracking towards the ultimate communist society, exactly as predicted by Marx's core theory.

Non-capitalist-based economic activity (and non-socialist-based) is the largest growing category of economic growth in the USA over the last 20 years. And it is to be noted that the rate of return on capital continues to fall in exactly the way Marx predicted it would. This indicates that Marx's theoretical prediction of a future communist society arrising in the USA is still on track.

If you want to discuss this issue (substantively), I'll recommend the 1844 Manuscripts for the discussion of Marx's theory of history.
Reply With Quote
  #13 (permalink)  
Old 12-11-2007, 04:48 PM
Chan's Avatar
Congressman
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Userid: 133
Location: Buffalo, New York, USA
Posts: 5,556
Rep Power: 7
Chan has a spectacular aura aboutChan has a spectacular aura about
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Zephyr View Post
Many of u are of late equating liberalism with Stalinism. Not so. Not so at all, my friends.

You see, you need a two dimensional political scale. One scale is social matters, one scale is economic matters.

LIBERALS: Believe in more personal freedom, and less economic freedom.
LIBERTARIANS: Believe in more personal and economic freedom. These people genuinely believe in small government.
CONSERVATIVES: Believe in less personal freedom and more economic freedom.
COMMUNISTS*: Believe in less personal freedom and less economic freedom. These are the true "big government" people.

*True communism isn't supposed to work like that, I know, but that's how it's worked in history, so that's what I'll call them unless you can think of a better name.

That's the general distinction; there are two dimensions you need to consider.

FASCISTS: Taking conservatism to the extreme. Fascists believe in union between the government and the corporation, an extreme sort of capitalism if you will.
STALINISTS: Take the concept of "Big Government" to the extreme. Stalinists are similar to Fascists on a social scale, but different on an economic scale.
COMMUNISM: Ideal communism envisions a transition period wherein there is a short-lived Dictatorship of the Proletariat which oversees the transition to a true communist system. In the true communist system, government disappears entirely. There is no class division, and everyone labors for the good of the community. There are no problems in society. (Remember, this is ideal communism, not true communism.)

Just clearing up some definitions.
Don't forget the socialists, which most liberals are, that believe in big government taking care of its citizens like a nanny from cradle to grave.
__________________
A panda walks into a cafe. He orders a sandwich, eats it, then draws a gun and fires two shots in the air.

"Why?" asks the confused waiter, as the panda makes toward the exit. The panda produces a badly punctuated wildlife manual and tosses it over his shoulder.

"I'm a panda," he says at the door. "Look it up."

The waiter turns to the relevant entry and, sure enough, finds an explanation.

"Panda. Large black-and-white bear-like mammal, native to China. Eats, shoots and leaves."

Reply With Quote
  #14 (permalink)  
Old 12-11-2007, 07:46 PM
Zephyr's Avatar
Obama's Socialist Goon
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Userid: 58
Location: Wouldn't you like to know.
Age: 16
Posts: 4,385
Rep Power: 7
Zephyr is a jewel in the roughZephyr is a jewel in the rough
Default

Quote:
Don't forget the socialists, which most liberals are, that believe in big government taking care of its citizens like a nanny from cradle to grave.
At least I'm not a selfish asshole who thinks he shouldn't have to do anything for anyone else.

(NOTE: I'm making a point here. Just as most libertarians aren't selfish assholes, most liberals are not socialists. Nice try, though.)

I'll add a socialist category, though, good idea.

*TOP POST EDITED: LOOK BACK ON FIRST PAGE*
__________________
"Moreover, I am cognizant of the interrelatedness of all communities and states...Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere. We are caught in an inescapable network of mutuality, tied in a single garment of destiny. Whatever affects one directly, affects all indirectly. Never again can we afford to live with the narrow, provincial "outside agitator" idea. Anyone who lives inside the United States can never be considered an outsider anywhere within its bounds."



~Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.


Last edited by Zephyr : 12-11-2007 at 07:54 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #15 (permalink)  
Old 12-12-2007, 12:47 PM
Congressman
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Userid: 25
Posts: 1,315
Rep Power: 3
White Rabbit is on a distinguished road
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chan View Post
Don't forget the socialists, which most liberals are, that believe in big government taking care of its citizens like a nanny from cradle to grave.
That is categorically anti-liberal.

There is NOTHING similar between liberals and socialists. They are ideological enemies by definition.
Reply With Quote
  #16 (permalink)  
Old 12-12-2007, 01:15 PM
Chan's Avatar
Congressman
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Userid: 133
Location: Buffalo, New York, USA
Posts: 5,556
Rep Power: 7
Chan has a spectacular aura aboutChan has a spectacular aura about
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Zephyr View Post
At least I'm not a selfish asshole who thinks he shouldn't have to do anything for anyone else.
Was this really necessary?

Quote:
(NOTE: I'm making a point here. Just as most libertarians aren't selfish assholes, most liberals are not socialists. Nice try, though.)

I'll add a socialist category, though, good idea.

*TOP POST EDITED: LOOK BACK ON FIRST PAGE*
Libertarians are more likely to believe that there is nothing wrong with individuals engaging in acts of charity or supporting private charitable organizations. What Libertarians object to is government using tax dollars for this purpose or otherwise engaging in acts of charity. Most liberals, however, do believe that various acts of charity fall within the province of government and that the power of government should be used to do what various religionists would call "good works." That, under an expanded definition of socialist, makes most liberals socialists.
__________________
A panda walks into a cafe. He orders a sandwich, eats it, then draws a gun and fires two shots in the air.

"Why?" asks the confused waiter, as the panda makes toward the exit. The panda produces a badly punctuated wildlife manual and tosses it over his shoulder.

"I'm a panda," he says at the door. "Look it up."

