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

[The Steel Magnolia]

Um. no?

[Conscentia]

Complete misinterpretation of what was written.
He didn't even mention Stalinism.

I am talking about reality whilst communism is just a fantasy. Why does he have to mention something for me to bring it up? You sound like a fascist to me.

I am bringing it up because i believe that in the real world that is a far as communism can ever get.

[Consortium of Manchukuo]

I'm not a communist, in fact opposed to Communism a good degree despite my innate left-ward leanings, but I still think banning or suppressing the communists is a poor idea. One of our basic tenets of a Free Society is allowing people to make their own political choices. If the Communists threaten others or attempt to harm other people, break the law, ect. ect. then of course they can be arrested or cracked down on or whatever. But if they're peaceful and obey the law of the land then no, leave them as they are. They're not a threat to the established Order of Things, given their small size.
And to play the slipper slope type argument, once we start cracking down on the Communists where does it end? Pretty soon everybody who doesn't fit to the center will be gone, and while I dislike many, well, most of the fringe groups it would still cause catastrophic harm to our society.

[Agymnum]

And you have your head in the clouds thinking it will ever work.

As i am talking about above communism is for one a stateless society and yet due to the human psyche a state will always be needed to repress those who disagree with Communism in the first place and want something else.

I'm not a communist.
And define "work".

I find it ironic that everyone who doesn't think communism is evil is immediately classified as a communist by the OP.

OP, just because we don't think Marx was in league with Satan, doesn't mean communism is our ideology of choice. I personally am democratic-socialist, as I feel that communism is an unnecessary extreme since the worker benefits under democratic socialism.

[Garwall]

Socialist parties no, communist parties yes. Freedom of speech need only go so far when the goal is to abolish the state and those involved are actively working towards it.

So if I was a Fascist and did not want to abolish the state, only rework it into a totalitarian machine that suppresses civil rights and freedom of speech to build a stronger nation, I have a right to free speech, but a Communist whose goal is to abolish the state and build a classless society with relative equal distribution of capital and unlimited personal rights to all individuals, regardless of race/gender, is a dangerous radical who should not have a right to speech? Sounds like a grade A Statist to mee.

[New Freedomstan]

What Communist Parties? Oh yeah, those Communist Parties which have no conceivable chance of ever winning a single election for even the lowest offices.

For someone with the Cypriotan flag, you don't know much about the AKEL.

I am talking about reality whilst communism is just a fantasy. Why does he have to mention something for me to bring it up? You sound like a fascist to me.

I am bringing it up because i believe that in the real world that is a far as communism can ever get.

A question, then. Do you think the current economical system based on private property will last forever? And if so, why would it be different from every single system that predated it?

[The Broken Imperial Sector]

Yes communism is a threat to freedom and democracy. Any and all members of any communist group should be imprisoned or possibly executed.

[Astracarn]

No. Australia's conservative party tried to pass this in the 1950s (at the height of the Red Scare). It was knocked down straight away. Now that communism is less than a thread in western society, there is no need for it to be outlawed.

[Agymnum]

Yes communism is a threat to freedom and democracy. Any and all members of any communist group should be imprisoned or possibly executed.

You wish to imprison intelligent, hardworking Americans who have done nothing wrong?

Please, tell me more about how you value freedom and democracy. If you oppose communists being able to exist legally, you clearly have no clue what freedom and democracy are.

[Imperiatom]

And you have your head in the clouds thinking it will ever work.

As i am talking about above communism is for one a stateless society and yet due to the human psyche a state will always be needed to repress those who disagree with Communism in the first place and want something else.

The definition of state marxists use is not "a government" or "a public organisatorial body". The state in Marxist terms is the public body used to front the interests of the ruling class, which in capitalism is the bourgeoisie, and in socialism the proletariat and allied classes. Most Marxists still operate that a statesless society, will still have a public legislative body in order to enforce the laws of society, but as class-differences grow less, and class-antagonism vanishes, the class-character of the state will vanish. Leaving merely the organisatorial and administrative role of the state, and not that of an enforcer of the ruling class' interests.

If communism is achieved, it's only good that people will gradually grow to oppose it as the rate of development increases, leading to conflict and, eventually, transition to whatever system lies beyond communism. We can't predict what the sources of conflict will be, but humans will be in conflict. However, to think that this will lead to restoration of capitalism is no more likely than for feudalism to be restored in the modern day.

So what your saying now is that one day Marx woke up and decided he had the power to change the definition of a word that had been in common usage for several hundred years? The ruling class would now be the proletariat whose interest is upholding communism and preventing anyone with another idea from being able to express it.

[Prussia-Steinbach]

I chose to outlaw them. I don't mind Social Democratic parties, or other moderate organisations, but full-out Communism... no.

[Disserbia]

Socialist parties no, communist parties yes. Freedom of speech need only go so far when the goal is to abolish the state and those involved are actively working towards it.

So if I was a Fascist and did not want to abolish the state, only rework it into a totalitarian machine that suppresses civil rights and freedom of speech to build a stronger nation, I have a right to free speech, but a Communist whose goal is to abolish the state and build a classless society with relative equal distribution of capital and unlimited personal rights to all individuals, regardless of race/gender, is a dangerous radical who should not have a right to speech? Sounds like a grade A Statist to mee.

Niether should, because both are trying to subvert democracy. Sounds like you're good at making assumptions that are wholy unfounded.

