NationStates Jolt Archive

Well.. read the title.

Professing to endorse or advocate communism.

I know, it's simplistic of me not to read book after book to find out the "true" communists from the rest. However, it works for me since political beliefs are subjective anyway, not some objective fact along the lines of "blonde hair" or "tall."

That is also why I consider the USSR to have been communist. It was run by, started by, endorsed by folks who claimed to be communists. Who am I to disagree? Am I really supposed to join sides in the "No *I* am the *true* communist, *they* are the heretics!" battle? I think not.

it's Self-explanatory Personal Affiliation Matching.

my guess is compassion and an urge to help your fellow man, mixed with a mild megalomania that results in one wishing to help all people.

plus, of course, upbringing and life experiences. once you've been poor you can go one of two ways: believing that people should have greater freedom to work their way out of being poor, for themselves - the right wing way. OR you can go the leftist way in believing that people make mistakes, and nobody chooses who their parents are or what their start in life is going to be, and hence everyone needs help to get out of the poor-cycle, and thats the role of the government and to be funded by the wealthy (as each person has a responsibility for every other)... the extent to which one goes down that path varies, but the most extreme would be communism. hence its also personal belief in certain philosophies, but i would say that those are fuelled by compassion and perhaps a more emotional nature. but i'm just guessing there *shrugs*

OmG C0mMi3!1!1[/McCarthy]

my guess is compassion and an urge to help your fellow man, mixed with a mild megalomania that results in one wishing to help all people.
Oh yeah, China is very compassionate. So was the USSR. :p

In fact, communist compassion is so great that, for the stake of being compassionate, they start harassing their opponents, killing and/or torturing them once they get to power, because communism can't coexist with criticism.

It's really annoying how some if not most communists label everything that doesn't agree with them as 'fascist' or 'rightwing'. They act as if they have the monopoly of the left. I'm leftwing and I'm so not communist.

It's really annoying how some if not most communists label everything that doesn't agree with them as 'fascist' or 'rightwing'. They act as if they have the monopoly of the left. I'm leftwing and I'm so not communist.
Ironically, facism *is* on the political left of the specturm in terms of governmental control of the economy.

Ironically, facism *is* on the political left of the specturm in terms of governmental control of the economy.
Although in personal freedoms, fascism is totally opposed to socialism and has much more in common with conservatism in those matters.

what makes someone a commy?

mostly its the membership card for the communist party in their country.

Ironically, facism *is* on the political left of the specturm in terms of governmental control of the economy.
Ironically, you're confusing the difference between government control of the economy, and industry control of the government.

Oh yeah, China is very compassionate. So was the USSR. :p

In fact, communist compassion is so great that, for the stake of being compassionate, they start harassing their opponents, killing and/or torturing them once they get to power, because communism can't coexist with criticism.

It's really annoying how some if not most communists label everything that doesn't agree with them as 'fascist' or 'rightwing'. They act as if they have the monopoly of the left. I'm leftwing and I'm so not communist.
:rolleyes: i am so sick of seeing this kind of misguided, uninformed view round here.
firstly, communism theory or ideology is very much seperate from the practicalities of reigimes like the ussr or china
secondly, good on you for being leftist, but please, know what communism really is before opening your mouth next time... or typing on your keyboard.... you know what i mean.

Ironically, you're confusing the difference between government control of the economy, and industry control of the government.
Ironically, you are forgetting the fact that when two people/groups are in bed, squabbling about who is in bed with whom is semantic and superficial.

:rolleyes: i am so sick of seeing this kind of misguided, uninformed view round here.
firstly, communism theory or ideology is very much seperate from the practicalities of reigimes like the ussr or china
secondly, good on you for being leftist, but please, know what communism really is before opening your mouth next time... or typing on your keyboard.... you know what i mean.
Sorry, but you can't make your own communism. Every communist system has been authoritarian, because that's how communism works. This has been historically proven. Working class illusions and promises were used by a particular group to gain power and become the new oppressive elite. I challenge you to find a communist regime that, having lasted for more than 5 years, didn't become authoritarian. All of them did. No one can rationally deny that communism is totalitarian.

