Communism

sweet_hack · Post by **sweet_hack** » 29 Nov 2005 16:26

I've been studying the postwar era in history and communism sounds pretty decent(if someone would of done it right), but what kind osf communism is best: leninism, marxism or leninism/marxism. [/img]

Jeremy · Post by **Jeremy** » 29 Nov 2005 16:52

trotskyism.

BainbridgeShred · Post by **BainbridgeShred** » 29 Nov 2005 17:49

You're cute if you think Trotsky wouldn't have fucked up Communism too.

Jeremy · Post by **Jeremy** » 29 Nov 2005 21:05

I thought the question was:

what kind of communism is best?

Not who would make the best leader or anything related to what would have happened if Trotsky was actually in power. Lets put him in power and see. Oh wait... which was does time go again? I'm not going to speculate about what the world would be like now if Trotsky came to power in Russia - simply that I think his views on communism were the best. I'm not a communist, I doubt I've ever called myself a communist. I'm simply capable of answering a question without trying to push a particular unrelated view point.

BainbridgeShred · Post by **BainbridgeShred** » 30 Nov 2005 15:15

Not who would make the best leader or anything related to what would have happened if Trotsky was actually in power. Lets put him in power and see. Oh wait... which was does time go again? I'm not going to speculate about what the world would be like now if Trotsky came to power in Russia - simply that I think his views on communism were the best. I'm not a communist, I doubt I've ever called myself a communist. I'm simply capable of answering a question without trying to push a particular unrelated view point.

Yeah, I read it wrong. You're right.

Trotsky still would've fucked up though. LMAO!@@!z

Slowsis · Post by **Slowsis** » 30 Nov 2005 15:59

As communism goes.....the Aboriginal people of North America had it going on before all the white people showed up.
Mind you, that depended on the tribe, and communism really only works on the super small tribe scale.

sampotter · Post by **sampotter** » 30 Nov 2005 16:05

Slowsis wrote:As communism goes.....the Aboriginal people of North America had it going on before all the white people showed up.
Mind you, that depended on the tribe, and communism really only works on the super small tribe scale.

word!

tribalism ftw

BainbridgeShred · Post by **BainbridgeShred** » 30 Nov 2005 16:08

Yeah, and we can see how well it worked out for them. They're dealing 3 dollar Blackjack now at Casino's run by Chinamen.

sampotter · Post by **sampotter** » 30 Nov 2005 16:18

I'll deal you a free blow to the head.

Jeremy · Post by **Jeremy** » 30 Nov 2005 16:28

Slowsis wrote:As communism goes.....the Aboriginal people of North America had it going on before all the white people showed up.
Mind you, that depended on the tribe, and communism really only works on the super small tribe scale.

That's not really communism and I can prove it. It was around for thousands of years with out fucking things up.

But seriously I think in the political sense of the term "communism" refers to the state run society - the tribalism of North America would probably be referred to as "communityism" or as "anarchism" - in fact it's often brought up as a working anarchist system (in the political sense of the word "anarchist" obviously).

Slowsis · Post by **Slowsis** » 30 Nov 2005 16:38

Anarchy=Communism without a leader....if the technical descriptions are used as reference.

Blackend · Post by **Blackend** » 30 Nov 2005 18:30

Communism blows. End of story.

Damn pinko-commie bastards.

BainbridgeShred · Post by **BainbridgeShred** » 30 Nov 2005 19:11

More proof that Indians are stupid regardless of if they suceeded in running a Communist state: Most of the Casino's run by Indian's give away free drinks to anyone who gambles, which means you can sucsessfully win the money you lost at the tables back in sugar water and fire water!

HighDemonslayer · Post by **HighDemonslayer** » 01 Dec 2005 09:29

Slowsis said:
-----------------------------------------

Anarchy=Communism without a leader..(...)
----------------------------

This isn't true, because then you would have nobody enforcing allegiance to the almighty "state".

-------------------------------------------

The best kind of communism depends on how you want to murder millions of your, and your neighboring countrys' citizens.

Do you want squads all over the country, conducting firing squads on your political opponents?

Or do you want to seize, or bulldoze-over all the food producing land, you could starve all those pesky "red" states (see y2000 election map)

Or you could imprison and murder all the "intellegensia", like in Cambodia.

Wearing glasses was considered a symbol of intelligence there, so if you wear glasses, you better pick a different kind of communism.

So at the end of the day, it just depends how you want to stack the mountain of skulls for the cover of National Geographic .

-n

Slowsis · Post by **Slowsis** » 01 Dec 2005 15:36

HighDemonslayer wrote:Slowsis said:
-----------------------------------------

Anarchy=Communism without a leader..(...)
----------------------------

This isn't true, because then you would have nobody enforcing allegiance to the almighty "state".

-n

Main Entry: an·ar·chism
Pronunciation: 'a-n&r-"ki-z&m, -"när-
Function: noun
1 : a political theory holding all forms of governmental authority to be unnecessary and undesirable and advocating a society based on voluntary cooperation and free association of individuals and groups

I said using the technical descriptions......
I guess i should have been more specific. The original concept of communism was that everyone would want to actively participate in the running of the state and the equal division of resources.

Sadly people are greedy, and therefor neither system i have outlined actually works.

Seath · Post by **Seath** » 01 Dec 2005 16:29

yea, the natives didnt have the state, they had the buffalo

BainbridgeShred · Post by **BainbridgeShred** » 01 Dec 2005 18:23

yea, the natives didnt have the state, they had the buffalo

Funniest thing I've read all year.

Jeremy · Post by **Jeremy** » 01 Dec 2005 18:37

Slowsis wrote: Sadly people are greedy, and therefor neither system i have outlined actually works.

But for that matter does capitalism work? We live in a largely capitalist world where a minority of people are very well off and the majority of people are very poor with very low standards of living. Look at Cuba - a very poor country but a socialist country with a national life expectancy better than many Western nations. Obviously I don't think their form of government is perfect - or even good at all - but I don't think we should get caught up in the rhetoric - it's clear that our system could be improved too. Perhaps a merging of our system and a socialist system - a capitalist system with all the core services run and operated by the government with private enterprise for people who want to pay more for treatment but higher taxes so that the government services remain well funded and more than adequate. Also better distributing of our natural resources to the government and thus to the benefit of all people - rather than to the pockets of large corporations with no social conscious. Governments that plan for the future and for future generations rather than simply for their own period. Look at Costa Rica - a nation which has seen it's limited resources and that its future lies in tourism rather than mining and is dealing with its environmental problems now before they become too big to be dealt with so as to be able to sustain their living into the future.