Ryan: '... Communism Cannot Work'

Off Topic Politics & World Issues
41

[quote]pat wrote:

[quote]Ryan P. McCarter wrote:
Of course, because pat has no idea what Marx said. Illustrated by the fact that he thinks we’ve “tried what Marx said.” What Marx wrote was a criticism of capitalism, not a blueprint for a socialist society.

Idiot.[/quote]

Any nimrod half-wit can criticize. Coming up with real, functional solutions is the key. The reason why Marxism turned in to socialism is because, a little detail that marx left out is you still need central leadership, people just weren’t going to work for the good of the society on their own. Communists soon realized the only way to get this model to even limp along was through oppression and threat.

I repeat, Marx was wrong about everything, period. Sadly, his stupidity ended up costing hundreds of millions of lives. Well, that’s not fair, it was people even dumber than him tried to implement his philosophy, but it was so bad, it had to be enforced by tyranny.

If you don’t like capitalism fine, come up with a better way. Don’t try to rehash an old failed philosophy that has and will never work.

Give me a Marx quote and I will tell you why it’s wrong…Yes, I do think I am smarter than him…By a mile.[/quote]

Just for fun :

The philosophers have only interpreted the world, in various ways. The point, however, is to change it.
Karl Marx

42

[quote]joebassin wrote:
The philosophers have only interpreted the world, in various ways. The point, however, is to change it.
Karl Marx[/quote]

Change happens regardless of what Marx wrote.

43

[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:

[quote]joebassin wrote:
The philosophers have only interpreted the world, in various ways. The point, however, is to change it.
Karl Marx[/quote]

Change happens regardless of what Marx wrote.[/quote]

And he strike again…

44

[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:

[quote]Ryan P. McCarter wrote:
The worst part, I think, is that many of them know that it was not socialist, and yet they continue their inane criticisms anyway. I don’t know if they’re simply cynical and taking advantage of the fact that many people are totally ignorant of socialism in order to mount an easy attack against it, or if they’re so programmed that their knee-jerk attack impulses get the better of them anyway.[/quote]

Yes, we are ignorant! Now, help us rectify that. Tell us what is socialism and what is communism and how are they different?

Why is communism so super-awesome and capitalism pure fail?

You still haven’t said anything relevant because you don’t know what you are talking about.[/quote]

Are you blind? Can you not find the Liberty in Socialism thread? Regardless of the fact that I should not be held to account for you shortcomings (this is supposed to be a principle of yours), I will repeat myself yet again:

Socialism is the economic system based on planned production for use, which if established, will arise out of capitalism. It is characterized by communal ownership of the means of production, which are operated according to a democratically determined plan, the abolition of income derived from property, and the presence of a workers’ state.

Communism is the hypothesized stage following socialism, in which money is abolished, the state gradually disappears, and work is performed voluntarily. It is a higher phase of socialism.

Capitalism, despite its numerous inefficiencies andfrequently brutal character, has been effective in building up the productive resources of society, but the inbuilt antagonisms in capitalism cause poverty, social problems, war, etc. Socialism dissolves these antagonisms, allowing these resources to be used to satisfy needs.

45

[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:

[quote]joebassin wrote:
The philosophers have only interpreted the world, in various ways. The point, however, is to change it.
Karl Marx[/quote]

Change happens regardless of what Marx wrote.[/quote]

Indeed. If you were more intelligent, or had simply read more, you would know that that was his ultimate point.

46

Pat, that’s the stupidest goddamn post I’ve ever read in my entire life. Everything in it is wrong. “Marxism turned into socialism?” Marxism is a method of analysis, not an economic or political system. “A little detail that marx left out is you still need central leadership?” Far from it jackass, what do you think the “dictatorship of the proletariat” refers to?

Well, good thing Marx never suggested it then.

How do you claim to know this when you don’t know the first thing about Marxism? On the contrary, everything you have said is wrong, period. Sorry to burst your bubble, but Marx was a whole hell of a lot smarter than you.

Please explain how a philosophy led to the deaths of millions. Capitalism, on the other hand, actually has killed millions, far more than “communism.” But of course, you don’t care about them, because their deaths are not politically convenient for you.

Why don’t you read something he wrote for once instead?

You’re a joke.

47

[quote]Ryan P. McCarter wrote:
Pat, that’s the stupidest goddamn post I’ve ever read in my entire life. Everything in it is wrong. “Marxism turned into socialism?” Marxism is a method of analysis, not an economic or political system. “A little detail that marx left out is you still need central leadership?” Far from it jackass, what do you think the “dictatorship of the proletariat” refers to?

Well, good thing Marx never suggested it then.

How do you claim to know this when you don’t know the first thing about Marxism? On the contrary, everything you have said is wrong, period. Sorry to burst your bubble, but Marx was a whole hell of a lot smarter than you.

