Communism: Persuade Me

[Khanatah]

The thing I find the most funny and ironic about communism is that both Engels and Marx were "bourgeois". Engels being a manufacturer is the "worst" of the "bourgeois".

Perhaps, but how else is one supposed to live in their capitalist countries?

A person who is bourgeois and is fighting for the proletariat accepts and is willing to sacrifice their bourgeois lifestyle and their bourgeois interests for the proletarian interest. They may use their available resources for the proletarian cause, which is exactly what both Marx and Engels did.

Communists aren't rich. Das Kapital had to be funded.

[Fson]

If you're going to group Stalin with us, then we'll group Franco and Mussolini with you guys, I'd venture to say Hitler too, but he wasn't all that capitalistic, more of an economic centrist.

The world has never been that black and white. I oppose centralized planning for the market place, whether it be with communism or national socialism. The market should be with as little intervention as is possible. Therefore don't assume that simply because one is anti-communist, he favors fascism or national socialism. My grandfather was in Dachau, until he was liberated. And when his home country fell to communism, he immigrated to the US. I am neither and I hate and detest both equally.

Idealologies don't matter, people deserve a minimum standard of living and access to free healthcare education etc, businesses deserve to be able to innovate and advance, but should also regulated to stop monopolisation a market without large monoplies is the only truly free market.

[Fson]

The thing I find the most funny and ironic about communism is that both Engels and Marx were "bourgeois". Engels being a manufacturer is the "worst" of the "bourgeois".

Engels wasn't a communist... Marx revised his theory

[Terra Agora]

The thing I find the most funny and ironic about communism is that both Engels and Marx were "bourgeois". Engels being a manufacturer is the "worst" of the "bourgeois".

Engels wasn't a communist... Marx revised his theory

Engels and Marx worked together to form communism. He and Marx produced "The Communist Manifesto".

[Fson]

Engels wasn't a communist... Marx revised his theory

Engels and Marx worked together to form communism. He and Marx produced "The Communist Manifesto".

you are completley right I got Hegel and Engels mixed up.

[Phoneboothknifefights]

The thing I find the most funny and ironic about communism is that both Engels and Marx were "bourgeois". Engels being a manufacturer is the "worst" of the "bourgeois".

On the other hand, if Marx and Engels were dirt poor, people would complain that their theory was a simple case of sour grapes.

[Terra Agora]

The thing I find the most funny and ironic about communism is that both Engels and Marx were "bourgeois". Engels being a manufacturer is the "worst" of the "bourgeois".

On the other hand, if Marx and Engels were dirt poor, people would complain that their theory was a simple case of sour grapes.

Their theory is worse then a simple case of sour grapes. Its a half assed religion.

[Terra Agora]

Engels and Marx worked together to form communism. He and Marx produced "The Communist Manifesto".

you are completley right I got Hegel and Engels mixed up.

I have that problem to sometimes hahaha.

[Phoneboothknifefights]

On the other hand, if Marx and Engels were dirt poor, people would complain that their theory was a simple case of sour grapes.

Their theory is worse then a simple case of sour grapes. Its a half assed religion.

That depends on how liberal your defintion of religon is and what would constitute full-on ass.

Anyway, my point was that any social class Marx and Engels belonged to would be basis for criticism.

[Terra Agora]

Their theory is worse then a simple case of sour grapes. Its a half assed religion.

That depends on how liberal your defintion of religon is and what would constitute full-on ass.

Anyway, my point was that any social class Marx and Engels belonged to would be basis for criticism.

I agree. But them creating cmmunism is like me starting a "religion" that says all white people are evil.

[Khanatah]

I think it's pretty fucking belittling to call communism a 'half-assed religion' without anything actually intelligent to back it up. You point to the class of the original architects of Communist theory. Damn, wow, you've totally busted communist theory. Man I'm totally reformed now.

Jealousy my ass, it's opposition to concrete systematic exploitation of the masses for the gain of only a few at any time.

I'm not jealous! I don't want the pools and limos and ridiculous luxury. I want
FREEDOM FROM NECESSITY.

Oh, I'll be honest though. I'd like something better than Mr. Noodles for dinner!

[Phoneboothknifefights]

That depends on how liberal your defintion of religon is and what would constitute full-on ass.

Anyway, my point was that any social class Marx and Engels belonged to would be basis for criticism.

I agree. But them creating cmmunism is like me starting a "religion" that says all white people are evil.

Not exactly. You can exist in the current system at a successful level and still advocate tearing that system down without being hypocritical.

But I agree with you as far as believing that many followers of communism (past and present) have elevated their ideology to the level of blind faith. IMO, there's nothing inherently wrong with faith in an ideology, so long as it's continually questioned and measured against reality.

[The Last Hope for Bees]

I'm not jealous! I don't want the pools and limos and ridiculous luxury. I want
FREEDOM FROM NECESSITY.

I want to own and run my own business.

[Khanatah]

I'm not jealous! I don't want the pools and limos and ridiculous luxury. I want
FREEDOM FROM NECESSITY.

I want to own and run my own business.

For what ?

Why?

The removal of the bourgeois doesn't create a vacuum for the creative process and the individual venture into the means of production.

It's just that you can't own workers or operate for the sake of profit instead of improvement.

Do you just like owning people or...?

[Phoneboothknifefights]

I differ with you on a few issues.

