|
Is Communism good? This poll is closed. |
|||
|---|---|---|---|
| Yes |
|
375 | 66.25% |
| No |
|
191 | 33.75% |
| Total: | 523 votes | ||
|
wateroverfire posted:In any other context "government shouldn't run like a business / household" would be uncontrovertial and sort of obvious but here we are. It shouldn't be run like a business in the sense that it shouldn't be owned by a few people who get all the benefit from it, but giving up on the idea of being able to make decisions about things involving production of goods and spending of money because that becomes magically impossible as soon as you introduce the word "government" seems silly.
|
#
¿
Mar 30, 2017 18:43
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 11, 2024 16:59 |
|
|
Well he argues that the bourg will continue to automate out as much skill and labour as they can, and/or drive wages as low as they can, because it's in their immediate interest to do so and they don't plan ahead, and that only direct opposition by organized proletariat will stop that. Which, well, seems to have held up for the last two centuries...
|
|
#
¿
Mar 30, 2017 18:50
|
|
|
wateroverfire posted:And that's why the proletariat is so much poorer today than it was two centuries ago and capitalism has collapsed. I mean there might have been a pretty big thing that happened in the early and middle 20th century that made governments think that maybe they needed to change their governing approach.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 30, 2017 19:45
|
|
|
Or that sufficient numbers of capitalists are willing to pursue destructive methods to enhance their own power under the belief that they won't incur resistance from the workers. Why assume perfect knowledge on the part of the capitalists? If they had perfect knowledge then we wouldn't have recessions.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 31, 2017 03:51
|
|
|
The US was a bunch of boojie twats getting pissy about paying their taxes and that set the tone for the entire nation for apparently the rest of time.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 31, 2017 18:57
|
|
|
They have a good record of replacing the flag and name under which the oppressors operate while failing utterly to address the actual problem, yes. Which is to say perhaps the reason they "work well" is that they set out to achieve very little.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 31, 2017 19:00
|
|
|
Cicero posted:It did mean that (white male) Americans were self-governing rather than subject to a monarch. That in and of itself is a huge improvement. Nobody is self governing as long as they are subject to selling their capacity to labour to Capital in order to not die. So I'm sure it was great for the wealthy landowners, who frankly deserve a bloody monarch as far as I'm concerned.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 31, 2017 19:03
|
|
|
I don't really think it matters much to me whether there's a king or not, I still have gently caress all say in how I live because that's determined by how much money I'm allowed to keep and whether I'm allowed to work. Feudal lord or landlord they both get to decide what my life is like.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 31, 2017 19:31
|
|
|
Typo posted:but to very different degrees: serfs for instance were tied down to the land and had limited labor mobility and ability to look for work elsewhere, whereas you are pretty free to move between cities in a modern democracy Ooo I get my choice of lovely housing in a variety of equivalently lovely places because I'm forced to chase lovely jobs and also cough up the money to do that. Lucky me. I can sample the traffic fumes of multiple different cities.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 31, 2017 19:38
|
|
|
I'm not really sure that "large sections of the population were displaced due to a need to chase livable wages during a major recession" is a selling point of capitalism.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 31, 2017 19:41
|
|
|
Reality is, unfortunately, rather depressing.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 31, 2017 20:25
|
|
|
And I think that is an illusion believed by those fortunate enough to not be made aware of exactly how little control they have. As I recall you actually own a business.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 31, 2017 20:34
|
|
|
Typo posted:something like this really bothers me because while it has a core of truth to it it has often being used as an excuse by the left not to acknowledge the real persuasive power and the legitimacy of the right's arguments If rich people have ideas they can buy things that put them in other people's heads, whether they are correct or not. That's how advertising works.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 31, 2017 21:03
|
|
|
Typo posted:hillary spend like 40x as much as trump in florida on ads and still lost to trump's semi-coherent rants Ah yes, poor man Donald Trump, who rose from nothing by power of his word alone.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 31, 2017 21:18
|
|
|
Bulgogi Hoagie posted:just out of interest, how do you reconcile your belief that soviets had democratic institutions with the historically documented fact that millions of political opponents of the communist party were put into the gulags for many years on end throughout the unions history in that tiny tankie head of yours Presumably the same way you rationalise the US doing it?
