Communism....

Sure is fun ain't it kids?

http://www.cnn.com/2010/WORLD/asiapcf/11/18/china.tweet.punishment/index.html?hpt=Sbin

No, it's not.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Market_socialism

It's perfectly easy and far more fun to troll idiots by condescending to them than to troll normal people by acting like an idiot.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Market_socialism

It's perfectly easy and far more fun to troll idiots by condescending to them than to troll normal people by acting like an idiot.

What are you trying to say? 

Isn't this more totalitarian than communist? What does censorship have to do with communal ownership of goods and services?

Isn't this more totalitarian than communist? What does censorship have to do with communal ownership of goods and services?

Affiliation. (Nothing, but emotional generalizations make it easier to make generalized conclusions.)

Kinda like:
1. Socialism = bad.
2. Universal health care = socialist.
3. Universal health care = bad.

Every one of these statements can be contested (more notably the 2nd and 3rd), but irrational people humans often allow negative inclinations spread by association without realizing it. There's no actual logical argument in this connection, but it feels intuitive after generalizations are made.


It makes as much sense as associating:

1 with 1.5.
1.5 with 2.
2 with 2.5.

Therefore, 1 and 2.5 are essentially judged to be alike. This conclusion is also nonsensical.

Edit: Hmm, I seem to be unoriginal in my dubbing of this flawed thought process. It already exists and understandably is called an association fallacy.

Isn't this more totalitarian than communist? What does censorship have to do with communal ownership of goods and services?

Has there ever really been a "truly" communist country?  Not just tacking communist or socialist in front of its name.

Berny
Thinks communism never really was

Has there ever really been a "truly" communist country?  Not just tacking communist or socialist in front of its name.

You are correct. By Karl Marx's definition, communism hasn't been tried yet.
A real communism would have all members completely equal. Every attempt at communism had elitists as the government.

Quote from: Trekky0623 on November 18, 2010, 01:53:03 PM

Isn't this more totalitarian than communist? What does censorship have to do with communal ownership of goods and services?

Has there ever really been a "truly" communist country?  Not just tacking communist or socialist in front of its name.

Berny
Thinks communism never really was

That is because communism is inherently flawed, you can't achieve pure communism. Looks good on paper, sucks in real life.

ITT: Wardogg shows yet again that he doesn't understand the definition of the word "communism."

Quote from: berny_74 on November 18, 2010, 03:24:30 PM

Quote from: Trekky0623 on November 18, 2010, 01:53:03 PM

Isn't this more totalitarian than communist? What does censorship have to do with communal ownership of goods and services?

Has there ever really been a "truly" communist country?  Not just tacking communist or socialist in front of its name.

Berny
Thinks communism never really was

That is because communism is inherently flawed, you can't achieve pure communism. Looks good on paper, sucks in real life.

How do you know it "sucks in real life" when no-one has tried it? Besides, it's not as if 'pure' democracy or 'pure' capitalism are sustainable.


The real problem with Marxist doctrine is its advocacy of violent revolution. This has meant a very bad reputation for communism and ensured that leaders of communist states have invariably been violent men with totalitarian instincts.

ITT: Wardogg shows yet again that he doesn't understand the definition of the word "communism."

Communism is a sociopolitical movement that aims for a classless society structured upon common ownership of the means of production, free access to articles of consumption, the end of wage labour and private property.

The Communist Party of China, also known as the Chinese Communist Party, is the founding and ruling political party of the People's Republic of China. Although nominally it exists alongside the United Front, in practice, the CPC is also the only party of the PRC, maintaining a unitary government centralising the state, military, and media. The legal power of the Communist Party is guaranteed by the PRC constitution.


Cheng, 46, was sentenced to one year in a Henan Province labor camp for disturbing social stability.

So being arrested for what you say against the government isn't right out of the communist playbook?  


ITT:  People show me how much their heads really are in the sand.

Quote from: Roundy the Truthinessist on November 18, 2010, 07:37:15 PM

ITT: Wardogg shows yet again that he doesn't understand the definition of the word "communism."

Communism is a sociopolitical movement that aims for a classless society structured upon common ownership of the means of production, free access to articles of consumption, the end of wage labour and private property.

And that is why China is not a communist country in any meaningful sense. It is a totalitarian state, yes, but not really communist.


The point is totalitarianism is independent of economic ideology.

