|
Is Communism good? This poll is closed. |
|||
|---|---|---|---|
| Yes |
|
375 | 66.25% |
| No |
|
191 | 33.75% |
| Total: | 523 votes | ||
|
It's the worst thing people have ever come up with.
|
#
¿
Jan 21, 2017 12:18
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 27, 2024 23:21 |
|
|
SpaceDrake posted:Quick realtalk: Soviet/Stalinist-style Communism is awful because it's ultimately just oligarchy wearing red clothing. Democratic Socialism, meanwhile, is pretty much the only sensible way to run a high-technology, well-developed civilization in a stable manner (which is why so much of Europe has developed in that direction). Yeah one is communism one isn't, and the commie one is bad.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 21, 2017 22:27
|
|
|
True pure communism needs two hyphens.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 22, 2017 02:52
|
|
|
forkboy84 posted:Communism can describe a whole mish mash of ideas, most of which aren't Leninism-Stalinism-Maoism you silly soul. They are all bad though I bet.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 22, 2017 12:58
|
|
|
cosmically_cosmic posted:This is also the problem with current capitalism though, insider trading is essentially impossible to stop despite technically not being a part of the system. The idea of land inheritance (and to an extent capital) is feudalistic (at least to me). In essance, both systems devolve into oligarchy. Communist revolutions just break down much faster than a liberal state. If we did have magical robots and Star Trek replicators then the poor would either be "phased out" or hunted for sport by the rich/party elite depending on whether it was a capitalist or communist country.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 23, 2017 13:03
|
|
|
Communism is good if you like mass graves and vicious political repression, bad if you like freedom, prosperity, and good outcomes.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 24, 2017 02:38
|
|
|
Without Marxism there would have been no Cheka, without Chekism there would have been no KGB, Without the KGB Donald Trump wouldn't be president. Checkmate commies.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 24, 2017 06:29
|
|
|
Communism is a hellish meatgrinder of evil.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 24, 2017 23:58
|
|
|
TomViolence posted:Y'wot? It is not in any way natural, nor does it in any way align with common notions of ownership or fairness, that 8 people in the world hold the same wealth as the poorest 3.5 billion. Capitalism is a global system of perverse incentives that is entirely artificial and is maintained through abuse of state power and corporate hegemony. It's not been corrupted, it's working entirely as designed. Capitalism will never die or be diminished. Communism is almost entirely eradicated from the world already, tick tock tovarish.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 25, 2017 00:01
|
|
|
SunAndSpring posted:lmfao, that loving last line thanks I thought it was pretty funny
|
|
#
¿
Jan 25, 2017 01:41
|
|
|
Flowers For Algeria posted:In the Bone Clocks, David Mitchell hints at the idea that Iceland will be the last bastion of civilization and humanity. Icleandic people are elves dude, it might be the last bastion of something but it ain't gonna be 'humanity.'
|
|
#
¿
Jan 25, 2017 01:42
|
|
|
Abolishing private property means stealing everything from anyone who has anything. Is it really surprising that a social order based on everyone being either the victim or perpetrator of theft would always end up in bloodbath and horror?
|
|
#
¿
Jan 26, 2017 02:11
|
|
|
What's the difference between communists in TYOOL 2017 and people who believe in angels and fairies and stuff anyway?
|
|
#
¿
Jan 26, 2017 02:34
|
|
|
TomViolence posted:Oh, poo poo, the human nature argument, marxism's only weakness. It has though.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 26, 2017 23:03
|
|
|
The struggle for communism is like a person who believes that if he manages to saw all his own arms and legs off with a chainsaw, he will sprout wings and be able to fly like a bird, and then blames the ultimate failure of his project on his inability to saw off that last arm.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 26, 2017 23:31
|
|
|
Communism is basically an amalgamation of all the bad things people have ever come up with. All the incomprehensibly evil genocide of Naziism, all the violent brutality of the Inquisition, the horrors of slavery, the injustice of vicious political repression, the totalitarian police state. It really is the worst thing people have ever thought up.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 27, 2017 02:19
|
|
|
Wait lol, what is "radical left wing practice" even supposed to mean? Posting on the internet? Not being late for class your first year off at university? hakimashou fucked around with this message at 02:27 on Jan 27, 2017 |
|
#
¿
Jan 27, 2017 02:24
|
|
|
Bob le Moche posted:The only reason China is no longer third world is because of the communist revolution that happened there and made it be not be a colony of the West anymore. The only reason China isn't part of the Greater East Asia Co-Prosperity Sphere is because the democratic capitalist west (The USA) destroyed Japan. Also Hong Kong is way way way way better than mainland China and so is Taiwan. What do the two have in common? They escaped the evil of Chinese communism. hakimashou fucked around with this message at 03:45 on Jan 27, 2017 |
|
#
¿
Jan 27, 2017 03:42
|
|
|
is the 'death toll of capitalism' literally every person who has ever died at the hands of anyone who wasnt a communist lol
|
|
#
¿
Jan 27, 2017 05:34
|
|
|
Flowers For Algeria posted:Hakimashou, have you ever heard of Pascal's wager? Better dead than red. 