|
|
#
¿
Mar 31, 2017 21:49
|
|
|
Typo posted:for one you can elect someone like trump or bernie sanders, whereas under cccp those guys would never have even made it onto a ballot I might be inclined to argue that that could actually suggest the USSR was better than the US.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 31, 2017 22:11
|
|
|
Typo posted:I argue no I remain skeptical of the notion that Trump can be considered good by any sane metric.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 31, 2017 22:15
|
|
|
Soviets are dumb, I just really don't think "they would have banned trump" is a very good argument against the USSR.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 31, 2017 22:18
|
|
|
Typo posted:it absolutely is a good argument against the USSR, you are effectively telling me that the government is ok with banning popular political candidates if the are sufficiently ideological deviant from the establishment, as determined by a bunch of old by definition establishment politicians sitting around in a politburo meeting I'm going to say that keeping the cheeto coloured pissbaby from any sort of power or platform, is a fairly reasonable candidate for the concept of objective good.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 31, 2017 22:22
|
|
|
Typo posted:communism did not do a very good job of keeping lovely politicians from holding power Correct, but "would not have allowed Trump onto the ballot" is still a pretty bad argument.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 31, 2017 22:27
|
|
|
Moridin920 posted:This is kind of a fair point for the USA in terms of "how fair are our elections really" but fwiw the socialist/communist party enjoys fairly significant success in Europe and other countries where they have a parliamentary system. I mean most of Europe's "socialist/communist" parties are now also capitalist parties, alas.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 31, 2017 22:54
|
|
|
steinrokkan posted:Again, we now have democratic Communist party that subscribes to Soviet era legacy. With free elections in place, we can gauge its real success - which has so far lingered around 12 percent, though its expected to get a massive jump this year. It's not the other guys' fault few people vote for the Communists. I might argue that in a Capitalist society, there might be some kind of... push from the people with power to keep Communists out of power?
|
|
#
¿
Mar 31, 2017 23:00
|
|
|
Bulgogi Hoagie posted:there was a pretty big push from people with power to keep the orange baboon out of it but that didn't work out huh Trump matters very little to the people with power because people with power don't need anything except for the US to continue to exist and continue protecting them, which Trump will do.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 31, 2017 23:04
|
|
|
steinrokkan posted:So the problem of Communism is that other people are allowed to speak against it? Are you serious? The problem with Capitalism is that it is obstructive to democracy because you can simply buy power. Your Communist party may be relegated to a particular amount of political exposure but the entire edifice of society ingrains the idea in us from birth that Capitalism is the only way to live.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 31, 2017 23:05
|
|
|
Good for you, mine didn't.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 31, 2017 23:07
|
|
|
steinrokkan posted:Mr. OwlFancier says that it is impossible for socialists to win if there are extant capitalists who do not with a socialist victory. So presumably the only way forward is either a violent revolution (like that has ever helped anybody) or the spontaneous combustion of everybody not on board with full Communism now. Or, possibly, the steady change of society to one where capitalism is sufficiently untenable that it becomes impossible for a critical mass of people to buy into.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 31, 2017 23:15
|
|
|
steinrokkan posted:So why are you complaining if the capitalist hegemony we are going through ATM is part of the master plan? Because it incurs a horrific human cost, and I am not able to shut that out.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 31, 2017 23:18
|
|
|
hakimashou posted:There's no difference between Nazis and Communists. Just different colored flags, incidental differences in which people they hate and murder. Don't you support the death penalty?
|
|
#
¿
Apr 1, 2017 00:42
|
|
|
hakimashou posted:What can I say, it's complicated. Are you sure it doesn't just make you a miniature nazicommunist?
|
|
#
¿
Apr 1, 2017 00:52
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 11, 2024 16:59 |
|
|
hakimashou posted:"capitalism" isnt even an ideology, its just the normal way people do things. It's incredible but you manage to get progressively more wrong over time.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 2, 2017 05:25
|
|