NationStates Jolt Archive

This post isn't directed entirely at anyone in particular but Naliitr sparked that annoyance I had in my head on Friday.
In my Civics class I have two communists - each of them fits into a hilarious stereotype, one being the nerdy type who is infatuated with Russian history, the other being some crazy obnoxious neo-nazi who doesn't even understand the concepts which he announces his faith to each day.

Why do teenagers think calling themselves a communist supporter is some sort of new 'cool'?

I am not bashing communism, it does work - see Cuba, they have a great time.
I am scratching my head as to why people seem to love it so much, there is 0% chance a capitalist will ever become a communist because, oh yes, you can't move to a communist country!

So why does every acne-infested teenager seem to think communism is their destiny? They will never be apart of it and if they ever got the chance, they would probably leave in under a week. Cars hardly exist in communistic countries, it is all about the 'public transport' trucks that stuff a bunch of sweaty workers in together for long periods of travelling. People don't have access to the wonders of capitalism in communism. I am guessing the angsty teens think the government will hold their hand through life in communism and they never have to do any work, think again, it is far worse than capitalism for work-loads in communism. Get rich or die trying, hah! Not unless you're a tour guide I suppose.

And if I ever, ever, ever see anybody saying "I'm an anarchy supporter!" I shall whip multiple rocks at them.

I'm an anarchy supporter!

I'm an anarchy supporter!

Damn it, you beat me to it!

I, too, am an anarchy supporter!

What's wrong with public transportation? It's better for the environment, cheaper and a lot more efficient than cars. I enjoy it frequently.

I am scratching my head as to why people seem to love it so much, there is 0% chance a capitalist will ever become a communist because, oh yes, you can't move to a communist country!
Why can't you move to a communist country?

What's wrong with public transportation? It's better for the environment, cheaper and a lot more efficient than cars. I enjoy it frequently.

Not talking about your city bus.
Talking about something worse than a Newyork Subway

http://www.svato.com/photos/albums/Cuba/Havana_public_transportation.jpg

Not talking about your city bus.
Talking about something worse than a Newyork Subway

http://www.svato.com/photos/albums/Cuba/Havana_public_transportation.jpg

Less wasteful and less expensive than dozens of cars driving around, isn't it?

Not talking about your city bus.
Talking about something worse than a Newyork Subway

http://www.svato.com/photos/albums/Cuba/Havana_public_transportation.jpg

You're blaming Cuba for the trade embargo the US has put on it, preventing it from importing modern automobiles?

Its the traditional rebellion of youth. Teenagers will always embrace the opposing ideology that prevails at the time. Take my old school for example, during the years of the Conservative government (which for you young American tykes out there and don't know, is sort of like the Republicans, with Labour being the Democrats....but only very very loosely on either), the political mood (according to the teachers) was that of being a Labour supporter. When I was there under a Labour government, everyone was a Conservative. During the early nineteenth century, German students were fiercely nationalist since the state of Germany at that time was a patchwork of smaller states. Go to a communist country and I'm sure the youth there will throw themselves on the altar of Adam Smith and Free Trade.

I'm simply pointing out that communist life is less than luxurious.

Ration cards for starters, you eat what the government gives you - even if you are one of the 'rich' communist (the type who take jobs that they can get tips from tourists) you still can't buy food.

You get your bland food and you eat it, if you don't like it, tough shit.

What is it with middle-aged fascists?

What is it with middle-aged fascists?

Impotence.

I'm simply pointing out that communist life is less than luxurious.

Ration cards for starters, you eat what the government gives you - even if you are one of the 'rich' communist (the type who take jobs that they can get tips from tourists) you still can't buy food.

You get your bland food and you eat it, if you don't like it, tough shit.

Why do you think socialism in the US would be equivalent to authoritarian Leninist/Stalinist "socialism" in underdeveloped countries?

What is it with middle-aged fascists?

Huh? The hell, I haven't seen many forty year olds wandering around yelling "SIEG HEIL"

I'm an 18 year old democratic socialist

"What is it with teenaged communists?"

I suspect a goodly portion if it is a combination of the old sirein song of "from each according to his ability, to each according to his need," which sounds nice but doesn't work, and the old "something for nothing" myth. :rolleyes:

Huh? The hell, I haven't seen many forty year olds wandering around yelling "SIEG HEIL"

Well, then I suppose it's a good thing that fascism does not necessarily equal Nazism; otherwise that might disprove my post. But I suspect you missed my point, regardless.

Why do you think socialism in the US would be equivalent to authoritarian Leninist/Stalinist "socialism" in underdeveloped countries?

So is that what you teenagers think?
You honestly think communism is going to come to America?
:headbang:

I'm an 18 year old democratic socialist

And I thought you were a social democrat.