The waiter turns to the relevant entry and, sure enough, finds an explanation.

"Panda. Large black-and-white bear-like mammal, native to China. Eats, shoots and leaves."

Reply With Quote
  #17 (permalink)  
Old 12-12-2007, 01:16 PM
Chan's Avatar
Congressman
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Userid: 133
Location: Buffalo, New York, USA
Posts: 5,556
Rep Power: 7
Chan has a spectacular aura aboutChan has a spectacular aura about
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by White Rabbit View Post
That is categorically anti-liberal.

There is NOTHING similar between liberals and socialists. They are ideological enemies by definition.
Tell that to liberals/socialists like Hillary Clinton and John Edwards.
__________________
A panda walks into a cafe. He orders a sandwich, eats it, then draws a gun and fires two shots in the air.

"Why?" asks the confused waiter, as the panda makes toward the exit. The panda produces a badly punctuated wildlife manual and tosses it over his shoulder.

"I'm a panda," he says at the door. "Look it up."

The waiter turns to the relevant entry and, sure enough, finds an explanation.

"Panda. Large black-and-white bear-like mammal, native to China. Eats, shoots and leaves."

Reply With Quote
  #18 (permalink)  
Old 12-12-2007, 10:02 PM
Zephyr's Avatar
Obama's Socialist Goon
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Userid: 58
Location: Wouldn't you like to know.
Age: 16
Posts: 4,385
Rep Power: 7
Zephyr is a jewel in the roughZephyr is a jewel in the rough
Default

Quote:
Was this really necessary?
Yeah, it was.

Quote:
Tell that to liberals/socialists like Hillary Clinton and John Edwards.

Hilary is far, far away from socialism. So is Edwards...you're kidding about their being socialists, right?

Quote:
Libertarians are more likely to believe that there is nothing wrong with individuals engaging in acts of charity or supporting private charitable organizations. What Libertarians object to is government using tax dollars for this purpose or otherwise engaging in acts of charity. Most liberals, however, do believe that various acts of charity fall within the province of government and that the power of government should be used to do what various religionists would call "good works." That, under an expanded definition of socialist, makes most liberals socialists.
You've demonstrated a complete misunderstanding of what socialism is. Socialism is for government control of the means of production. None of the democratic candidates even come close to that.

Quote:

There is NOTHING similar between liberals and socialists. They are ideological enemies by definition.
Economically, no. Socially, yes.

Socialists are take economic liberalism to the extreme. Although liberalism is more a social ideology IMO.
__________________
"Moreover, I am cognizant of the interrelatedness of all communities and states...Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere. We are caught in an inescapable network of mutuality, tied in a single garment of destiny. Whatever affects one directly, affects all indirectly. Never again can we afford to live with the narrow, provincial "outside agitator" idea. Anyone who lives inside the United States can never be considered an outsider anywhere within its bounds."



~Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.

Reply With Quote
  #19 (permalink)  
Old 12-13-2007, 04:22 PM
Chan's Avatar
Congressman
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Userid: 133
Location: Buffalo, New York, USA
Posts: 5,556
Rep Power: 7
Chan has a spectacular aura aboutChan has a spectacular aura about
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Zephyr View Post
Yeah, it was.




Hilary is far, far away from socialism. So is Edwards...you're kidding about their being socialists, right?
In the expanded definition of socialist, i.e. big government nanny staters that want to give more and more power to government, I'm not kidding.



Quote:
You've demonstrated a complete misunderstanding of what socialism is. Socialism is for government control of the means of production. None of the democratic candidates even come close to that.
Perhaps in a strict sense, yes but many of us operate under an expanded definition that includes government control of not only the means of production but over many other things as well.
__________________
A panda walks into a cafe. He orders a sandwich, eats it, then draws a gun and fires two shots in the air.

"Why?" asks the confused waiter, as the panda makes toward the exit. The panda produces a badly punctuated wildlife manual and tosses it over his shoulder.

"I'm a panda," he says at the door. "Look it up."

The waiter turns to the relevant entry and, sure enough, finds an explanation.

"Panda. Large black-and-white bear-like mammal, native to China. Eats, shoots and leaves."

Reply With Quote
  #20 (permalink)  
Old 12-13-2007, 10:25 PM
Zephyr's Avatar
Obama's Socialist Goon
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Userid: 58
Location: Wouldn't you like to know.
Age: 16
Posts: 4,385
Rep Power: 7
Zephyr is a jewel in the roughZephyr is a jewel in the rough
Default

Quote:
In the expanded definition of socialist, i.e. big government nanny staters that want to give more and more power to government, I'm not kidding.
"Expanded definition"--Perhaps you're right, but "expanded definitions" don't pertain at all to reality.

And under no expanded definition are Hilary Clinton or John Edwards socialists. They are not for bigger government or nationalization of any industry.
__________________
"Moreover, I am cognizant of the interrelatedness of all communities and states...Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere. We are caught in an inescapable network of mutuality, tied in a single garment of destiny. Whatever affects one directly, affects all indirectly. Never again can we afford to live with the narrow, provincial "outside agitator" idea. Anyone who lives inside the United States can never be considered an outsider anywhere within its bounds."



~Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.

Reply With Quote
Reply



Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On






     Top Political Sites  
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:41 PM.
Political Fever 2007/2008
   Word Search   |   Family Friendly   |   AdSense Forum   |   Game Cheats   |   Coupon Codes   |   Spore Game   |   Xcode Forum   |   Political Forums   |   Internet Marketing   |   Social Networking    |   Sudoku   |   Mobile Marketing   |   Web Forms   |   Articles & News   |   Loans & Credit Repair   |   Online Coupon Codes   |   Loans   |   Sudoku Puzzles   |   Map Games   |   Spore Screenshots