But would you agree they go hand in hand?

I think the USA has more in common with the communist doctrine than China. They just don't realise it.

I think the USA has more in common with the communist doctrine than China. They just don't realise it.

Its actually quite scary.

But would you agree they go hand in hand?

I think violent revoluton and totalitarianism often go hand in hand, especially when an ideological component is present. Not always, but often. There are plenty of totalitarian states in the world which are not communist.

How many times must we go through this same process before Wardogg realizes that many of his political, religious, and economic views have the same amount of logical basis as me killing a moose in revenge for a car accident caused by a deer? Then again, I'm having severe doubts if these are his actual beliefs considering just how ridiculous they are and his willingness to utterly ignore the fact that the facts and logic show them to be utter b*llshit. Hell, most of his posts can be defeated and ridiculed with the proper usage of a dictionary.

How many times must we go through this same process before Wardogg realizes that many of his political, religious, and economic views have the same amount of logical basis as me killing a moose in revenge for a car accident caused by a deer? Then again, I'm having severe doubts if these are his actual beliefs considering just how ridiculous they are and his willingness to utterly ignore the fact that the facts and logic show them to be utter b*llshit. Hell, most of his posts can be defeated and ridiculed with the proper usage of a dictionary.

Yeah, personal attacks really do well in a debate.  Congratulations, you just won 4 internets.

Quote from: Death-T on November 19, 2010, 09:28:01 AM

How many times must we go through this same process before Wardogg realizes that many of his political, religious, and economic views have the same amount of logical basis as me killing a moose in revenge for a car accident caused by a deer? Then again, I'm having severe doubts if these are his actual beliefs considering just how ridiculous they are and his willingness to utterly ignore the fact that the facts and logic show them to be utter b*llshit. Hell, most of his posts can be defeated and ridiculed with the proper usage of a dictionary.

Yeah, personal attacks really do well in a debate.  Congratulations, you just won 4 internets.

Its not a debate when I can point to the dictionary and its over.

Quote from: WardoggKC130FE on November 19, 2010, 09:31:31 AM

Quote from: Death-T on November 19, 2010, 09:28:01 AM

How many times must we go through this same process before Wardogg realizes that many of his political, religious, and economic views have the same amount of logical basis as me killing a moose in revenge for a car accident caused by a deer? Then again, I'm having severe doubts if these are his actual beliefs considering just how ridiculous they are and his willingness to utterly ignore the fact that the facts and logic show them to be utter b*llshit. Hell, most of his posts can be defeated and ridiculed with the proper usage of a dictionary.

Yeah, personal attacks really do well in a debate.  Congratulations, you just won 4 internets.

Its not a debate when I can point to the dictionary and its over.

Your right...actually it was a conversation, of which you failed all over by not contributing to.  Congratulations, you just lost 6 internets.

Your right...actually it was a conversation, of which you failed all over by not contributing to.  Congratulations, you just lost 6 internets.

Your usage of a fake term of creditability in attempt to mimimize your overall failure on this site in regards to economics, politics, and religion is amusing. Please continue.

Is wardogg STILL trolling the shit out of this board? boring trolling is boring. Communism/Islam is bad, blah blah. He's doing a very good 'amerika' caricaturization, but that's kind of played now, don't you think?

You forgot socialism.

Oops, you went out of character there. Socialism and communism are basically the same, aren't they?

Oops, you went out of character there. Socialism and communism are basically the same, aren't they?

Apparently not, and neither of which are totalitarianism.  See I can learn.

Quote from: JamesJamie on November 18, 2010, 05:53:42 PM

Quote from: berny_74 on November 18, 2010, 03:24:30 PM

Quote from: Trekky0623 on November 18, 2010, 01:53:03 PM

Isn't this more totalitarian than communist? What does censorship have to do with communal ownership of goods and services?

Has there ever really been a "truly" communist country?  Not just tacking communist or socialist in front of its name.

Berny
Thinks communism never really was

That is because communism is inherently flawed, you can't achieve pure communism. Looks good on paper, sucks in real life.

How do you know it "sucks in real life" when no-one has tried it? Besides, it's not as if 'pure' democracy or 'pure' capitalism are sustainable.


The real problem with Marxist doctrine is its advocacy of violent revolution. This has meant a very bad reputation for communism and ensured that leaders of communist states have invariably been violent men with totalitarian instincts.

