Your thoughts on communism?

[United British Union]

Aristocracy is arguably useless even in a capitalist economy and impeding to the growth of a nation's economy.

Ah, you mean inherited aristocracy? Yeah, I kinda see them as parasites.

A jolly mean thing to say, sir!
I find you as revolutionaries.

[Arglorand]

Aristocracy is arguably useless even in a capitalist economy and impeding to the growth of a nation's economy.

Ah, you mean inherited aristocracy? Yeah, I kinda see them as parasites.

Inherited aristocracy sort of brings new meaning to "welfare queen", really.

[Unitaristic Regions]

And my opinion is that aristocracy is redundant, because the things you mentioned don't have to be managed by aristocracy.

Communism is terrible, as it steals our land and houses. Put that in your pipe and smoke it, sir.

Your logic that says

Is against aristocracy == commeh!

Is pretty crude.

[Unitaristic Regions]

Ah, you mean inherited aristocracy? Yeah, I kinda see them as parasites.

A jolly mean thing to say, sir!
I find you as revolutionaries.

I'm not a commeh.

[Arglorand]

Ah, you mean inherited aristocracy? Yeah, I kinda see them as parasites.

A jolly mean thing to say, sir!
I find you as revolutionaries.

Why, thank you, milady, you are most gracious. Unfortunately, I'm not quite as brave as to cause a revolution just yet.

I'm an idealistic social democrat.

wat now

Reality blows up.

Finally.

[Unitaristic Regions]

Ah, you mean inherited aristocracy? Yeah, I kinda see them as parasites.

Inherited aristocracy sort of brings new meaning to "welfare queen", really.

It does.

[United British Union]

Sirs, to prevent taking over this thread, I have made this one to carry on our own topic. Good day.
viewtopic.php?f=20&t=276439
Sirs, the above.

[Duvniask]

Too idealistic for me. I prefer social democracy.

Are you speaking as your younger self or as your older self, Obi-Wan?

[Arglorand]

Too idealistic for me. I prefer social democracy.

Are you speaking as your younger self, or as your older self, Obi-Wan?

Obi-Wan when old was clearly an anarchist, as opposed to the obviously slightly socially conservative, yet social democratic beliefs of his youth.

[Duvniask]

No, we pay well for service in our houses and on the farmland, sir. One must understand.

Because under capitalism (and thus you), the majority of people work not for themselves but for the upper class, and this is why they're "employees". This goes completely against individual rights, as it is undemocratic and authoritarian.
The alternative is unemployment or worse.

As a matter of fact, sir, many of our estates provide food for thousands of people!

Which doesn't make you exceptional in the food business.

How, sir?

Because you are unnecessary.

[Jetan]

A party cannot function without the Aristocracy, sir.

...a nation without an Aristocracy is as useful as a glass hammer, sir. That one must see!

You should become a comedian, you're natural.

[Conscentia]

And my opinion is that aristocracy is redundant, because the things you mentioned don't have to be managed by aristocracy.

Communism is terrible, as it steals our land and houses. Put that in your pipe and smoke it, sir.

A house is personal property, thus irrelevant.
As for land - you stole the land from common ownership. Before private land ownership, all land was commonly owned.

[Sanguinea]

Communism is terrible, as it steals our land and houses. Put that in your pipe and smoke it, sir.

A house is personal property, thus irrelevant.
As for land - you stole the land from common ownership. Before private land ownership, all land was commonly owned.

I would say that "stole" is the wrong term, more like parcelled out land that was at one time commonly owned.

[Conscentia]

A house is personal property, thus irrelevant.
As for land - you stole the land from common ownership. Before private land ownership, all land was commonly owned.

I would say that "stole" is the wrong term, more like parcelled out land that was at one time commonly owned.

Steal: Take (another person's property) without permission or legal right and without intending to return it.

Stole is entirely the correct term.

[4years]

Too idealistic for me. I prefer social democracy.

I find social democracy much to idealistic for my tastes, actually.

[Jetan]

I would say that "stole" is the wrong term, more like parcelled out land that was at one time commonly owned.

