If America Should Go Communist

[quote]pookie wrote:
LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:

It is only thru democratic means that it can be established.

As SpongeBob would say “Well, good luck with that.”

I think the first thing a democratic communist population would do is vote back a capitalist party to power.

[/quote]

Really?

How come then that historically democracies moved more and more in the socialist direction?

I bet that in Canada more than 50% of the GNP is spent by the state, meaning you are closer to communism than to capitalism.

[quote]gladiatorsteer wrote:
pookie wrote:
LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:

It is only thru democratic means that it can be established.

As SpongeBob would say “Well, good luck with that.”

I think the first thing a democratic communist population would do is vote back a capitalist party to power.

this is a posibillity but the fact that a democratic communist population would get to actually decide its own future is a great accomplishment within itself. i am anti-capitalist mainly because of the undemocratic nature of capitalism. [/quote]

Democracy is just a way of deciding things. Are you in love with a method?

And yes, property rights mean that I get to decide on how to use what`s mine.

That is not “undemocratic”, because you have no business interfering with my use of my property anyway.

[quote]gladiatorsteer wrote:
this is a posibillity but the fact that a democratic communist population would get to actually decide its own future is a great accomplishment within itself. i am anti-capitalist mainly because of the undemocratic nature of capitalism. [/quote]

Oddly, the real world supports the exact opposite view of what you’re saying. You can’t show a single example of democratic communism, because they’re has never been a democratic communist country.

On the contrary, countries like Chile which had horrendous economies and dictators (Pinochet) implemented capitalist principles which restored their economy and eventually led to democracy. Estonia is another shining example, since it managed to get rid of soviet rule. It is now one of the economically freest countries in the world and it’s citizen’s standard of living has never been higher.

Face it, communism sucks. It’s a failed idea that only appears to work in some kind of idealized world composed of purely altruistic beings. Unfortunately, that world doesn’t exist.

[quote]orion wrote:
How come then that historically democracies moved more and more in the socialist direction?[/quote]

That’s true up to a point, but there has also been periods of privatization. In Canada, for example, CN Rail was privatized, the Postal Service too, and Air Canada is a private company since the 90s.

You lose that bet. It’s below 20%. But I’ll grant you that we have way too much taxes and regulations.

[quote]gladiatorsteer wrote:
the disappearence of your friend’s friend is tragic but you didn’t explain what evidence exists which points to the chzvez government.

i was aware of the decree that passed yesterday extending the power of chavez. i think it is important to look at what is happening at the bottom, meaning the common people of venezuela. they support chavez because his government benefits them(a system that benefits the majority, i think we would call that a democracy). please research all of the social projects that the government has institued (land, education,health, etc.).

also, could you please inform me on how your family was persecuted for being catholic and how the government took averything away from your family.

i think your sugestion of visiting these countries is a very good idea and hopefully one day i will get to do so.[/quote]

I am tiring of this thread, so I will not be responding much longer no matter what.
Second, this is a forum not a research facility or educational facitity. You are just going to take my word on some things. I don’t have substancial evidence, not that would stand up in a court of law. Frankly, I don’t owe you that.

How about offering evidence that socialism/commuunism actually works. Where has it been successfully implemented and the people are happy with it?

Religion is illeagal in Cuba. It’s not just Catholics. Worshiping anything higher than Castro is an actual crime.

Here are some links for the socialists among us:
Here’s your buddy Castro:

http://www.therealcuba.com/page5.htm

http://www.cubanet.org/CNews/y06/ago06/15e12.htm

His student Chavez is equally great:

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/chi-0612030393dec03,1,7234181.story?coll=chi-newsnationworld-hed

Yea, he’s a regular chior boy:

http://hrw.org/english/docs/2006/01/18/venezu12258.htm

http://www.amnesty.org/un_hrc/venezuela.html

China is a bunch of nice guys too:

http://web.amnesty.org/pages/chn-010207-action-eng

Liftvs, Gladiator, these are the people who you support. This is what this communist ideology brings. Every where it’s been tried this is the result. Name a country and then look it up. History speaks for itself, you don’t have to take the word of some dickhead on a forum.
Get eduacated on the topic. Visit places where it exists or is has existed. Talk to people who have lived it. Don’t take it from me. Look it up yourselves. There is plenty of empirical evidence out there.
I am done with it.

