Liberal vs. Conservative

[Atmos]

1 minute ago, othertomperson said:

So China is Communist because its one dictatorial party -- a group of people who are no workers, not owned by workers, in no way accountable to workers -- says that they are Communist, and this is enough for you? If I called myself a Fairy Godmother that would automatically make it so?

 

You have automatically assumed that The State and the people who live in it are synonymous. Marxism does not mean the state owns anything, but rather the people. In other words, it goes back to what I was talking about in which the employees of a company were themselves that company's shareholders, so that they ultimately own, guide and profit from their own labour. In that sense it wouldn't be a "private company", it would be a publicly traded company.

 

Communism has not produced "the worst" countries. In fact I'd go so far as to say that it hasn't produced any countries yet.

Right, so let's look at the purest form of a communist state. The USSR. Oh those were wonderful times right? The people living inside the ussr certainly weren't being purged in the millions by starvation, racial and religious tensions, and all the like right? Oh, and the leaders of the USSR were all working men! Oh, wait. Both of those statements are 100% false.

 

No communist state has a "working class" leadership. The leadership is almost never actually working class. You simply saying, "Oh, the leader's aren't working class, so everything else is invalid!" is a completely horseshit manner of dismissing an argument. As your so fond to say, "go read a book"

I've already clearly layed out what marxism is at its core philosophy. Refer to my early post.

China, USSR, Vietnamn, North Korea, I can keep going, but I think you get the idea.

Keep in mind that Stalin killed far more innocent people, and his own people, than hitler ever did.

[othertomperson]

4 minutes ago, Atmos said:

Right, so let's look at the purest form of a communist state. The USSR. Oh those were wonderful times right? The people living inside the ussr certainly weren't being purged in the millions by starvation, racial and religious tensions, and all the like right? Oh, and the leaders of the USSR were all working men! Oh, wait. Both of those statements are 100% false.

 

No communist state has a "working class" leadership. The leadership is almost never actually working class. You simply saying, "Oh, the leader's aren't working class, so everything else is invalid!" is a completely horseshit manner of dismissing an argument. As your so fond to say, "go read a book"

I've already clearly layed out what marxism is at its core philosophy. Refer to my early post.

China, USSR, Vietnamn, North Korea, I can keep going, but I think you get the idea.

Keep in mind that Stalin killed far more innocent people, and his own people, than hitler ever did.

Then according to the definition you just gave those countries are not Communist.

 

And "working class" has got nothing to do with it. It's about the people who work for money being in control of their own labour. That's it. It doesn't matter if the President used to be a dock worker or whatever, that's irrelevant. Do the workers have control of the means of production of wealth? If yes, communism. If no, then it's not.

 

The USSR, China, Vietnam, North Korea, you haven't named a single Communist country. North Korea calls itself a Democratic Republic, ffs, do you believe that too?

 

As for your reference to Stalin. Let's pretend he was a Communist. He wasn't, but let's pretend. Hitler was a Catholic Capitalist. Are Catholism or Capitalism responsible for his genocide?

[othertomperson]

By the way, these awful Marxist businesses I describe already exist across Europe and to a lesser extent the US, they are called Worker Co-operatives. Guess where they don't exist. Russia, China, DPRK...

[Atmos]

17 minutes ago, othertomperson said:

Then according to the definition you just gave those countries are not Communist.

Once again, you've proven you cannot read. Perhaps before reading a book, you should learn to read to begin with. This is my last post in response to you, you've proven you can't objectively look at what's being said, and there's nothing more to say to someone like you, who can't even keep up. It's like trying to explain blackholes to a child.

 

What I described in detail was MARXISM

Quote

2. Marxism is an ecnomic theory based on the ideas of Karl Marx, and to a lesser Friedrich Engels. its core philosophy is promoting a socialist, and eventually communist state by giving control of the economy to the working class. Private companies do not exist under a marxist country. 