Do you know what communism really is? We all know that worker have better conditions in a social market economy, NOT in communism, which oppresses the people and doesn't let them speak out their opinion.

but please, know what communism really is before opening your mouth next time... or typing on your keyboard.... you know what i mean.
I guess I know what you mean... So because I don't like communism I should shut up, right? I know it wasn't intentional, but you are actually supporting my point of view that communism is authoritarian :)

Ironically, you are forgetting the fact that when two people/groups are in bed, squabbling about who is in bed with whom is semantic and superficial.
Ironically, attempting to use the Nazis to slander an entire political wing when they are already slandered by their own side is a bit overkill, thank you very much.

Sorry, but you can't make your own communism. Every communist system has been authoritarian, because that's how communism works. This has been historically proven. Working class illusions and promises were used by a particular group to gain power and become the new oppressive elite. I challenge you to find a communist regime that, having lasted for more than 5 years, didn't become authoritarian. All of them did. No one can rationally deny that communism is totalitarian.

Do you know what communism really is? We all know that worker have better conditions in a social market economy, NOT in communism, which oppresses the people and doesn't let them speak out their opinion.

1: Nobody's "making their own Communism", Einstein.

2: Every "Communist" system has been authoritarian simply because the people who brought about the revolution (which totally goes against Communism in the first place) were egomaniacal despots. Mao was the least of them at first, but we all know what he did later on...

3: Yeah, all of them become authoritarian because every "Communist" system has been brought about in a nation that hadn't even been through the Capitalist stage of development.

4: Oh, please. Get your head out of your ass. http://www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/1931/

Sorry, but you can't make your own communism.

True communism has never been implemented. We (as in, the world) have seen leninism, stalinism, maoism etc., but never true communism.

True communism has never been implemented. We (as in, the world) have seen leninism, stalinism, maoism etc., but never true communism.

Refer to the link in my post above to see what *true* Communism is, and has always been, before the perversions of Marx, Lenin, and friends.

1: Nobody's "making their own Communism", Einstein.

2: Every "Communist" system has been authoritarian simply because the people who brought about the revolution (which totally goes against Communism in the first place) were egomaniacal despots. Mao was the least of them at first, but we all know what he did later on...

3: Yeah, all of them become authoritarian because every "Communist" system has been brought about in a nation that hadn't even been through the Capitalist stage of development.

4: Oh, please. Get your head out of your ass. http://www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/1931/

I see. So, you are the ultimate arbiter on what is communist, and about every major communist party, communist nation and communist theorist are not?

Sorry. They called themselves communist. They aimed to build what they saw as a communist society. Just because you disagree, doesn't invalidate them. Otherwise, I might as well just declare that YOU are not a "true" communist, eh? Why should I believe YOUR vision of "true" communism and not the Soviet vision, the Marxist vision, the Leninist vision, the Maoist vision or the American Fucking Communist Party vision? Like it or not, those visions of communism are still visions of communism every bit as much as yours is (if not more so).

Try to dissociate yourself all you wish, it doesn't stick with anyone who doesn't redefine history to suit their personal political agenda.

Ironically, attempting to use the Nazis to slander an entire political wing when they are already slandered by their own side is a bit overkill, thank you very much.
Ironically, Facism wasn't exclusive to the Nazis and is a seperate ideology in its own right.
Ironically, none of these statements have been very ironic.

I see. So, you are the ultimate arbiter on what is communist, and about every major communist party, communist nation and communist theorist are not?

Sorry. They called themselves communist. They aimed to build what they saw as a communist society. Just because you disagree, doesn't invalidate them. Otherwise, I might as well just declare that YOU are not a "true" communist, eh? Why should I believe YOUR vision of "true" communism and not the Soviet vision, the Marxist vision, the Leninist vision, the Maoist vision or the American Fucking Communist Party vision? Like it or not, those visions of communism are still visions of communism every bit as much as yours is (if not more so).