Please explain how a philosophy led to the deaths of millions. Capitalism, on the other hand, actually has killed millions, far more than “communism.” But of course, you don’t care about them, because their deaths are not politically convenient for you.

Why don’t you read something he wrote for once instead?

You’re a joke.[/quote]

Only people who think Marx’s “philosophy” is dumber than he was.
And apparently your a history denier to since you are unaware of the suffering and death of millions cause by communist governments.
I suppose you’re probably a holocaust deniers to.

Let me know when other people quit giving you a free ride in college and you live in the real world and have to do for yourself.

Give me something Marx said and I will tell you why it’s wrong…Put up, or shut up.

An even better example, show me one country in the world, espousing Marxist virtues that has ever worked? Just one. Shouldn’t be hard, right?

48

[quote]pat wrote:
An even better example, show me one country in the world, espousing Marxist virtues that has ever worked? Just one. Shouldn’t be hard, right?
[/quote]

So he’s just gonna tell you that it’s never been done before so it cannot be proved…he’ll insists that it hasn’t been disproved.

Hey pat, aren’t you from Cuba? Tell us about that shining example of a communist paradise!

And this illustrates a larger point about communism’s failure – it cannot be done because it requires the political class to interpret Marx in their own fashion, as we have see RPM do. Even he cannot tell us what it is or how it is brought about…though you should read his deluded explanation a few posts above…pure fantasy it is.

49

Ryan, when your perfect socialist example exists then you can post with authority - until then, everything you offer is only opinion and theory . . .

50

[quote]IrishSteel wrote:
Ryan, when your perfect socialist example exists then you can post with authority - until then, everything you offer is only opinion and theory . . . [/quote]

You forgot Fallacy.

51

[quote]pat wrote:

[quote]Ryan P. McCarter wrote:
Of course, because pat has no idea what Marx said. Illustrated by the fact that he thinks we’ve “tried what Marx said.” What Marx wrote was a criticism of capitalism, not a blueprint for a socialist society.

Idiot.[/quote]

Any nimrod half-wit can criticize. Coming up with real, functional solutions is the key. The reason why Marxism turned in to socialism is because, a little detail that marx left out is you still need central leadership, people just weren’t going to work for the good of the society on their own. Communists soon realized the only way to get this model to even limp along was through oppression and threat.

I repeat, Marx was wrong about everything, period. Sadly, his stupidity ended up costing hundreds of millions of lives. Well, that’s not fair, it was people even dumber than him tried to implement his philosophy, but it was so bad, it had to be enforced by tyranny.

If you don’t like capitalism fine, come up with a better way. Don’t try to rehash an old failed philosophy that has and will never work.

Give me a Marx quote and I will tell you why it’s wrong…Yes, I do think I am smarter than him…By a mile.[/quote]

Can you in depths explain why karl heinrich marx was wrong on everything.

as an example: what makes the dialektik-materialism wrong?

52

[quote]florelius wrote:

[quote]pat wrote:

[quote]Ryan P. McCarter wrote:
Of course, because pat has no idea what Marx said. Illustrated by the fact that he thinks we’ve “tried what Marx said.” What Marx wrote was a criticism of capitalism, not a blueprint for a socialist society.

Idiot.[/quote]

Any nimrod half-wit can criticize. Coming up with real, functional solutions is the key. The reason why Marxism turned in to socialism is because, a little detail that marx left out is you still need central leadership, people just weren’t going to work for the good of the society on their own. Communists soon realized the only way to get this model to even limp along was through oppression and threat.

I repeat, Marx was wrong about everything, period. Sadly, his stupidity ended up costing hundreds of millions of lives. Well, that’s not fair, it was people even dumber than him tried to implement his philosophy, but it was so bad, it had to be enforced by tyranny.

If you don’t like capitalism fine, come up with a better way. Don’t try to rehash an old failed philosophy that has and will never work.

Give me a Marx quote and I will tell you why it’s wrong…Yes, I do think I am smarter than him…By a mile.[/quote]

Can you in depths explain why karl heinrich marx was wrong on everything.

as an example: what makes the dialektik-materialism wrong?

[/quote]

just the fact that it was actually Engels’s idea and even he did not express it as it is defined and used today . . . . :slight_smile:

53

[quote]IrishSteel wrote:

[quote]florelius wrote:

[quote]pat wrote:

[quote]Ryan P. McCarter wrote:
Of course, because pat has no idea what Marx said. Illustrated by the fact that he thinks we’ve “tried what Marx said.” What Marx wrote was a criticism of capitalism, not a blueprint for a socialist society.

Idiot.[/quote]

Any nimrod half-wit can criticize. Coming up with real, functional solutions is the key. The reason why Marxism turned in to socialism is because, a little detail that marx left out is you still need central leadership, people just weren’t going to work for the good of the society on their own. Communists soon realized the only way to get this model to even limp along was through oppression and threat.