Because teenagers havn't yet learned that helping other people is unAmerican.

Well, then I suppose it's a good thing that fascism does not necessarily equal Nazism; otherwise that might disprove my post. But I suspect you missed my point, regardless.

Dictatorship and Nazism aren't that far apart.

depends what day it is :D

So is that what you teenagers think?
You honestly think communism is going to come to America?
:headbang:

Why do you think I am a teenager?

I have no idea whether or not Communism will come to the United States. I don't think comparing capitalism in the US to distortions of socialism elsewhere is a comparison from which much of worth can be garnered.

Dictatorship and Nazism aren't that far apart.

Dictatorship is not the same as fascism either.

Stalin was not a communist.

Neither was Pol Pot or Mao. Kim Jong Il and Fidel Castro don't get very high marks for following a true communist ideology, either. So any statements about communism you make using them are automatically invalidated. Whether they called themselves that or not is irrelevant. I can call myself a Republican and it won't effect my anarcho-socialist ideology in the slightest.

Next!

Dictatorship and Nazism aren't that far apart.

What's your point? Neither are Minneapolis and St. Paul. Doesn't make them the same city.

Stalin was not a communist.

Neither was Pol Pot or Mao. Kim Jong Il and Fidel Castro don't get very high marks for following a true communist ideology, either. So any statements about communism you make using them are automatically invalidated. Whether they called themselves that or not is irrelevant. I can call myself a Republican and it won't effect my anarcho-socialist ideology in the slightest.

Next!

I have mentioned not a single communist leader.

I don't believe Communism will come to America. But socialism may find a home in the U.S. Of course, it will be a slow process and not an easy one.

What's your point? Neither are Minneapolis and St. Pual. Doesn't make them the same city.
Hey Sdae... nice analogy, but I have to say it's not exactly accurate. Political ideologies are intangible abstractions and thus cannot be compared to tangible, concrete objects such as cities. Not that I'm disagreeing with you or anything.

Pure ignorance. A shallow, rosy, low-comprehension surface view of whatever they think communism is is readily exclaimed upon without deeper thought as to the idea's implications, or further research into the writings of people who actually know what they're talking about in the realms of economics or philosophy. Basically, a kid not smart or serious enough to really think it through sees the words "equality", "brother-love", and "free lunch" and goes "yeah, communism, word dude!". Since the unintelligent are majorities in pretty much all age groups, and the non-serious are a majority in kids, you get lots of uninformed youth who follow that progression.

Political ideologies are intangible ideas

No shit, Sherlock.

Pure ignorance. A shallow, rosy, low-comprehension surface view of whatever they think communism is is readily exclaimed upon without deeper thought as to the idea's implications, or further research into the writings of people who actually know what they're talking about in the realms of economics or philosophy. Basically, a kid not smart or serious enough to really think it through sees the words "equality", "brother-love", and "free lunch" and goes "yeah, communism, word dude!". Since the unintelligent are majorities in pretty much all age groups, and the non-serious are a majority in kids, you get lots of uninformed youth who follow that progression.

You haven't seen teenaged angst until you see them scratch a hammer and sickle onto their arm with a pen.

In my english class, there's a communist. But he's against welfare and he hates black people, so I don't really think he knows a whole lot about communism.

He's one funny bastard, though.

I have mentioned not a single communist leader.
No, but the way you talk about communism implies that you've studied the corrupt regimes of the past, not the idealist Thoreauesque version so many teenagers support. Real socialism won't necessarily turn out like the USSR.

Hey Sdae... nice analogy, but I have to say it's not exactly accurate. Political ideologies are intangible ideas and thus cannot be compared to tangible, concrete objects such as cities. Not that I'm disagreeing with you or anything.

Sure they can. Political ideologies can be given "physical" locations on a dimensional graph of political ideology. You know those two-axis graphs that we see? While the dots for Nazism and fascism might reside relatively close to one another, they would not be the same dot. Sort of like how the dots for Minneapolis and St. Paul are directly next to one another on a map, but not the same exact dot.

No shit, Sherlock.
Er.... my mistake, I meant "abstractions".

Edited and thanks for pointing it out.

In my english class, there's a communist. But he's against welfare and he hates black people, so I don't really think he knows a whole lot about communism.

He's one funny bastard, though.

oh yeah, my history class has a fascist commie who hates all Asians except for the Japanese (he's half jap). He's amusing as hell though when he goes on his military rants.

"What is it with teenaged communists?"

I suspect a goodly portion if it is a combination of the old sirein song of "from each according to his ability, to each according to his need," which sounds nice but doesn't work, and the old "something for nothing" myth. :rolleyes:

Yep, greed is definatly the primary driving force behind communism. I hate those greedy reds, always preaching about how "greed is good". Makes me sick to the stomach.

