Should democracy get tough on communist party's in the west?

[New Freedomstan]

As member of Communist Party I thank foolish liberals freedom-loving democrats for paving the way for revolution upholding democracy, and they will be sent to the gulag have freedom of the speech after the Revolution. Those who oppose Great Communism will be lined up to the wall left with the freedom of the speech. Because we respect freedom of the speech and democracy which is not sham.

[Imperiatom]

If they are a threat to individual freedoms and rule by parliamentary democracy then maybe it is. I point you in the direction of modern day Germany as a nation that has outlawed a particular party yet is democratic.

The outlawing of the Nazi Party in Germany is a disgrace to democracy.

You do not beat your enemies by stooping to their level. You beat them by rising above. Democratic nations are inherently better because people enjoy living there voluntarily. They do not seek Nazism in large numbers because democracy is better able to provide for them.

By banning Nazism, Germany is expressing a fear that their democracy is unable to satisfy the people to the point where they will turn to Nazism. That means Germany's democracy is doing something wrong.

It depends which type of democracy one subscribes to.

[Bojikami]

The problem is, America is still as afraid of communism is it was in the 50's.

[Free Tristania]

The moment a party is outlawed democracy dies. Now unless they would be killing people or planting bombs to blow stuff up.. there is no reason to ban them and to ban them without a good reason would kill democracy.

[Ovisterra]

The outlawing of the Nazi Party in Germany is a disgrace to democracy.

You do not beat your enemies by stooping to their level. You beat them by rising above. Democratic nations are inherently better because people enjoy living there voluntarily. They do not seek Nazism in large numbers because democracy is better able to provide for them.

By banning Nazism, Germany is expressing a fear that their democracy is unable to satisfy the people to the point where they will turn to Nazism. That means Germany's democracy is doing something wrong.

It depends which type of democracy one subscribes to.

The one with the democracy. That one.

[Of the Free Socialist Territories]

Ah by strange coincidence i am reading Bloodlands at the moment. He does produce compelling evidence but the fact that so many other estimates are out there leaves open all possibilities from between 2-8 million.

Not really, no. There a possibility that Stalinist collectivisation was carried out by enormous green rabbits, not a mish-mash of central government figures, party cadres, the NKVD and local troikas and dvoikas, to name a few types, but that doesn't make the possibility of the rabbits worth spending time on when another version of events has far more evidence.

[Imperiatom]

There seems to be no poll option for communists to pick.

You should vote for the status quo, as that one is also for you, vote for your continued existence .

[Agymnum]

There seems to be no poll option for communists to pick.

You should vote for the status quo, as that one is also for you, vote for your continued existence .

How about an option where we educate the western populace so they stop fearing communism and understand what it really is?

That would be the pro-communist option.

[Ainin]

There seems to be no poll option for communists any sane person to pick.

Fixed for accuracy.

[Conscentia]

The outlawing of the Nazi Party in Germany is a disgrace to democracy.

You do not beat your enemies by stooping to their level. You beat them by rising above. Democratic nations are inherently better because people enjoy living there voluntarily. They do not seek Nazism in large numbers because democracy is better able to provide for them.

By banning Nazism, Germany is expressing a fear that their democracy is unable to satisfy the people to the point where they will turn to Nazism. That means Germany's democracy is doing something wrong.

It depends which type of democracy one subscribes to.

There are only 2: Representative & Direct.

Both are violated by the prohibition of an ideology.

[New Freedomstan]

Ah by strange coincidence i am reading Bloodlands at the moment. He does produce compelling evidence but the fact that so many other estimates are out there leaves open all possibilities from between 2-8 million.

Not really, no. There a possibility that Stalinist collectivisation was carried out by enormous green rabbits, not a mish-mash of central government figures, party cadres, the NKVD and local troikas and dvoikas, to name a few types, but that doesn't make the possibility of the rabbits worth spending time on when another version of events has far more evidence.

Such cockery never happened under Comrade Stalin. Anyone who says otherwise are petty-bourgeois counter-revolutionary third-wheeling semi-fascist right-wing deviationists and should be sent to the gulag.

[Imperial Nilfgaard]

There seems to be no poll option for communists to pick.

You should vote for the status quo, as that one is also for you, vote for your continued existence .

Or boycott the vote and demand we start the people's revolution. That could be more entertaining...

[Agymnum]

It depends which type of democracy one subscribes to.

I'm going with the democracy that's actually fully democratic.

AKA: Not North Korean "democracy".

[Bojikami]

You should vote for the status quo, as that one is also for you, vote for your continued existence .

How about an option where we educate the western populace so they stop fearing communism and understand what it really is?

That would be the pro-communist option.

I'm all for this.

[Of the Free Socialist Territories]

Not really, no. There a possibility that Stalinist collectivisation was carried out by enormous green rabbits, not a mish-mash of central government figures, party cadres, the NKVD and local troikas and dvoikas, to name a few types, but that doesn't make the possibility of the rabbits worth spending time on when another version of events has far more evidence.