[quote]orion wrote:
LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
pat36 wrote:
My family is from Cuba, asshole. They didn’t leave it, they escaped from it. Not only was everything taken from my family in Cuba, but they were also persecuted for being Catholics. I never met my grand parents because of your friend Castro. I could never go. They are dead now and the rest of my family escaped just recently.

Your complaints are valid and understood but what does it have to do with communism? Again, Castro and the government he represents is fascist. What else do you expect from dictatorial regimes? Castro is no more a communist than Lenin or Stalin was. We judge people by thier actions not by the titles they give themselves.

Well you really can`t comment on capitalism then, because there has never been a 100% capitalist society either.
[/quote]

We can comment on the philosophy of capitalism or communism. The distiction is that we cannot compare the historical context of these said philosophies because as was stated there has never been 100% so-and-so. I am being completly hypothetical in regards to how communism would need to be implemented in order to function. Captialism by its very nature was not meant for a democratic societies.

[quote]pat36 wrote:
Liftvs, Gladiator, these are the people who you support. This is what this communist ideology brings. Every where it’s been tried this is the result. Name a country and then look it up. History speaks for itself, you don’t have to take the word of some dickhead on a forum.
Get eduacated on the topic. Visit places where it exists or is has existed. Talk to people who have lived it. Don’t take it from me. Look it up yourselves. There is plenty of empirical evidence out there.
I am done with it.[/quote]

We are not talking about the historical implications of authoritarian communism. We all know the outcome of that. The title of this thread is: “If America Should Go Communist”. We are being completely hypothetical.

You may not know this about the English language but the word, should is used here in the subjunctive mood which we are given clues about with the word, if–this indicates conditionality.

Your objections are noted…but rather irrelevant in the context we are speaking.

[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
Headhunter wrote:
gladiatorsteer wrote:

oh, and let us not forget the U.S.’ most memorable example of capitalism: slavery.

The capitalist portion of the USA eliminated slavery, an institution of the ‘aristocratic’ agrarian South.

Ummmm, no. Capitalists had nothing to do with it. [/quote]

Except for the English bankers, like Rothschild and Barings, who do you think financed the Union effort?

[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:

Captialism by its very nature was not meant for a democratic societies.[/quote]

That’s why it exists in places like England, the United States, Switzerland,…

LMAO!!!

[quote]pookie wrote:
gladiatorsteer wrote:
this is a posibillity but the fact that a democratic communist population would get to actually decide its own future is a great accomplishment within itself. i am anti-capitalist mainly because of the undemocratic nature of capitalism.

Oddly, the real world supports the exact opposite view of what you’re saying. You can’t show a single example of democratic communism, because they’re has never been a democratic communist country.

On the contrary, countries like Chile which had horrendous economies and dictators (Pinochet) implemented capitalist principles which restored their economy and eventually led to democracy. Estonia is another shining example, since it managed to get rid of soviet rule. It is now one of the economically freest countries in the world and it’s citizen’s standard of living has never been higher.

Face it, communism sucks. It’s a failed idea that only appears to work in some kind of idealized world composed of purely altruistic beings. Unfortunately, that world doesn’t exist.
[/quote]

i cannot comment on estonia as i do not know the history but as far as chile you are right pinochet was a horrible dictator who was put into power but the CIA(the democratically elected socialist president Salvador Allende was killed in the process of this coup’) becuase they new he would implement capitalist policies.

during his rule of free market policies unemployment rates rose dramatically, real wages declined, and poverty doubled.

[quote]Headhunter wrote:
LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:

Captialism by its very nature was not meant for a democratic societies.

That’s why it exists in places like England, the United States, Switzerland,…

LMAO!!!

[/quote]

the U.S. is not a democratic country. democracy means people rule. in the U.S. an elite few rule.