I repeat, Marx was wrong about everything, period. Sadly, his stupidity ended up costing hundreds of millions of lives. Well, that’s not fair, it was people even dumber than him tried to implement his philosophy, but it was so bad, it had to be enforced by tyranny.

If you don’t like capitalism fine, come up with a better way. Don’t try to rehash an old failed philosophy that has and will never work.

Give me a Marx quote and I will tell you why it’s wrong…Yes, I do think I am smarter than him…By a mile.[/quote]

Can you in depths explain why karl heinrich marx was wrong on everything.

as an example: what makes the dialektik-materialism wrong?

[/quote]

just the fact that it was actually Engels’s idea and even he did not express it as it is defined and used today . . . . :)[/quote]

originally it was neither engels nor marxs idea. Hegel was the one who created the dialektik that marx or engels as you say modified. But there was a difference between hegels dialektik and marxs. Hegel was an dialektik-idealist, where Marx was an dialektik-materialist…:slight_smile:

54

[quote]florelius wrote:

[quote]IrishSteel wrote:

[quote]florelius wrote:

[quote]pat wrote:

[quote]Ryan P. McCarter wrote:
Of course, because pat has no idea what Marx said. Illustrated by the fact that he thinks we’ve “tried what Marx said.” What Marx wrote was a criticism of capitalism, not a blueprint for a socialist society.

Idiot.[/quote]

Any nimrod half-wit can criticize. Coming up with real, functional solutions is the key. The reason why Marxism turned in to socialism is because, a little detail that marx left out is you still need central leadership, people just weren’t going to work for the good of the society on their own. Communists soon realized the only way to get this model to even limp along was through oppression and threat.

I repeat, Marx was wrong about everything, period. Sadly, his stupidity ended up costing hundreds of millions of lives. Well, that’s not fair, it was people even dumber than him tried to implement his philosophy, but it was so bad, it had to be enforced by tyranny.

If you don’t like capitalism fine, come up with a better way. Don’t try to rehash an old failed philosophy that has and will never work.

Give me a Marx quote and I will tell you why it’s wrong…Yes, I do think I am smarter than him…By a mile.[/quote]

Can you in depths explain why karl heinrich marx was wrong on everything.

as an example: what makes the dialektik-materialism wrong?

[/quote]

only as edited and published by Engels . . . :slight_smile:
just the fact that it was actually Engels’s idea and even he did not express it as it is defined and used today . . . . :)[/quote]

originally it was neither engels nor marxs idea. Hegel was the one who created the dialektik that marx or engels as you say modified. But there was a difference between hegels dialektik and marxs. Hegel was an dialektik-idealist, where Marx was an dialektik-materialist…:slight_smile:
[/quote]

55

whats are you trying to say irishsteel by reposting what I wrote? am I missing something.

to pat: I am still waiting for your expert answer.

56

[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:

[quote]pat wrote:
An even better example, show me one country in the world, espousing Marxist virtues that has ever worked? Just one. Shouldn’t be hard, right?
[/quote]

So he’s just gonna tell you that it’s never been done before so it cannot be proved…he’ll insists that it hasn’t been disproved.

Hey pat, aren’t you from Cuba? Tell us about that shining example of a communist paradise!

And this illustrates a larger point about communism’s failure – it cannot be done because it requires the political class to interpret Marx in their own fashion, as we have see RPM do. Even he cannot tell us what it is or how it is brought about…though you should read his deluded explanation a few posts above…pure fantasy it is.[/quote]

Perhaps Leninism requires the political class to interpret Marx, but the heart of Marxism in practice is popular movement.

And of course, interpretation of the political class could hardly be counted against socialism, since capitalism also required interpretation of theory by the political class. Unless you’re still clinging to your fantastical interpretation of history.

57

[quote]IrishSteel wrote:
Ryan, when your perfect socialist example exists then you can post with authority - until then, everything you offer is only opinion and theory . . . [/quote]

At least I offer something.

58

[quote]dmaddox wrote:

[quote]IrishSteel wrote:
Ryan, when your perfect socialist example exists then you can post with authority - until then, everything you offer is only opinion and theory . . . [/quote]

You forgot Fallacy.[/quote]

Oh surprise, surprise! Dmaddox swings in with an insult, just as I predicted. The theoretical discussion is over his head, so he stays out of that, but he knows his masters have commanded him to hate socialism, so his programming kicks in.

Thanks dmaddox. I could never make my points better than you can.

59

[quote]florelius wrote:
whats are you trying to say irishsteel by reposting what I wrote? am I missing something.

to pat: I am still waiting for your expert answer.[/quote]

You will wait a long time on pat.

60

[quote]Ryan P. McCarter wrote:

[quote]florelius wrote:
whats are you trying to say irishsteel by reposting what I wrote? am I missing something.

to pat: I am still waiting for your expert answer.[/quote]

You will wait a long time on pat.[/quote]

thats to bad, I am looking forward to an in depth analysis by an expert in marxisme such as pat :stuck_out_tongue_winking_eye: hehe