Such cockery never happened under Comrade Stalin. Anyone who says otherwise are petty-bourgeois counter-revolutionary third-wheeling semi-fascist right-wing deviationists and should be sent to the gulag.

Please try saying something coherent instead of stereotypes and poorly-executed satire.

[Maledixit]

Should democracy get tough on communist party's in the west is the question, and if so how tough?
I am interested to find out what the members of nation states feel about this. As if the communists ever took power i doubt we could use this site as we do presently. The outlawing of other political party's would i believe occur, swiftly followed by the repression of free speech and expression. Given that the attitude of the communists is my way or the highway( Road of bones- for those who don't understand my pun) should we tolerate them or should we crack down on them as Germany does for example on Nazi ideology.

I am torn between Keeping the status quo or outlawing the party.

A couple of points that may have already been said (I haven't read back through the whole thread).

1) Are we really that sure that the west even constitutes a true democracy by definition?

2) There probably isn't any need to get tough with communist parties, because their threats these days are mostly just words. North and South Korea have been officially at 'war' for about 60 years, and nothing has really come from it.

3) Free speech is free speech. If you try to remove others' free speech to support your own stance on how you apparently advocate it yourself, you're a hypocrite.

[Imperiatom]

As member of Communist Party I thank foolish liberals freedom-loving democrats for paving the way for revolution upholding democracy, and they will be sent to the gulag have freedom of the speech after the Revolution. Those who oppose Great Communism will be lined up to the wall left with the freedom of the speech. Because we respect freedom of the speech and democracy which is not sham.

Somebody execute him!!! (very droll lol)

[Chestaan]

Not really, no. There a possibility that Stalinist collectivisation was carried out by enormous green rabbits, not a mish-mash of central government figures, party cadres, the NKVD and local troikas and dvoikas, to name a few types, but that doesn't make the possibility of the rabbits worth spending time on when another version of events has far more evidence.

Such cockery never happened under Comrade Stalin. Anyone who says otherwise are petty-bourgeois counter-revolutionary third-wheeling semi-fascist right-wing deviationists and should be sent to the gulag.

Hmm, maybe banning certain parties isn't such a bad idea after all...

[Gallopfrey and the Pony Republic Therof]

It depends which type of democracy one subscribes to.

I'm going with the democracy that's actually fully democratic.

AKA: Not North Korean "democracy".

He may be talking about representative democracy or direct democracy, methinks.

[Chinese Regions]

The outlawing of the Nazi Party in Germany is a disgrace to democracy.

You do not beat your enemies by stooping to their level. You beat them by rising above. Democratic nations are inherently better because people enjoy living there voluntarily. They do not seek Nazism in large numbers because democracy is better able to provide for them.

By banning Nazism, Germany is expressing a fear that their democracy is unable to satisfy the people to the point where they will turn to Nazism. That means Germany's democracy is doing something wrong.

It depends which type of democracy one subscribes to.

Direct, representative? Nothing about banning specific beliefs, ideologies.
Oh Athenian as well, all mature and adult Greek men that aren't slaves can say whatever they want.

[Agymnum]

I'm going with the democracy that's actually fully democratic.

AKA: Not North Korean "democracy".

He may be talking about representative democracy or direct democracy, methinks.

Neither of which advocate suppression of any political ideologies.

So again, I'm going with the democracy that's actually democratic, since any democracy which bans political ideologies or suppresses them really isn't democratic at all.

[Imperiatom]

It depends which type of democracy one subscribes to.

The one with the democracy. That one.

1) Democracy that allows freedom of expression for all groups despite the majority view.
2) Democracy that follows the will of the people. For example if 95% of people want communists killed the will of the people is overwhelmingly to kill them.

[Agymnum]

The one with the democracy. That one.

1) Democracy that allows freedom of expression for all groups despite the majority view.
2) Democracy that follows the will of the people. For example if 95% of people want communists killed the will of the people is overwhelmingly to kill them.

Number 2 is a bastardization of democracy. That's tyranny by majority, not actual democracy.

[New Freedomstan]

The one with the democracy. That one.

1) Democracy that allows freedom of expression for all groups despite the majority view.
2) Democracy that follows the will of the people. For example if 95% of people want communists killed the will of the people is overwhelmingly to kill them.

Now, comrade, democracy does not necessarily mean freedom of expression. Surely, vicious assaults of the bourgeois on the Revolution through their so-called 'freedom of press' and 'freedom of speech' should be curtailed for the glory of the proletariat. If the Will of the People is Great Communism, then naturally this implies lining the bourgeois up against the walls! For Communism!

[Ainin]

The one with the democracy. That one.

1) Democracy that allows freedom of expression for all groups despite the majority view.
2) Democracy that follows the will of the people. For example if 95% of people want communists killed the will of the people is overwhelmingly to kill them.

1) Yes.
2) No. Hold the fuck up. That's tyranny by majority. Democracy protects.