[quote]orion wrote:

When corporations violate environmental laws they committ a crime. That is what justice systems are for. Happens in all systems and is not unique to free markets. In fact socialist countries REALLY fucked up their environments.

Look up “Bitterfeld”. It is a small East German town.

Are those corporations providing slave labor jobs or are they leaving unemployment behind?

Which one is it?

The truth is that globalizaion is helping millions of people escaping extreme poverty which existed before those countries adopted free market policies.

Like in the case of Manchester liberalism capitalism is plamed for the conditions that existed because of hundreds of years of feudalism and which capitalism eliminated in mere decades.

As to flooding “poor” markets with "cheap “products”…

Well that are the only kind of products those people can afford so thank God they get them instead of nothing.

[/quote]

when organizations like the WTO, IMF, and World Bank forcibly implement their free market policies they demand little to no government intervention so the justice system is rendered powerless against the big corporations, thus environmental laws cannot be inforced.

as to your question: Are those corporations providing slave labor jobs or are they leaving unemployment behind? my answer would be look at what happened in Argentina and to different degrees in every other latin american country. argentina’s economy was crippled by free market policies in 2001.

in jamaica sweat shops pay their workers slave wages and sometimes delay their payments for weeks and when the workers organize for better pay and better work conditions the corporations bring in labor from asia or they pack up and move to mexico where there is cheaper labor. after that the corporations pack up and move to china where the labor is cheaper still. this is not to mention the banana farmers in jamaica that cannot compete with the big corporations and are forced into poverty.

what about the fishermen in mexico whose families have been fishing for centuries but then are driven out by the big corporations.

globalization and free market policies are making the rich richer and the poor poorer. even here in America the destribution of wealth has become increasingly unequal. 30 years ago one person working 40 hours a week could support a family and now it takes two people working 40 hours a week.

[quote]Headhunter wrote:
LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:

Captialism by its very nature was not meant for a democratic societies.

That’s why it exists in places like England, the United States, Switzerland,…

LMAO!!!

[/quote]

No. It doesn’t. Democracy does not exist anywhere in the world anymore. Democracy means that citizens literally rule themselves and don’t use representatives–a la Roman Republic. Real democracy cannot work in a federal system. It has to be kept extremely local. It is more suited for small communities just like communism.

[quote]orion wrote:

When corporations violate environmental laws they committ a crime. That is what justice systems are for. Happens in all systems and is not unique to free markets. In fact socialist countries REALLY fucked up their environments.

[/quote]

socialist cuba is the only sustainable country in the world meaning it does not conSume more natural resources than the earth can produce.

[quote]pookie wrote:

You lose that bet. It’s below 20%. But I’ll grant you that we have way too much taxes and regulations.

[/quote]

Now way.

It was 39,3 in 2005 which is actually pretty good.

It seems to have dropped significantly since the early 90.

[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
orion wrote:
LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
pat36 wrote:
My family is from Cuba, asshole. They didn’t leave it, they escaped from it. Not only was everything taken from my family in Cuba, but they were also persecuted for being Catholics. I never met my grand parents because of your friend Castro. I could never go. They are dead now and the rest of my family escaped just recently.

Your complaints are valid and understood but what does it have to do with communism? Again, Castro and the government he represents is fascist. What else do you expect from dictatorial regimes? Castro is no more a communist than Lenin or Stalin was. We judge people by thier actions not by the titles they give themselves.

Well you really can`t comment on capitalism then, because there has never been a 100% capitalist society either.

We can comment on the philosophy of capitalism or communism. The distiction is that we cannot compare the historical context of these said philosophies because as was stated there has never been 100% so-and-so. I am being completly hypothetical in regards to how communism would need to be implemented in order to function. Captialism by its very nature was not meant for a democratic societies.[/quote]

Capitalism because of its very nature leads to democratic societies, in fact there can be no Democracy without private property.