Try to dissociate yourself all you wish, it doesn't stick with anyone who doesn't redefine history to suit their personal political agenda.

1: No, but I'm willing to bet I know a hell of a lot more about it than you. I sense some McCarthyism in you, "kind sir".

2: It's not because I disagree --- it's because the state invalidates itself. All of them have. There's no such thing as a Communist state. All these so-called "Communist" territories have been oppressive Totalitarian states, with hefty state-sponsored Capitalism and nothing short of slave labor (Gulags, anyone?).

3: Think what you will, but it'll still be extremely ignorant, uneducated thought.

Ironically, Facism wasn't exclusive to the Nazis and is a seperate ideology in its own right.
Ironically, none of these statements have been very ironic.
I believe our use of ironically is ironically irony in and of itself.

1: No, but I'm willing to bet I know a hell of a lot more about it than you. I sense some McCarthyism in you, "kind sir".

McCarthyism, because I call the USSR communist?

The Soviets called themselves communist, are they also McCarthyists as a result or is it just me?

2: It's not because I disagree --- it's because the state invalidates itself. All of them have. There's no such thing as a Communist state. All these so-called "Communist" territories have been oppressive Totalitarian states, with hefty state-sponsored Capitalism and nothing short of slave labor (Gulags, anyone?).

Look, Democrats don't believe in direct democracy and Republicans call for increasingly authoritarian federal government. Does that mean anyone should be ranting and raving constantly about how there are no Republicans in the country, how there are no Democrats? At least, I haven't seen you do so. Hence the Democrats are Democrats, the Republicans are Republicans and the Communists are Communists. It is an ugly truth. A=A.

3: Think what you will, but it'll still be extremely ignorant, uneducated thought.

Hey, when you say things like that, it hurts. In my heart. :(

I believe our use of ironically is ironically irony in and of itself.
Ironically, I think that you are right.

[/hijack]

1: Nobody's "making their own Communism", Einstein.

2: Every "Communist" system has been authoritarian simply because the people who brought about the revolution (which totally goes against Communism in the first place) were egomaniacal despots. Mao was the least of them at first, but we all know what he did later on...

3: Yeah, all of them become authoritarian because every "Communist" system has been brought about in a nation that hadn't even been through the Capitalist stage of development.
That's nonsense :rolleyes: . Communism is against private enterprise and has a centrally planned economy. That is totally authoritarian, just to add to the fact that a communist system is naturally inclined towards authoritarianism mostly because of its inherent central planning in economy.

4: Oh, please. Get your head out of your ass.
You're being very offensive. I think I have the basic right not to be insulted. You don't need to throw insults at me just because I don't agree with you. Go show your trollhood on someone else. :cool:

True communism has never been implemented. We (as in, the world) have seen leninism, stalinism, maoism etc., but never true communism.
Those are all schools of communism :rolleyes: You know what? See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Communism.

Pure communism is impossible, just like pure capitalism. Western democracies are considered capitalist but they're also (for the most part) very far from pure capitalism.

Well.. read the title.
A trekkie probably.

As far as I remember, pretty much all attempts at Communism on the community level failed, at least in the United States. I cannot see why then, if it cannot be managed on a small scale why it would be successful on a larger scale.

Mao says (in his little red book):

Every comrade must be brought to understand that the supreme test of the words and deeds of a Communist is whether they conform with the highest interests and enjoy the support of the overwhelming majority of the people.
and
Communists must always go into the whys and wherefores of anything, use their own heads and carefully think over whether or not it corresponds to reality and is really well founded; on no account should they follow blindly and encourage slavishness.

Make of that what you will...

Sorry. They called themselves communist. They aimed to build what they saw as a communist society. I do agree that it is silly for people to subjectively define Communism, so there needs to be a definition for what Communism is.