And you're right, china doesn't 100% fit the mold for marxism. However, most companies within china are held under the control of the "working class" or at least china's equivalent, which is not actually the working class within china, but that's left for another debate.

 

Do you know what mold china fits, almost exactly though? And do you know what mold North Korea's founding and current day vietnamn fit almost perfectly?

Quote

3. Communism is heavily based upon marxist principles, and is as many more learned that myself teach, is the natural progression of marxism once it becomes the primary driving factor of a state.

 

That's right, they're are or in the case of North Korea, were, Communist! Before you cry "You said the worst countries on earth are communist/marxist!" No, what I said was 

Quote

Its once again no coincidence that communism has produced the worst countries on earth to date,

Notice that "Produced"?

North Korea was founded by a communist state before devolving into its current monarchy after the fall of the communism in the region. Vietnam though, is a great example of a modern day communist state that is in the midst of complete and total economical and social failure. Medical care is almost nonexistent, the money is worth less than the German Mark was during WWII, and poverty sits around 30%, luckily down from the 73% it had in the 1980's thanks to the planned economy that is being pushed.

 

When I say that Communism has produced the worst countries in the world to-date. It's not an opinion, its an objective fact. Meanwhile the same goes for modified capitalism has produced the best to live in, and the most prosperous countries to date.

[DutchTexan]

Socialism and communism is not the answer or even a good thing. Get out of here with that shit, seriously. 

[DutchTexan]

50 minutes ago, Speedyv said:

And there we go. People want complete freedom but also want religion entwined in their politics.... 

I said, "I will pray for you" So, now you assume I mean we need a monarchy? Why do people hate religion and spirituality so much?

[DutchTexan]

 

[othertomperson]

17 minutes ago, Atmos said:

Once again, you've proven you cannot read. Perhaps before reading a book, you should learn to read to begin with. This is my last post in response to you, you've proven you can't objectively look at what's being said, and there's nothing more to say to someone like you, who can't even keep up. It's like trying to explain blackholes to a child.

 

What I described in detail was MARXISM

And you're right, china doesn't 100% fit the mold for marxism. However, most companies within china are held under the control of the "working class" or at least china's equivalent, which is not actually the working class within china, but that's left for another debate.

 

Do you know what mold china fits, almost exactly though? And do you know what mold North Korea's founding and current day vietnamn fit almost perfectly?

 

That's right, they're are or in the case of North Korea, were, Communist! Before you cry "You said the worst countries on earth are communist/marxist!" No, what I said was 

Notice that "Produced"?

North Korea was founded by a communist state before devolving into its current monarchy after the fall of the communism in the region. Vietnam though, is a great example of a modern day communist state that is in the midst of complete and total economical and social failure. Medical care is almost nonexistent, the money is worth less than the German Mark was during WWII, and poverty sits around 30%, luckily down from the 73% it had in the 1980's thanks to the planned economy that is being pushed.

 

When I say that Communism has produced the worst countries in the world to-date. It's not an opinion, its an objective fact. Meanwhile the same goes for modified capitalism has produced the best to live in, and the most prosperous countries to date.

Don't patronisingly tell someone that that they don't know how to read when you cannot fundamentally grasp how words work. Here's a lesson: they have definitions. If something does not fit that definition, then that word is not applicable to them, and no amount of self-identification will change that.

 

The USA is closer to Communism than any of those countries because at least in cases where the state does own things that state is accountable to working people through elections, which is more than you can say for China or North Korea. Communism has the effect of breaking down big states into smaller, locally controlled areas. Communism requires direct democracy of people, which is near impossible to do at a state level. As such ideas of the "big state" and "communism" are fundamentally at odds with eachother.

 

You keep going on about "working class" when that is irrelevant. A middle class executive at the Co-Operative Group, for instance, has shares and votes in the direction that that business takes -- that is Marxism at work. Not the DPRK or Vietnam.

