In Reply to: foundations of posted by Stephen Psallidas on October 25, 1996 at 03:38:23:
> > > Don't you idiots realize there is no better alternative to capitalism?
> > > No other system has worked so well to enrich so many-including your
> > > pitiful lives. How else could you hypocrites get your stupid message
> > > out-In a capitalist system with a computer that costs enough to
> > > feed hundereds in the Philippines etc. If your so against "capitalism
> > > stop using it's most prominent tools to spread your message.> > > Hypocrites all
> > I agree completely with Todd's statement. While we can all try to do our
> > part by "treading lightly" (recycyling, reusing, reducing), trying to over-
> > throw our capitalist society is not the answer. The experience of the USSR
> > shows us that communism does not work, we need to find another way. I think
> > that multinationals should strive to become more and more green. While the jobs
> > that McDonald's provides might be low-paying, they can serve as an incentive to
> > young people to go out and do better.> (See also Ashley Lavelle's reply)
> Of course the Soviet Union didn't work. It was a purely totalitarian state
> which was ruthlessly exploited by its leaders. Anyone who has the slightest
> knowledge of communism would realise that a true communist wouldn't kill
> literally millions of their fellow citizens in order to silence their views.> A true communist wouldn't engage in an insane arms race. A true communist wouldn't
> prevent their fellow citizens leaving the country or deny them access to the media
> of other countries. A true communist would be happy to allow free elections even
> if it meant them losing power.> The fact of the matter is that the Soviet Union was a brutal dictatorship. For a
> few years after the Russian Revolution there was genuine communism (just remember
> the thousands of American and Europeans who flocked to help on the great construction
> projects of the 20's and 30's), but after the death of Lenin every leader who came
> to power after him was interested only in themselves.> The Soviet Union did not prove the truth of "communism doesn't work", it was more an
> example of "power corrupts".> I am a supporter of free speech and social justice, and therefore to some extent the
> idea of communism, but I don't think that a traditional "communist state" (i.e. dictatorship)
> is the answer. In fact, I don't think any concentration of power in the hands of one
> individual is the answer. Don't you think it's ironic that a lot of people, like the first
> in this chain, protest when the leader of a government has too much power which is open to
> abuse, but seem quite happy to let the bosses of huge multinational corporations wield
> enourmous influence over their lives ?> I would like to see a system where many activities of a central goverment are indeed restricted,
> thus reducing government's power. However the replacement of this corrupt "public" power by
> corrupt "private" power won't help. Power should be devolved from a centralised to a localised
> level, so that people can take control of their own lives. And it's no good saying "well surely
> that is a capitalist syste: everyone looking out for themselves and f**k the others". The key is> (a) to restrict the amount of power any individual can have
> (b) to get people to realise that they cannot gain in the long run by screwing others, but that
> in fact they can only progress by helping others progress.> these are the foundations of "true" communism.....
my friend you are truly insightful, never before on this debate site have
i seen more intelligence in a single response. I guess it takes one who does
not live in america to see this issue clearly. in a way it's not their faults,
they can't help being brainwashed into believing that anything that is different
from them must be inherently wrong. how are they so sure that communism
doesn't work until they have actually tried it.