Communism can't work unless you change how they adapted to survive. In communism (hell, in almost every government), you reward the weak and punish the strong. That goes against the very fabric of nature. Sure, you'll say it's punishing the people who start off with a silver spoon in hand. However, communism also degrades participation and hard work.

If I bust my ass of for 11 years to become a prestigious neurosurgeon, save countless lives, work 12 hour shifts, and invent a new non-invasive cancerous tumor removal, I still get paid the same amount as that asshat window wiper who dropped out of high school because he was lazy.

When the above happens, people aren't going to be very happy.

Yes, pure communism wants to rid the society of classes, but that alone is inherently impossible. Humans will always find ways to distinguish themselves from one another. When this happens, classes will always emerge. When the classes emerge, true communism cannot be had.

Quote from: Lord Wilmore on November 19, 2010, 05:59:27 AM

Quote from: JamesJamie on November 18, 2010, 05:53:42 PM

Quote from: berny_74 on November 18, 2010, 03:24:30 PM

Quote from: Trekky0623 on November 18, 2010, 01:53:03 PM

Isn't this more totalitarian than communist? What does censorship have to do with communal ownership of goods and services?

Has there ever really been a "truly" communist country?  Not just tacking communist or socialist in front of its name.

Berny
Thinks communism never really was

That is because communism is inherently flawed, you can't achieve pure communism. Looks good on paper, sucks in real life.

How do you know it "sucks in real life" when no-one has tried it? Besides, it's not as if 'pure' democracy or 'pure' capitalism are sustainable.


The real problem with Marxist doctrine is its advocacy of violent revolution. This has meant a very bad reputation for communism and ensured that leaders of communist states have invariably been violent men with totalitarian instincts.

Communism can't work unless you change how they adapted to survive. In communism (hell, in almost every government), you reward the weak and punish the strong. That goes against the very fabric of nature. Sure, you'll say it's punishing the people who start off with a silver spoon in hand. However, communism also degrades participation and hard work.

If I bust my ass of for 11 years to become a prestigious neurosurgeon, save countless lives, work 12 hour shifts, and invent a new non-invasive cancerous tumor removal, I still get paid the same amount as that asshat window wiper who dropped out of high school because he was lazy.

When the above happens, people aren't going to be very happy.

Yes, pure communism wants to rid the society of classes, but that alone is inherently impossible. Humans will always find ways to distinguish themselves from one another. When this happens, classes will always emerge. When the classes emerge, true communism cannot be had.

I can't stand this kind of argument. It's certainly true that you worked very hard for the qualifications (let's assume you're telling the truth about being an accomplished neurosurgeon and also a famous oncological researcher for the sake of argument) but your daily life is a hell of a lot easier than that of a window cleaner, not including the vast pay and lifestyle differences. That window cleaner spends all day out in the pissing rain serving people who don't respect him, and runs a higher risk of injury in doing so than you would if you did your job in Afghanistan.

You're also assuming that the only reason this guy didn't become a neurosugeon was pure laziness, that it would've been perfectly possible for him to afford the soaring university costs had he pulled his finger out, that he went to as good a school as you and that his home life was as stable as yours. For all you know that guy could've been cleaning windows since he was twelve because his dad fucked off and his mum couldn't get a job, so he just didn't have the time to put in those long hours of study.

These differences are precisely the differences of class that communism would hope to abolish, so that the people who wanted to be neurosurgeons and were willing to put the effort in would be able to do so, and that that were not, would not.

wouldnt the window washer have had the same opportunities as the neurosurgeon to pay for school?  therefore he was either lazy, not smart enough to become a neurosurgeon, or just loves washing windows.  if we are talking about communism he shouldn't be able to use money as an excuse for not being able to become a neurosurgeon.  also you make it sound as if there is no stress in the life of a neurosurgeon and washing windows is more dangerous than being in afghanistan.  i would assume that a neurosurgeon experiences a lot of stress when he is performing surgery.  and maybe washing windows on the 80th floor in the pissing rain could be pretty dangerous, but i don't think they wash windows in the pissing rain, because rain is dirty and therefore it is pointless to try and clean the windows while its raining.  maybe they do though, i dont know.

Yes, because a homeless person's children will have the same opportunities as Bill Gates's kids.