 

Quoting you (misspellings and all):

 

Marxism is an ecnomic theory based on the ideas of Karl Marx, and to a lesser Friedrich Engels. its core philosophy is promoting a socialist, and eventually communist state by giving control of the economy to the working class

 

Is any of this true for those countries? Do the working people have control over the economy, of the companies they work for, of their own wealth creation? Do they even have a say in who runs the government? If not then having "Communist" in the name doesn't cut it -- they aren't Communist.

 

16 minutes ago, DutchTexan said:

Socialism and communism is not the answer or even a good thing. Get out of here with that shit, seriously. 

 

Of course you believe that. You don't believe anything that isn't spoon fed to you by Fox News.

[othertomperson]

Just now, Nicholatian said:

Jeez louise. this train is a threadwreck.

 

Get your heads out of your asses please. Grow up. You’re being ployed into buying the Us vs. Them mentality so the wealthy people can run off with all the fucking money. As for the rest of you, FWIW you’re wasting your time. If you’re having fun with this I’m not here to stop you… but god damn.

YOU'RE STARTING TO SOUND LIKE A DIRTY COMMUNIST

[DutchTexan]

11 minutes ago, othertomperson said:

Don't patronisingly tell someone that that they don't know how to read when you cannot fundamentally grasp how words work. Here's a lesson: they have definitions. If something does not fit that definition, then that word is not applicable to them, and no amount of self-identification will change that.

 

The USA is closer to Communism than any of those countries because at least in cases where the state does own things that state is accountable to working people through elections, which is more than you can say for China or North Korea. Communism has the effect of breaking down big states into smaller, locally controlled areas. Communism requires direct democracy of people, which is near impossible to do at a state level. As such ideas of the "big state" and "communism" are fundamentally at odds with eachother.

 

You keep going on about "working class" when that is irrelevant. A middle class executive at the Co-Operative Group, for instance, has shares and votes in the direction that that business takes -- that is Marxism at work. Not the DPRK or Vietnam.

 

Quoting you (misspellings and all):

 

Marxism is an ecnomic theory based on the ideas of Karl Marx, and to a lesser Friedrich Engels. its core philosophy is promoting a socialist, and eventually communist state by giving control of the economy to the working class

 

Is any of this true for those countries? Do the working people have control over the economy, of the companies they work for, of their own wealth creation? Do they even have a say in who runs the government? If not then having "Communist" in the name doesn't cut it -- they aren't Communist.

 

 

Of course you believe that. You don't believe anything that isn't spoon fed to you by Fox News.

Dude, you have some issues. Why do you hate people that don't love socialism or communism? Assume whatever you want, I don't watch fox news. I just happen to see a video on their YouTube channel. Cat fang guy is right, this is truly becoming a toxic thread. 

 

I would be okay if people just watched the 3 videos and absorbed what they could mean on a holistic scale for America.

[othertomperson]

Just now, DutchTexan said:

Dude, you have some issues. Why do you hate people that don't love socialism or communism? Assume whatever you want, I don't watch fox news. I just happen to see a video on their YouTube channel. Cat fang guy is right, this is truly becoming a toxic thread. 

 

I would be okay if people just watched the 3 videos and absorbed what they could mean on a holistic scale for America.

Why do you think that someone knowing more than you about something and correcting you means that they hate you? Is this why you're so averse to learning new things, because you're insulted by the idea that you don't know everything?

[DutchTexan]

3 minutes ago, othertomperson said:

Why do you think that someone knowing more than you about something and correcting you means that they hate you? Is this why you're so averse to learning new things, because you're insulted by the idea that you don't know everything?

I never said anything close to that. I know nothing. I will proudly say that, forever. You assume you know more than me, good for you!

[othertomperson]

2 minutes ago, DutchTexan said:

I never said anything close to that. I know nothing. I will proudly say that, forever. You assume you know more than me, good for you!