Unfortunately, in political theory, political words tend to be subjectively changed depending on who's using them. So someone else might call themselves Communist and have their own definition of what Communism is.

The problem here isn't that the countries who implemented Communism didn't fit the initial definition of Communism. The problem is that they didn't fit their own definitions of Communism. This is why they weren't Communist countries.

Or, to take a different tack: what if they'd called themselves Capitalists and thought they were implementing a capitalist society? Would they be Capitalists?

As far as I can tell, not being a libertarian is enough to get somebody labelled a communist around here...

"Oh yeah, China is very compassionate. So was the USSR. "

Wow you're really funny.... except for the fact that those countries ARE NOT AND NEVER WERE TRUE COMMUNIST COUNTRIES!!! They're all socialist. I mean, at least do a bit of research before you say these SOCIALIST countries were communist. They weren't even close, they just pledged their allegience to communism, but weren't in fact practicing communism.

"Oh yeah, China is very compassionate. So was the USSR. "

Wow you're really funny.... except for the fact that those countries ARE NOT AND NEVER WERE TRUE COMMUNIST COUNTRIES!!! They're all socialist. I mean, at least do a bit of research before you say these SOCIALIST countries were communist. They weren't even close, they just pledged their allegience to communism, but weren't in fact practicing communism.
You too are being revisionist by saying that China and USSR weren't communist. You can't change history baby :D
They weren't true communist for sure, but is the USA true capitalist? No, but it's still capitalist. China and USSR were communist and denying this is to be revisionist.

You too are being revisionist by saying that China and USSR weren't communist. You can't change history baby :D
They weren't true communist for sure, but is the USA true capitalist? No, but it's still capitalist. China and USSR were communist and denying this is to be revisionist.

They never actually called themselves communist...

Their leaders may have professed marxism as their ideology, but they never actually called their countries "communist".

Now now, don't get on us socialists' case for the actions of Lenin et al. We are not responsible for what they did. I mean, you wouldn't bash Germans for the Holocaust or the Japanese for the Rape of Nanking, so why is everyone so quick to bash socialists for the Great Leap Forward.

One becomes a socialist/communist/leftist when they have the realization that capitalism is truly and inevidably flawed and cannot properly support all of humanity, nor can it be counted on not to destroy nature.

They have a red right hand.

They never actually called themselves communist...

Their leaders may have professed marxism as their ideology, but they never actually called their countries "communist".
Marxism is a school of communism, so (you too) don't try to rewrite history and accept the fact that those countries were communist.

Or, to take a different tack: what if they'd called themselves Capitalists and thought they were implementing a capitalist society? Would they be Capitalists?
I'd quite like to see a reponse to this.

The Soviets called themselves communist

Actually they didn't.

USSR stands forUnion of Soviet Socialist Republics.
In their propaganda about space they said 'Another proof of Socialism's superiority over Capitalism'. And I know they used that line a lot in other propaganda too.

And so on.

A communist is someone who supports communism.

Typically, when the term is used seriously outside of political theory, communism is an ideology to the left of whatever the mainstream socialist/leftist tendency is of the day, and as such has no real constant meaning. The Eurocommunists would be derided as revisionists collaborating with the capitalist system if ever they went back in time and met the members of the pre-World War I communist parties, but nevertheless they are considerably to the left of the current mainstream social democratic parties, as the communist parties then were to the left of the Revisionist socialist political parties.

Or, to take a different tack: what if they'd called themselves Capitalists and thought they were implementing a capitalist society? Would they be Capitalists?

They would be very unsuccessful and mislead capitalists, yes.

Actually they didn't.

USSR stands forUnion of Soviet Socialist Republics.
In their propaganda about space they said 'Another proof of Socialism's superiority over Capitalism'. And I know they used that line a lot in other propaganda too.