[quote]orion wrote:
LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
orion wrote:
LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
pat36 wrote:
My family is from Cuba, asshole. They didn’t leave it, they escaped from it. Not only was everything taken from my family in Cuba, but they were also persecuted for being Catholics. I never met my grand parents because of your friend Castro. I could never go. They are dead now and the rest of my family escaped just recently.

Your complaints are valid and understood but what does it have to do with communism? Again, Castro and the government he represents is fascist. What else do you expect from dictatorial regimes? Castro is no more a communist than Lenin or Stalin was. We judge people by thier actions not by the titles they give themselves.

Well you really can`t comment on capitalism then, because there has never been a 100% capitalist society either.

We can comment on the philosophy of capitalism or communism. The distiction is that we cannot compare the historical context of these said philosophies because as was stated there has never been 100% so-and-so. I am being completly hypothetical in regards to how communism would need to be implemented in order to function. Captialism by its very nature was not meant for a democratic societies.

Capitalism because of its very nature leads to democratic societies, in fact there can be no Democracy without private property.

[/quote]

Why? So that only private land owners can have a say? Capitalism is completely aristocratic and leads to authoritarian ownership. How do people own land and property? What inherent rights and philosphical principles can back this up?

Please qualify your opinion as it makes absolutely no sense whatsoever.

[quote]gladiatorsteer wrote:
socialist cuba is the only sustainable country in the world meaning it does not concume more natural resources than the earth can produce.
[/quote]

Not if they are using petroleum.

[quote]gladiatorsteer wrote:

when organizations like the WTO, IMF, and World Bank forcibly implement their free market policies they demand little to no government intervention so the justice system is rendered powerless against the big corporations, thus environmental laws cannot be inforced.

as to your question: Are those corporations providing slave labor jobs or are they leaving unemployment behind? my answer would be look at what happened in Argentina and to different degrees in every other latin american country. argentina’s economy was crippled by free market policies in 2001.

in jamaica sweat shops pay their workers slave wages and sometimes delay their payments for weeks and when the workers organize for better pay and better work conditions the corporations bring in labor from asia or they pack up and move to mexico where there is cheaper labor. after that the corporations pack up and move to china where the labor is cheaper still. this is not to mention the banana farmers in jamaica that cannot compete with the big corporations and are forced into poverty.

what about the fishermen in mexico whose families have been fishing for centuries but then are driven out by the big corporations.

globalization and free market policies are making the rich richer and the poor poorer. even here in America the destribution of wealth has become increasingly unequal. 30 years ago one person working 40 hours a week could support a family and now it takes two people working 40 hours a week.[/quote]

The WTO, IMF, etc have nothing to do with capitalism and a lot with merkantilism. For free trade you need less rules and less bureaucrates and also less import restrictions in rich countries.

The way rich countries use those institutions is very often a disgrace, but the very disgrace is GOVERNMENT INTERVENTION that PREVENTS POOR COUNTRIES from competing on equal terms.

This is not capitalism but the lack of it.

Argentine was economically crippled by linking their currency to the $ and through socialised money.

That mean it was hurt by too much government intervention, not the lack of it.

Fishermen cannot compete wth big companies, banana farmers not with cheap fruit.

Well, though luck.

Explain to me why thousands of poor people with poor diets and children to feed should not have cheap fish and fruit just so that a few dozens can keep a job others can do way better.

Once there were 80% farmers in Europe, now it is 2-3%.

This inrease in productivity was rather unpleasant for those farmers but an enormous benefit for all the rest and their descendents, because it led us out of the Dark Ages.

When medieval craftsmen were replaced by manufacturers that sucked for them.

When dose were replaced by factories that sucked for the manufacturers.

When they started to use better machines, robots, computers that also sucked for some people.

All in all though this constant progress has made us the richest, best educated, healthiest societies ever.

Things change and that`s a good thing.

To the drop in real wages.

How dare you blame capitalism when the government takes away more than 50% of what you produce and squanders it on war on drugs, war on poverty and high tech fighters to wipe out al Quaedas mighty airforce?

The rich get richer and the poor poorer?

No way. Millions of Chinese and Indians have escaped poverty, hundreds of millions are on their way of achieving the same.