|
|
#
¿
Jan 27, 2017 10:09
|
|
|
The Kingfish posted:Private ownership and control of the economy is immoral. Our ancestors will look back at these times with the same sense of bewildered fascination we have towards feudalism. Our ancestors all died long ago.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 3, 2017 16:50
|
|
|
Communism is good if you like monstrous crime, unthinkable suffering, and mass murder, but I don't, so I am not a fan.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 4, 2017 13:05
|
|
|
Commies remind me of sovereign citizens or gold buggers or something. Like they have this whole bizarre made-up alternative world view with their own catch phrases and insane conventional wisdom and stuff. But instead of "travelling" and "fiat" and "10,000 dollars an ounce" and "i do not consent officer" it's "capital" and "means of production" and "class consciousness" and all the rest of it. Instead of Ron Paul and Alex Jones and Hayek and Ayn Rand they have Marx and Hoxha and all kinds of other wackadoos. It's like a parallel universe.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 25, 2017 03:56
|
|
|
steinrokkan posted:The made up concept of "capital". Who has ever seen capital? Gold is real, but the way ron paul thinks about it is bizarre. It's just that these communists/conspiracy theorists/ron paul type people all see a situation, but draw bizarre conclusions from it, based on bizarre and outlandish ways of thinking that seem perfectly normal to them.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 26, 2017 01:16
|
|
|
I guess maybe all the wild commie theories might have been more interesting 100 years ago when it was all novel. But in TYOOL 2017 its not too hard to just look at different countries and see how the free ones turned out better than the communist ones. SK or NK? Japan or China? Western or Eastern Europe? It's easy to figure out which are better places to live. There are crazy Americans who think Thomas Jefferson's musings on agrarian democracy are the apex of human political thought and the core of the True America. Why should some loopy marxist be taken more seriously than glenn beck? hakimashou fucked around with this message at 02:34 on Mar 26, 2017 |
|
#
¿
Mar 26, 2017 02:07
|
|
|
Stealing everything from anyone who has anything isn't even good on paper, and its not at all surprising that a crusade to make everyone a robber or a victim of robbers leads to the worst atrocities in human history.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 26, 2017 02:34
|
|
|
RBC posted:but people who have everything stealing from people who have very little is ok gotcha It's almost like the best thing would be somewhere between the two extremes...
|
|
#
¿
Mar 26, 2017 02:40
|
|
|
RBC posted:yeah, like redistributing everything so everyone has an equal share? You're right. ronpaul2017! the only real money is silver and gold!
|
|
#
¿
Mar 26, 2017 02:52
|
|
|
OwlFancier posted:I don't actually think anyone seriously disagrees with Marx's analysis of Capital, they just don't like the implications. I've never actually seen someone try to suggest that ownership doesn't allow the owner to control those who do not own things in exchange for money. People disagree about whether it would be good to abolish property and put 'the workers' somehow in control of the 'means of production.' History seems to show its bad. Also plenty of disagreement about whether or not the be-all and the end-all of dividing people into groups is 'marxist socioeconomic classes.' Societies obsessed with these categories seem to have bad outcomes. Any right-thinking person would agree that workers should have rights and also that labour should be organized to have some power like collective bargaining and striking. The aim should be to create a balance. Hasn't history shown us over and over that destruction of an imperfect society leads to a worse society than before?
|
|
#
¿
Mar 26, 2017 03:29
|
|
|
OwlFancier posted:I wonder if Marx might have had anything to say about the possibility of there being other forms of power than private ownership of things, and possibly even advocated for them? Who cares what marx had to say about anything though? Marx is not a great thinker he is a discredited wretch buried in the ash-heap of history. Like it's not 1917, its 2017. We have had a century to see marxism fully borne out as a blood soaked misery. "I wonder if DR Paul had something to say about this. Maybe Hayek wrote something down about it, HMM? Educate yourself, read infowars."