Okay, and the Communist Party of the Soviet Union (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Communist_Party_of_the_Soviet_Union) aka Communist International (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comintern) "from Коммунистичекий Интернационал (Kommunisticheskiy Internatsional) – Communist International)"? What about them? Were these folks not the ones basically synonmyous with Soviet government for much if not all of the USSR's history? I think they were.

= Commies.

I think you're overlooking a rather obvious fact here, namely that there is more than one kind of socialism and dismissing all forms of socialism for the flaws of one kind is quite inaccurate. No one would take me seriously if I said that the USSR disproved the validity of all government because we all clearly recognize that there is more than one kind of government.

Okay, and the Communist Party of the Soviet Union (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Communist_Party_of_the_Soviet_Union) aka Communist International (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comintern) "from Коммунистичекий Интернационал (Kommunisticheskiy Internatsional) – Communist International)"? What about them? Were these folks not the ones basically synonmyous with Soviet government for much if not all of the USSR's history? I think they were.

= Commies.

They claimed to advocate communism, yes, but the USSR's regime never claimed to have achieved a communist society, merely a socialist one.

They slaughter kittens, sacrifice virgins at equinox, steal presents, cncel christmas, dress up as the boogy man, and have appalling dress sense.

They slaughter kittens, sacrifice virgins at equinox, steal presents, cncel christmas, dress up as the boogy man, and have appalling dress sense.

LOL!

*hands you a box of special brownies*

LOL!

*hands you a box of special brownies*

go me, I win:)

just had to add a double entendre, I couldn't resist

They have the internet handle 'DHomme'.

Only people who follow that rule are communists

Oh yeah, China is very compassionate. So was the USSR. :p

In fact, communist compassion is so great that, for the stake of being compassionate, they start harassing their opponents, killing and/or torturing them once they get to power, because communism can't coexist with criticism.

It's really annoying how some if not most communists label everything that doesn't agree with them as 'fascist' or 'rightwing'. They act as if they have the monopoly of the left. I'm leftwing and I'm so not communist.

you're confusing communism with what stalin did:headbang:

They slaughter kittens, sacrifice virgins at equinox, steal presents, cncel christmas, dress up as the boogy man, and have appalling dress sense.

yes I do

We all know that worker have better conditions in a social market economy

For values of "We all know" that equal "me and my friends agree"! (Are you PNR, PP, or ND?)

The health and longevity statistics show that workers have better conditions under some sort of social democracy or social-democrat-formed mixed economy. Among semi-democratic states, it is primarily in the United States that this is even an item of debate.

Actually they didn't.

USSR stands forUnion of Soviet Socialist Republics.
In their propaganda about space they said 'Another proof of Socialism's superiority over Capitalism'. And I know they used that line a lot in other propaganda too.

And so on.

Like most communists, they argued that only communism was real, scientific socialism. So they deliberately confused matters by calling themselves socialist. That big lie (Communism=Socialism), being convenient for the anti-socialists, has been adopted by all their greatest foes as a stick to beat democratic socialists, social democrats, and even moderates with.

Ironically, facism *is* on the political left of the specturm in terms of governmental control of the economy.

Multi-axis model

http://encyclopedia.laborlawtalk.com/wiki/images/c/ce/2d-political-spectrum.png


Nope, wrong, it's the polar opposite of communism.


Communism<---Left----------------------------------------------------Right>Fascism

Isn't it commie?

What makes someone a communist? Headgear.

http://www.udo-leuschner.de/sozialismus/lenin.jpg
http://phillips.blogs.com/photos/uncategorized/418chinese_army.jpg
http://www.cs.berkeley.edu/~kamin/gallery/nicaragua/che_mural.jpg
http://www.britishcouncil.org/ism-trenduk-muslim-330x220
http://www.heanet.ie/conferences/2003/presentations/Thursday/NorrisWilson_files/images/Image33.png

So given that anyone that calls themselves a communist is a communist, what did that make the Democratic German Republic?

Well.. read the title.

By admitting you're one, of course.