> The very idea that the poor and middle class are entitled to the money that
> has been earned by the upper classes is disgusting. This is why communism and
> socialism are the most selfish economic forms. OK- I agree with you - the class that makes the money aught to keep it - but all weatlhth is produced by the workers, and appropriated by the owners - no one can earn several million dollars of their own work - it always has to be at the espense of others - capitalism is organised theft....
> Communists are always saying it failed because "the wrong people were in
> charge," so we'll allow that
No - thats not the case - communism failed in Russia because Lenin's theory of the revolutionwas misguided - the revolution must be carried out by the working class istelf- not a revolutionary vanguard party that operates an effective coup d'etat.
example to be discredited simply for the sake of argument. Now let's look at some others. North Korea - land of the happy? I think not. Cuba - land of the wealthy? Again I think not. Oh, but these examples too must be discredited, once again because there are a certain group of people in charge who are corrupt and therefore it screws up the whole system - one that would work if it weren't for these people. Fine. Has it ever occured to any one that the very reason communism fails is that because under such a system it ALLOWS power hungry tyrants to rule countries? Did anyone ever think that this isn't a factor that ruins communism, BUT A VERY SYMPTOM OF COMMUNISM? Of course not. So now let's turn to the most important "real world" example of the failure of communism.
No- I think that its a symptom of Leninism, and proof that communism cannot work in isolated countries, but only in a world wide revolution...
> In the early part of the seventeenth century a group of religious pilgrims
> came to what is no the United States to escape religious persecution. These
> people were very hard-working "Christian" types who simply wanted to get away
> from the oppression of the "old world." While they were travelling on thire
> ship, THE MAYFLOWER, they wrote a charter for a new government in which all
> the people would compile their profits (agricultural at the time) into a
> common store. No tyrants would run this system, it would be completely
> voluntary and that way everyone would get the same amount of food and no one
> would go without. Perfect. Commmunism in its purest form. No power-hungry
> rulers to screw up the equation. Then you must ask, my liberal friend, "did
> it work?" No, just the opposite. Half of the poeople starved to death in the
> first year. Not in the winter, either, in the SUMMER, when food was abundant.
> Why then did they die? Because these hard-working people became lazy and
> greedy thinking that everyione else would do the work for them. Why should
> they work when everyone else would and they could just feed off fof them.
Its probably more likely that their productive capacities were not up to the job of sustaining communism. We all work volunarilly - if a uniuon calls a work to rule (Where people only do the work they are contracted to do - production drops by fifty percent - thats fifty percent of all production is utterly unpaid for - and all the resat is underpaid...)
: Let me ask: How is your "tone" of superiority any different from hers, my radical friend? Admit it, you don't agree with her so you fabricate an image of her being all superior and thinking that she knows everything. I know Cara, and she is none of these things.
> Do you think this country is destroying the earth? Let me explain something:
> Under the CAPITALIST/DEMOCRATIC system which the United States now operates,
> the purity of the air and water in the United States has improved 25% over the
> last 20-some years. That's right, the Environmental protection act, sponsored
> by strong Capitalist believer RICHARD M. (EVIL) NIXON has worked! Under
> communist Russia (yes, I'm using them as an example again, I don't know where
> I got this brain damage or, what, precisely, is wrong with me) pollution and
The Soviet Union was not a socialist country - It was capitalist. Yawn.
> environmental degradation was 10 times worse than it ever qwas in the United
> States. Farmland was destroyed by the acre, not because of the evil people at
> the top, but because of the low class who wer supposed to benefit from the
> system. The reason the situatio was so bad was because people did not own the
> property they were given to look after. What did they care if the land was
> destroyed? Then they just A) would be given another piece of land by the all
> loving PEOPLE (government) or B) they would no longer have to work becasue
> there was no land to work on! YIPPEE! Why would they care if land/air/water
> was destroyed of they didn't own it. One absolute in life that even you
> cannot deny is that ownership breeds responsibility.
Thats ture - so lets all own the world - instead of a group of people whose only real goal is to attain capital growth...
> Oh neat - a scientist. You must admit, my tree loving friend, that such a
> thing as INSTINCT does exist. Or wait, maybe that is just one of those things
> we are fed from birth. Man would not exist if he/she did not have built in
> behaviors for survival, such as the need to reproduce. One of these instincts
> is to look out for him/herself first. I know what makes me happy. I know
> best how to keep myself alive best. Therefore doesn't it make the best sense
> to let me run my life however I want and keep the benefits of that work and
> allow you to do the same? Please agree, it would make me happy.
Yes, humans have instincts - to be co-operative, and to be adaptable...
> Michael Owens
> Future President of the United States
God help America......
:)