|
|
#
¿
Mar 26, 2017 04:15
|
|
|
steinrokkan posted:After decades of legislative and private pushes to erase any political power of labor and protect capital with measures that place it above even human life in the current state framework, how can anybody conclude that capital isn't the fundamental operating principle of the current state system of power that methodically usurps all power when given the opportunity (such as when alternative attempts to wrest power e.g. organized labor are defeated) and eliminates all competing factors from positions of access to the government. They've had an easy time of it because they get to be on the right side of a debate that shouldn't even happen, a debate between them and communists. Why argue against sensible center-left labor rights ideas when instead you can pick an argument you know you'll always win, every time, an argument against marxists. It's like you have to run a race for a big prize, and you get to pick between facing off against a strong runner, or some overweight slob with a sprained ankle. If you want to see it happen before your very eyes, turn them to Britain. The latest indignity from that benighted land was just today. A national restaurant chain felt so emboldened by the far-left's undermining of the sane-left that it actually put forth a program to pay its workers in sandwiches. hakimashou fucked around with this message at 04:24 on Mar 26, 2017 |
|
#
¿
Mar 26, 2017 04:20
|
|
|
steinrokkan posted:What, nobody is arguing against marxists in position of power. The battle is against moderate center-left ideas, because even those can be rolled back - in absence of a concerted and dedicated opposition - in the obvious pursuit of the ultimate goal of any recent government, which is the elevation of capital to a position beyond reproach and beyond social responsibility. There is no way that fire can melt steel comrade. A marxist opposition is no opposition at all. See: Britain 2017. Marxists undermine the center-left and leave workers defenseless, because the revolution is never, ever, going to come. Also consider this real thing: Marxist College Kid: "..in the absence of a concerted and dedicated opposition - in the obvious pursuit of the ultimate goal of any recent government, which is the elevation of capital to a position beyond reproach and beyond social responsibility!" Actual Working Class Guy: "uwot m8? immigrants innit" MCK: "immigrants are working class just like you and me, we don't control capital, we live off our labour, solidarity! the bourgeoisie have as their ultimate goal which is the elevation of capital to a position beyond reproach and beyond social responsibility!" AWCG: "taking our jobs and our dole though innit, need rid of em dont we" MCK "no, weren't you listening, shut up about immigrants! the ultimate goal of any recent government, which is the elevation of capital to a position beyond reproach and beyond social responsibility!" AWCG: "fuckoff m8, tories it is." hakimashou fucked around with this message at 05:46 on Mar 26, 2017 |
|
#
¿
Mar 26, 2017 04:34
|
|
|
"Anarchism," if you can be charitable enough to describe the degenerate fever dreams of anarchists with an -ism, is even worse than communism when it comes to relying on people to somehow change their basic dispositions for it to work.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 26, 2017 12:15
|
|
|
Flowers For Algeria posted:And at the bottom of the pile of bad ideologies, is everything you believe in, hakimashou. No the stuff I believe in is good. Good and pragmatic. Its actually way up on top of the other pile, the pile of good stuff.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 26, 2017 22:28
|
|
|
caps on caps on caps posted:So? This is immaterial to the fact that it is a transformation, just as Marx said, and furthermore that the belief in these latent human aspects is a critical pillar of communist theory, as stated by Marx: the true human being is a social being. And social means acting and feeling, and enjoying and even loving in accordance with the societal wellbeing. In terms of theory it is the idea that humans become social optimizers, which they are not under private property, which Marx also writes. And certainly not now. So this change is important, and whether it is true nature, as Marx writes, or not, it is a transformation, as he also writes. And of course marxism doesn't accomplish any of this- quite the opposite. You end up with places like Russia and China where over the generations of marxist horror, the good becomes killed and starved and beaten out of the people. In the whole of human history mankind has never come up with an idea worse than communism.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 26, 2017 22:30
|
|
|
Rexicon1 posted:What political theory do you think is best. A Theory of Justice
|
|
#
¿
Mar 26, 2017 22:34
|
|
|
Rexicon1 posted:What does this mean? It's the title of a book...
|
|
#
¿
Mar 26, 2017 22:41
|
|
|
steinrokkan posted:Hm, the liberal approach which states that people should be nice to each other because of their deep appreciation of abstract scenarios with shroud of uncertainty and other bullshit. What a rock solid foundation for a society. He asked me what my favorite political theory was. Obviously there's a lot more to life and to the best outcomes than "political theories," but Rawls' is my favorite political theory.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 26, 2017 22:44
|
|
|
Rexicon1 posted:I'm a deeply ignorant person, what does the book prescribe. "Justice is fairness." One of the biggest practical conclusions is that inequality is fine if it makes things better for the least well-off. There's a lot in there, it's a pretty cool theory.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 26, 2017 23:10
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 27, 2024 23:21 |
|
|
Yup. In practice its about getting the best that you can from the realistic options available, and largely just about stopping the worse people from getting power. Like it says in The Wire, "you gotta keep the devil down in the hole." That's one reason 2017 marxism or communism is such a drag, because it undermines the good guys team. Just look at britain, where a mad dog of the left is dragging the labour party down to nothing, leaving the tories unopposed. hakimashou fucked around with this message at 23:30 on Mar 26, 2017 |
|
#
¿
Mar 26, 2017 23:28
|
|