It's not an assumption, dear. I've demonstrated a basic understanding of the definition of Communism, which you and Atmos have not. I've also demonstrated, unlike both of you, that I will seek to understand what a concept means before dismissing it as somehow bad, or evil, or immoral.

 

Not only are you ignorant, you are wilfully ignorant, which is much worse.

[DutchTexan]

Just now, othertomperson said:

It's not an assumption, dear. I've demonstrated a basic understanding of the definition of Communism, which you and Atmos have not. I've also demonstrated, unlike both of you, that I will seek to understand what a concept means before dismissing it as somehow bad, or evil, or immoral.

Cool. I am glad you are passionate about something in life.

[Aspiring Techie]

Communism in its purest form will never ever come to pass while this earth stands. Karl Marx's fatal assumption was that the working class is purged from evil due to their work. That is not reality. Every human has evil in his heart, which is why bad things happen. Marx's society can't work unless 100% of the populace is totally virtuous. Humanity won't ever get that good. Ever. 

 

 

[Atmos]

12 minutes ago, DutchTexan said:

I never said anything close to that. I know nothing. I will proudly say that, forever. You assume you know more than me, good for you!

Just leave him alone man, you're not going to talk any sense into him, there's nothing to talk into but the hollow shell of an echo chamber child who can't look objectively at the world. With statements like "the us is more communist than china" you should take him for the troll he is and ignore him like the rest of us are trying to do.

 

At least we have facts on our side. And speaking of facts, I'm off to finish up my university classes for the day; it'll be amusing to see what becomes of this thread in four hours and some change, though I think I know where its already going.

[Aspiring Techie]

The problem with the Left is that they control the universities and teach our young people how to think Left. They are teaching people to see things through the lense of race, income, gender, sexual identity, etc. They claim that black people are worse off because of white racism, women are still not equal to men, gay's and transgender's rights are not equal to normal people, the rich are rich by exploiting the poor (unless those rich are Leftist donors). They never once stop and consider that people are responsible for their own actions and they never stop to look at the facts. They pick the one study that supports their theory on the world and they trumpet it all around. Anyone who disagrees is a bigot, racist, sexist, homophobic, transphobic, islamaphobic, or just plain haters. 

 

When you step back and consider what the Left says about their enemies, they really are talking about themselves. They are racist against whites and biased towards women and minorities.

[othertomperson]

12 minutes ago, Aspiring Techie said:

Communism in its purest form will never ever come to pass while this earth stands. Karl Marx's fatal assumption was that the working class is purged from evil due to their work. That is not reality. Every human has evil in his heart, which is why bad things happen. Marx's society can't work unless 100% of the populace is totally virtuous. Humanity won't ever get that good. Ever. 

Not really. I mean mob rule is always a risk of real direct Democracy, but the USA has major issues with that already.

 

8 minutes ago, Atmos said:

Just leave him alone man, you're not going to talk any sense into him, there's nothing to talk into but the hollow shell of an echo chamber child who can't look objectively at the world. With statements like "the us is more communist than china" you should take him for the troll he is and ignore him like the rest of us are trying to do.

 

At least we have facts on our side. And speaking of facts, I'm off to finish up my university classes for the day; it'll be amusing to see what becomes of this thread in four hours and some change, though I think I know where its already going.

You're calling me a child, but you haven't even graduated yet. Cute. At some point in your university career, assuming you don't drop out when you find out that they actually expect you to learn stuff, you are going to find out that you do not, in fact, know everything. Hopefully when that happens you'll manage extricate your head enough from your anus that your ears will be able to hear reason.

 

The interesting thing is that it is not facts that are necessarily the issue, but your inability to follow a logical thread. The facts that you yourself posted exclude China from the definition of Communism. If you understood the words that you posted and recognised that merely calling themselves "The Communist Party" does not actually make them Communists (just as most Conservative Parties generally do harbour a fair number of Radicals) we wouldn't even be having this argument. 