[Songhia]

I think democracy should get tough on people who think that democracy should get tough on people. Rights for me but not for thee; it always ends the same way. The moment you say that freedom of assembly or of speech or of political conscience needs to be limited by this or that, then you've turned rights into privileges, which will in time invariably be winnowed away.

What are your political opinions, Imperiatom?

[Souseiseki]

Yes communism is a threat to freedom and democracy. Any and all members of any communist group should be imprisoned or possibly executed.

You wish to imprison intelligent, hardworking Americans who have done nothing wrong?

Please, tell me more about how you value freedom and democracy. If you oppose communists being able to exist legally, you clearly have no clue what freedom and democracy are.

they thought bad :-)

[Arumdaum]

Destroy democracy to save democracy? Makes perfect sense.

^ This.

If anything, the more popular communist parties of the West are much more democratic than other parties.

[Garwall]

Yes communism is a threat to freedom and democracy. Any and all members of any communist group should be imprisoned or possibly executed.

It makes me sad when I see people who honestly think this way and believe there's nothing wrong or contradictory with their statements.

[Baiynistan]

You know, if a party is outlawed, it ain't much of a democracy.

Pretty much spot on.

Also, Communist Parties are about as likely to get into government in Europe, the States, Oceania (lolrony) or any other 'Western' country as the Monster Raving Loony Party is in the United Kingdom. Like it or not, Socialism failed and Joe Blogs knew this long before socialists cared to admit it (many still don't) and because of this, or maybe vice versa, real Left parties never get substantial votes.

I'd say, if any type of party is worth worrying about, it's the Nationalists, but even they are unlikely to get hold of any real political clout in most 'civilised' countries. The Fascists showed that it was a lot easier to get the proletariat fired up with patriotism than it was to inspire them to adopt an unified internationalist Working Class consciousness. Even so, Far Right parties shouldn't be band either.

[The Broken Imperial Sector]

Yes communism is a threat to freedom and democracy. Any and all members of any communist group should be imprisoned or possibly executed.

You wish to imprison intelligent, hardworking Americans who have done nothing wrong?

Please, tell me more about how you value freedom and democracy. If you oppose communists being able to exist legally, you clearly have no clue what freedom and democracy are.

Sometimes to protect freedom you have to do what is necessary. Communism is a direct threat to freedom so those who follow it deserve none.

[Agymnum]

So if I was a Fascist and did not want to abolish the state, only rework it into a totalitarian machine that suppresses civil rights and freedom of speech to build a stronger nation, I have a right to free speech, but a Communist whose goal is to abolish the state and build a classless society with relative equal distribution of capital and unlimited personal rights to all individuals, regardless of race/gender, is a dangerous radical who should not have a right to speech? Sounds like a grade A Statist to mee.

Niether should, because both are trying to subvert democracy. Sounds like you're good at making assumptions that are wholy unfounded.

So we destroy democracy and freedom of speech in order to save democracy and freedom of speech.

Makes a lot of sense.

[Garwall]

So if I was a Fascist and did not want to abolish the state, only rework it into a totalitarian machine that suppresses civil rights and freedom of speech to build a stronger nation, I have a right to free speech, but a Communist whose goal is to abolish the state and build a classless society with relative equal distribution of capital and unlimited personal rights to all individuals, regardless of race/gender, is a dangerous radical who should not have a right to speech? Sounds like a grade A Statist to mee.

Niether should, because both are trying to subvert democracy. Sounds like you're good at making assumptions that are wholy unfounded.

Subverting democracy to protect it against those who would subvert it defeats the purpose entirely, and accomplishes exactly what you're trying to prevent. You're just assuming the role of those you wish to prevent from getting into power.

[Arumdaum]

You wish to imprison intelligent, hardworking Americans who have done nothing wrong?

Please, tell me more about how you value freedom and democracy. If you oppose communists being able to exist legally, you clearly have no clue what freedom and democracy are.

Sometimes to protect freedom you have to do what is necessary. Communism is a direct threat to freedom so those who follow it deserve none.

Your beliefs are a direct threat to freedom. Clearly, you deserve none.

[Imperiatom]

I love the poll:
"Do nothing, or else do far more then would be civilized, choose wisely."

Thank you Rex.

[Agymnum]

You wish to imprison intelligent, hardworking Americans who have done nothing wrong?

Please, tell me more about how you value freedom and democracy. If you oppose communists being able to exist legally, you clearly have no clue what freedom and democracy are.

Sometimes to protect freedom you have to do what is necessary. Communism is a direct threat to freedom so those who follow it deserve none.

"Protect freedom" is bullshit. To protect freedom, you allow it to flourish.

Tell me where communism is a direct threat to democracy. Tell me. Stalinism is not communism. Neither is maoism. Both are authoritarian state-socialist ideologies which masquerade as communism just as North Korea masquerades as being a democratic republic.

[New Panti]

Well, I say no, because as many people have said it limits freedom of speech and expression. Also, communism isn't even a real form of government. It's an economic system. Technically speaking, it is possible to have a communist democracy, though that is highly unlikely.

[Conscentia]

I chose to outlaw them. I don't mind Social Democratic parties, or other moderate organisations, but full-out Communism... no.

Expected - OP, here is a real fascist. Feel free to ask him what fascism is, assuming he's willing to explain.
(You are still a fascist aren't you, Prussia?)