Steal: Take (another person's property) without permission or legal right and without intending to return it.

Stole is entirely the correct term.

I love how so many of you commies choose to cherry pick what you understand about any given definition/law/whatever. Where exactly is it illegal to own land again? Certainly not in any of the democratic countries, if anywhere.

[Conscentia]

Too idealistic for me. I prefer social democracy.

Elaborate, please.

[Conscentia]

Steal: Take (another person's property) without permission or legal right and without intending to return it.

Stole is entirely the correct term.

I love hiw so many of you commies choose to cherry pick what you understand about give definition/law/whatever. Where exactly is it illegal to own land again? Certainly not in any of the democratic countries, if anywhere.

It's illegal to steal. Long ago, all land was commonly owned. The land was stolen when it was first seized from common ownership and put into private hands. The thefts happened centuries - now it's the trade of stolen property.

[Quintium]

Communism is an ideology, and I don't really care for ideologies. Personally, I judge ideas by their practical implications. And the practical implications of communism haven't exactly been fun. Every time it was tried, it ended up falling apart, with the state having to turn to extreme authoritarianism to maintain even a semblance of success.

[Sanguinea]

I would say that "stole" is the wrong term, more like parcelled out land that was at one time commonly owned.

Steal: Take (another person's property) without permission or legal right and without intending to return it.

Stole is entirely the correct term.

That would be assuming that there was such a concept as common land ownership before the formation of socialist thought, which in truth, there wasn't. Humans have fought over land for their entire existence. Before the idea of international law, permission and legal rights meant nothing. Ownership was a direct outcome of a tribe's ablity to exert its dominance.

[Jetan]

I love hiw so many of you commies choose to cherry pick what you understand about give definition/law/whatever. Where exactly is it illegal to own land again? Certainly not in any of the democratic countries, if anywhere.

It's illegal to steal. Long ago, all land was commonly owned. The land was stolen when it was first seized from common ownership and put into private hands. The thefts happened centuries - now it's the trade of stolen property.

I assume you have some sort of proof for this claim that all land is infact stolen? Becouse if not, your claim is nothing but ideologically driven rant.

[Conscentia]

Communism is an ideology, and I don't really care for ideologies. Personally, I judge ideas by their practical implications. And the practical implications of communism haven't exactly been fun. Every time it was tried, it ended up falling apart, with the state having to turn to extreme authoritarianism to maintain even a semblance of success.

Where was it tried?

It certainly wasn't tried in the USSR and similar states where the officials explicitly claimed that the aim was socialism, not communism. Of-coarse, that itself was propaganda.

[Conscentia]

Steal: Take (another person's property) without permission or legal right and without intending to return it.
Stole is entirely the correct term.

That would be assuming that there was such a concept as common land ownership before the formation of socialist thought, which in truth, there wasn't. Humans have fought over land for their entire existence. Before the idea of international law, permission and legal rights meant nothing. Ownership was a direct outcome of a tribe's ablity to exert its dominance.

They fought to use the land, not to own the land.
Ever heard of the term "de facto" before?
Primitive communism was the status quo for most of human history.

[4years]

Communism is an ideology, and I don't really care for ideologies. Personally, I judge ideas by their practical implications. And the practical implications of communism haven't exactly been fun. Every time it was tried, it ended up falling apart, with the state having to turn to extreme authoritarianism to maintain even a semblance of success.

Where was it tried?

It certainly wasn't tried in the USSR and similar states where the officials explicitly claimed that the aim was socialism, not communism. Of-coarse, that itself was propaganda.

Technically they claimed that they were socialist and that the goal was communism, which was, of course, mere propaganda.

[4years]

It's illegal to steal. Long ago, all land was commonly owned. The land was stolen when it was first seized from common ownership and put into private hands. The thefts happened centuries - now it's the trade of stolen property.

I assume you have some sort of proof for this claim that all land is infact stolen? Becouse if not, your claim is nothing but ideologically driven rant.

Perhaps you recall the Native American tribes who lived on the land before the US came along? How exactly do you think that the colonists took over everything?