[PlayStation 2]

All of you fucks are arguing over a fucking compressed MPEG4 file with audio.

Bravo. Nice intelligence level, everyone.

[othertomperson]

1 minute ago, Dan Castellaneta said:

All of you fucks are arguing over a fucking compressed MPEG4 file with audio.

Bravo. Nice intelligence level, everyone.

Um I know four pages is quite a lot of reading, but I don't think anyone is talking about that video.

[PlayStation 2]

Just now, othertomperson said:

Um I know four pages is quite a lot of reading, but I don't think anyone is talking about that video.

Oh, so it's shitposting at this point.

[othertomperson]

Just now, Dan Castellaneta said:

Oh, so it's shitposting at this point.

No, conversations evolve over time. There's only so many things you can say about a stupid video, so discussing its wider context was inevitable.

[PlayStation 2]

Just now, othertomperson said:

No, conversations evolve over time. There's only so many things you can say about a stupid video, so discussing its wider context was inevitable.

Eh, fair enough.

[Aspiring Techie]

Yeah, mob rule is getting pretty bad here. The Left is using it to their advantage. They are pushing more and more government spending on welfare, blissfully ignoring that we are spending waaaaaaay beyond our means. Why are they doing that? Votes and power. The vast majority of those on welfare stay on welfare for most of their lives. Also, very conveniently, they vote for Democrats. So what does the Left do? More welfare to get even more votes. The vast majority on welfare vote Democrat simply because the Democrats are committed to maintaining and expanding the current welfare state. They are afraid of those who actually want to get our rampant spending out of control because they would be deprived of all their benefits and would actually have to take personal responsibility for once in their lives. That, and scapegoating, is the basic mentality of all mob rule.

[othertomperson]

18 minutes ago, Aspiring Techie said:

Yeah, mob rule is getting pretty bad here. The Left is using it to their advantage. They are pushing more and more government spending on welfare, blissfully ignoring that we are spending waaaaaaay beyond our means. Why are they doing that? Votes and power. The vast majority of those on welfare stay on welfare for most of their lives. Also, very conveniently, they vote for Democrats. So what does the Left do? More welfare to get even more votes. The vast majority on welfare vote Democrat simply because the Democrats are committed to maintaining and expanding the current welfare state. They are afraid of those who actually want to get our rampant spending out of control because they would be deprived of all their benefits and would actually have to take personal responsibility for once in their lives. That, and scapegoating, is the basic mentality of all mob rule.

That's not really what "mob rule" means. Mob rule is aka "tyranny of the majority". It's when the popular majority can vote to take away the rights of the minority. An example of this is Proposition 8.

 

Very little is being spent on welfare. The vast, vast, vast majority of the budget goes to the military. If you want to do anything about the budget deficit you have to reduce military spending significantly. The US is the Number 1 country by amount spent on the military in the world. At one point a few years ago it actually spent more than the next nine countries combined.

 

The problem in the US is that it has one of the most expensive education systems in the world, that is open primarily to foreign students. Obama did try to address this, and try to make university education -- and the opportunities that come along with it -- available to all, and was called a socialist and a snob by Republicans for it.

 

The reasons that people on welfare stay on welfare for a prolonged time is because most jobs don't pay a wage you can actually live on, which means that poor wages are being subsidised by welfare. A higher minimum wage is needed to get these people off of welfare and ensure that jobs, and work, actually pays, not taking away their food stamps so that they just don't eat. The other main reason is that most jobs that pay better than this have an educational barrier to entry -- an educational barrier that is engineered to keep a lot of poor people out of it.

 

There are ways to reduce the welfare bill, as well as provide greater opportunities for people. $1 000 000 shouldn't be considered a "small loan" needed to start out in the world.

 

If the budget deficit is your main concern, though, you should trace its origin to the the Bush administration. Bush inherited a surplus from Clinton.