Saying that many in the Russian Federation want the USSR to rise again is a bit disingenuous. (sp?). First, I'm sure people like living without fear of the KGB cracking down on them for saying or doing the "wrong thing." Second, I would say plenty in the Ukraine and eastern Europe probably hate the USSR, given the amount of time they spent living under their boot and that whole nasty usage of famine as a political weapon on the Ukraine back in the 30s. Third, I would bet that most Russians who feel this way probably just want the USSR's old international stature to return as the major powerbroker against the USA, not so much any love lost for the USSR's old system. Sure, I would reckon the dismantling of socialism didn't sit well with everyone (the film Goodbye Lenin depicts this feeling from the East German POV), but it seems the general feeling is that the past shouldn't return.

Second, communism is very much a political movement and always has been. It advocates for a classless, equal society. If that isn't political, I'm not sure what is.

wow. just wow.

Communism HAS NO GOVERNMENT. how can something be political IF THERE ARE NO POLITICS?

Ukraine is not in the russian federation. it is its own country. it USED to be a soviet republic. i am speaking of the russian federation, also a former soviet republic.

Stalin was not a communist he was a AUTHORITARIAN DICTATOR.

The KGB was not the secret police in the time period you described; it was the NKVD. that dissolved in 1954. it was replaced by the KGB.
when Brezhnev rose, the issues of speech lessened and lessened, until Gorbechev legalized it entirely in the 80s.

i will clarify on my statement that a large portion of russians miss the USSR;
a large portion believe in communism, and although the communist party of the soviet union is illegal, the communist party of the russian federation is thriving. a large portion of the population consider themselves communist.

IMO, the abolition of politics (eventual or immediate) is a pretty political issue to me. Also, I would think that even the utopian communist society would have some degree of politics, even if such practices are formally abolished.

I'm fully aware that Ukraine is independent now. I was merely pointing out that others beside the west hate the USSR. The Ukraine, above probably all others, would have the best reason for doing so.

Stalin was an authoritarian dictator, true, but he considered himself a communist, as did the Communist Party of the Soviet Union.

The Soviet Union may have been a nicer place post-Stalin (how could it not be?), but few can deny that the KGB were...intrusive upon the populace...to say the least.

However, I will agree that it is evident that there is still a strong communist presence in the modern Russian Federation. The Communist Party of the Russian Federation is a popular force.

[Terra Agora]

I want to own and run my own business.

For what ?

Why?

The removal of the bourgeois doesn't create a vacuum for the creative process and the individual venture into the means of production.

It's just that you can't own workers or operate for the sake of profit instead of improvement.

Do you just like owning people or...?

Because only a market economy can allocate resources efficiently.

[Herskerstad]

Communism itself is not evil, but it does however stand out as evil's greatest asset.

[Khanatah]

For what ?

Why?

The removal of the bourgeois doesn't create a vacuum for the creative process and the individual venture into the means of production.

It's just that you can't own workers or operate for the sake of profit instead of improvement.

Do you just like owning people or...?

Because only a market economy can allocate resources efficiently.

Utter bull. What gives you that impression when overproduction sends all the workers home?

[Khanatah]

Communism itself is not evil, but it does however stand out as evil's greatest asset.

I'll contend that capitalism is "evil's greatest asset". And religion.

[Bluth Corporation]

Communism HAS NO GOVERNMENT. how can something be political IF THERE ARE NO POLITICS?

Politics does not require government. Anywhere there is power to be had and people who want to wield it, you have politics.

Stalin was not a communist he was a AUTHORITARIAN DICTATOR.

Did he honestly believe he was working to bring about communism? I'm convinced he was; thus, it's fair to call him a communist. You can argue about how effective his methods might have been towards that end, of course, but I think it's tough to argue that Stalin was ultimately interested in anything but working towards communism. And keep in mind that Marx himself was hardly a utopian--he was quite aware that the path to communism would most likely be ugly and violent.

[Bluth Corporation]

The thing I find the most funny and ironic about communism is that both Engels and Marx were "bourgeois". Engels being a manufacturer is the "worst" of the "bourgeois".

You really can't hold some responsible for the circumstances into which they were born.

[Bluth Corporation]

Engels wasn't a communist... Marx revised his theory

Engels and Marx worked together to form communism.

No. Communist thought existed long before Engels and Marx. Communist societies existed in Russia long before 1917. What Marx did was develop a very specific theory on how communism would come into existence. He didn't deal too much with what communism would "look like."

[Bluth Corporation]

On the other hand, if Marx and Engels were dirt poor, people would complain that their theory was a simple case of sour grapes.

Their theory is worse then a simple case of sour grapes. Its a half assed religion.

Before Marx, the idea that economic relationships among "the people" were a driving force in history was almost unheard of. Yet it seems so obvious to us today. We can thank Karl Marx's theory for this huge leap forward in our understanding of history. Certainly, Marx takes it to an extreme that seems to deny any agency among individual human beings, but the basic idea was an unbelievably valuable contribution to the study of history.

[Terra Agora]

Their theory is worse then a simple case of sour grapes. Its a half assed religion.

Before Marx, the idea that economic relationships among "the people" were a driving force in history was almost unheard of. Yet it seems so obvious to us today. We can thank Karl Marx's theory for this huge leap forward in our understanding of history. Certainly, Marx takes it to an extreme that seems to deny any agency among individual human beings, but the basic idea was an unbelievably valuable contribution to the study of history.

I'd beg to differ.

[Bluth Corporation]

Are you suggesting that economic relationships are not an important element in understanding historical change?