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

[Empire of Akebulan]

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.

COmmunists have good ideas. Unfortunately they are a bit unrealistic in the same sense as the libertarians - sounds REALLY good, but it doesn't seem to work. Outlawing them is too far, and it would only begin a step in the direction of limiting freedom in general.

[Individual]

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.

Nope. The party is not that influential for it to become a threat to anyone. Also, sinking down to their level is not really the way to preach democracy, sorry. Just keep the status quo for now. But my good fiends, I am so waiting to hear Hippostania's opinion on this issue.

[Imperiatom]

You seem to be advocating that it is a form of "government" that can not work in the real world.

Why not?

Besides which, it doesn't change the fact that the OP isn't discussing communists, it's discussing Stalinists.

Which is a form of communism. Marxism is what many people ad hear to as the only true form of communism but it is an umbrella term for a number of slightly different ideology's.

[Individual]

Why not?

Besides which, it doesn't change the fact that the OP isn't discussing communists, it's discussing Stalinists.

Which is a form of communism. Marxism is what many people ad hear to as the only true form of communism but it is an umbrella term for a number of slightly different ideology's.

viewtopic.php?t=197979&f=20&view=unread

[Trotskylvania]

No "democracy" should ever, under any circumstances, prohibit someone's political views. No matter how disagreeable or insane.

For example, I hate Nazism, like just about everyone who isn't a Nazi himself, but I think Germany should be ashamed of banning it outright.

This is just as silly as the inverse.

[Of the Free Socialist Territories]

Why not?

Besides which, it doesn't change the fact that the OP isn't discussing communists, it's discussing Stalinists.

Which is a form of communism.

No.

Marxism is what many people ad hear to as the only true form of communism but it is an umbrella term for a number of slightly different ideology's.

None of which, even if it were accurate, and it isn't, because Stalinism is a total betrayal of basic Marxist principles, changes the fact that your OP is erroneous and banning parties solely on the basis of ideology is reprehensible.

[Wamitoria]

No "democracy" should ever, under any circumstances, prohibit someone's political views. No matter how disagreeable or insane.

For example, I hate Nazism, like just about everyone who isn't a Nazi himself, but I think Germany should be ashamed of banning it outright.

This is just as silly as the inverse.

Tell 'em like it is, Trots.

[Petrovsegratsk]

InB4FreedomOfSpeech.

[Arkiasis]

If a nation outlaws an ideology then they are not "democratic".

[Tyriece]

A lot of people here should look up what communism is...

[Randy F Marsh]

If a nation outlaws an ideology then they are not "democratic".

Well they are if it's done in the democratic fashion, they are just intolerant by majority.

[Chestaan]

A lot of people here should look up what communism is...

You'd think people here would already know seeing as how the definition is quoted every ten seconds.

[Individual]

No "democracy" should ever, under any circumstances, prohibit someone's political views. No matter how disagreeable or insane.

For example, I hate Nazism, like just about everyone who isn't a Nazi himself, but I think Germany should be ashamed of banning it outright.

This is just as silly as the inverse.

Don't think so. After all, swastikas never killed anyone. Also, everyone keeps whining about the holocaust, but always forgets the holodomor, which is a stalinist equivalent to the holocaust. What's so different about them? Oh yeah, it was about racism in the holocaust. And in holodomor, people were killed even more than in the holocaust. Doesn't matter, because it was about racism in the holocaust. WHAT THE HELL, PEOPLE???

[New Chalcedon]

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.

Because, of course, "freedom" only includes the right to pick one of the state-approved ideologies, without any competition from other ways of thinking.

About what I'd expect of you.

[Of the Free Socialist Territories]

And in holodomor, people were killed even more than in the holocaust.

False.

[Randy F Marsh]

A lot of people here should look up what communism is...

Then you should know the communist parties in the world, particularly the west, are a poor reflection of communism.

[Agymnum]

A lot of people here should look up what communism is...

Considering how people bitch about it so often, I'm surprised most people are completely unaware of how democratic communism really is.

I mean, what could be more democratic than the workers themselves owning the means of production, which belong to them in the first place since they, you know, produce everything people buy?

But hey, fuck educating ourselves. Education takes too much brain power.

[Individual]

A lot of people here should look up what communism is...

You'd think people here would already know seeing as how the definition is quoted every ten seconds.

On NSG? No chance. You commies should copy that to your signatures so the ignorant could have a good, clear look at them. If they care, that is.

[Agymnum]

You'd think people here would already know seeing as how the definition is quoted every ten seconds.

On NSG? No chance. You commies should copy that to your signatures so the ignorant could have a good, clear look at them. If they care, that is.

"Why should I trust your definition of Communism, you bastard pinko? Next thing you know, you'll be telling me that McCarthy wasn't a hero but a fraud! Lies, all of them!"

[Imperiatom]

Which is a form of communism. Marxism is what many people ad hear to as the only true form of communism but it is an umbrella term for a number of slightly different ideology's.

viewtopic.php?t=197979&f=20&view=unread

In that case one might argue that since everyone cannot control everything or all of the same mind, it is impossible to have a system of law and run any form of production without a state or private enterprise. This would lead to the conclusion that Marxism is the fanciful ramblings of an idiot who had no understanding of the human Psyche, and the Stalinist or the current Chinese way is the only way of implementing communism in reality.

[Agymnum]

viewtopic.php?t=197979&f=20&view=unread

In that case one might argue that since everyone cannot control everything or all of the same mind, it is impossible to have a system of law and run any form of production without a state or private enterprise. This would lead to the conclusion that Marxism is the fanciful ramblings of an idiot who had no understanding of the human Psyche, and the Stalinist or the current Chinese way is the only way of implementing communism in reality.

Stalinism and Maoism are not Communism. Just because someone says they are something, doesn't make them that.

For example, North Korea's official title is the Democratic People's Republic of Korea. Obviously, they must be democratic seeing as their name has both democracy and republic in it, right?

[Of the Free Socialist Territories]

viewtopic.php?t=197979&f=20&view=unread

In that case one might argue that since everyone cannot control everything or all of the same mind, it is impossible to have a system of law and run any form of production without a state or private enterprise.

You might argue that.

You'd be bullshitting, but you might argue it.

This would lead to the conclusion that Marxism is the fanciful ramblings of an idiot who had no understanding of the human Psyche,

Debatable. You might also argue that it's a massively misunderstood theory and is pretty damn individualist.

and the Stalinist

What? Shooting communists is the only way to implement communism?

or the current Chinese way

That'd be dirigiste capitalism tending towards unregulated capitalism.

is the only way of implementing communism in reality.

Well, one of them involves executing communists, and the other one is essentially capitalism but even worse, so I don't know how you'd come to that conclusion without not knowing what the term means.

[Imperiatom]

This is just as silly as the inverse.

Don't think so. After all, swastikas never killed anyone. Also, everyone keeps whining about the holocaust, but always forgets the holodomor, which is a stalinist equivalent to the holocaust. What's so different about them? Oh yeah, it was about racism in the holocaust. And in holodomor, people were killed even more than in the holocaust. Doesn't matter, because it was about racism in the holocaust. WHAT THE HELL, PEOPLE???

I have given up explaining that to people. To the mainstream we have vilified Hitler so much that they think anybody who opposed him must be better.

[Individual]

viewtopic.php?t=197979&f=20&view=unread

In that case one might argue that since everyone cannot control everything or all of the same mind, it is impossible to have a system of law and run any form of production without a state or private enterprise. This would lead to the conclusion that Marxism is the fanciful ramblings of an idiot who had no understanding of the human Psyche, and the Stalinist or the current Chinese way is the only way of implementing communism in reality.

Did you even read the thread?

[Imperiatom]

In that case one might argue that since everyone cannot control everything or all of the same mind, it is impossible to have a system of law and run any form of production without a state or private enterprise. This would lead to the conclusion that Marxism is the fanciful ramblings of an idiot who had no understanding of the human Psyche, and the Stalinist or the current Chinese way is the only way of implementing communism in reality.

Stalinism and Maoism are not Communism. Just because someone says they are something, doesn't make them that.

For example, North Korea's official title is the Democratic People's Republic of Korea. Obviously, they must be democratic seeing as their name has both democracy and republic in it, right?

well one man gets to vote