No, but the way you talk about communism implies that you've studied the corrupt regimes of the past, not the idealist Thoreauesque version so many teenagers support. Real socialism won't necessarily turn out like the USSR.

I am talking about present day communism, like Cuba.
Although some fools claim China is also communist, it's of course a ridiculous notion.

Sure they can. Political ideologies can be given "physical" locations on a dimensional graph of political ideology. You know those two-axis graphs that we see? While the dots for Nazism and fascism might reside relatively close to one another, they would not be the same dot. Sort of like how the dots for Minneapolis and St. Paul are directly next to one another on a map, but not the same exact dot.
Well, yeah. But political alignment can be measured in three dimensions (social, economic, moral), in four (social, economic, political, moral), and so on; whereas cities are kind of stuck on the ground.

Point taken, though.

No, but the way you talk about communism implies that you've studied the corrupt regimes of the past, not the idealist Thoreauesque version so many teenagers support. Real socialism won't necessarily turn out like the USSR.

Nor are those two the only options.

Sure they can. Political ideologies can be given "physical" locations on a dimensional graph of political ideology. You know those two-axis graphs that we see? While the dots for Nazism and fascism might reside relatively close to one another, they would not be the same dot. Sort of like how the dots for Minneapolis and St. Paul are directly next to one another on a map, but not the same exact dot.

I fail to see the difference between a leader running a country with discipline and violence to a leader running a country with discipline, violence and racism.

I am talking about present day communism, like Cuba.
Although some fools claim China is also communist, it's of course a ridiculous notion.
But the vast majority of young socialists and communists do not support present-day Cuba's political or social policies in the slightest. Cuba isn't a communist state, it's a semi-fascist authoritarian dictatorship that just happens to oppress the rich just as much as the poor.

I don't believe Communism will come to America. But socialism may find a home in the U.S. Of course, it will be a slow process and not an easy one.
This is true of any government. The legislation just keeps on passing laws and the government just keeps on swelling until a revolution happens. All countries end up in socialism, break down, and than are reborn again as unobtrusive states.

Nor are those two the only options.
True. However, they appear to be the most common viewpoints of socialism. I could be wrong; NS General is full of extremists after all.

This is true of any government. The legislation just keeps on passing laws and the government just keeps on swelling until a revolution happens. All countries end up in socialism, break down, and than are reborn again as unobtrusive states.

Oh god, don't start saying that.
You'll get the anarchist supporters all anxious that the government will fall and they can revert to their beloved barbaric societies.

I am talking about present day communism, like Cuba.

Cuba doesn't even call itself Communist. "Pseudo-socialist" is the best name I can think of for it; while the economy is not under the control of the people, it is nevertheless at least largely dedicated to meeting their needs.

I fail to see the difference between a leader running a country with discipline and violence to a leader running a country with discipline, violence and racism.

Judging by your posts, I'd say that that's not the only thing you fail at. The differences are mostly the manner in which the government reacts with the economy. Also, you made mention of one of the big differences. Nazi Germany and Franco's Spain had decidedly different domestic policies, didn't they?

Cuba doesn't even call itself Communist. "Pseudo-socialist" is the best name I can think of for it; while the economy is not under the control of the people, it is nevertheless at least largely dedicated to meeting their needs.

Cuba is the best example of modern communism.
Unless of course you want to start mixing communism into the pot with totalitarism in which case you could call alot of countries communist.

Judging by your posts, I'd say that that's not the only thing you fail at. The differences are mostly the manner in which the government reacts with the economy. Also, you made mention of one of the big differences. Nazi Germany and Franco's Spain had decidedly different domestic policies, didn't they?

You are turning it too specific.
Of course there will be different policies, the policies will change with every passing government - it is the concept that is the same.

You are turning it too specific.
Of course there will be different policies, the policies will change with every passing government - it is the concept that is the same.

How am I turning it too specific? They are universally defined as different forms of government. The concept isn't even the same.

You are turning it too specific.
Of course there will be different policies, the policies will change with every passing government - it is the concept that is the same.
Fast-moving threads are annoying.

Anyway, check the previous page for my response to your earlier posts.

How am I turning it too specific? They are universally defined as different forms of government. The concept isn't even the same.

Despite that this conversation has jumped off the original destination, like it always does in General.
Explain how they are different in concept.

Despite that this conversation has jumped off the original destination, like it always does in General.
Explain how they are different in concept.

Nazism differed from Fascism proper in the emphasis on the state's purpose in serving its national ideal on the basis of a national race, specifically the social engineering of culture to the ends of the greatest possible prosperity for German race at the expense of all else and all others. In contrast, Mussolini's Fascism held that cultural factors existed to serve the state, and that it wasn't necessarily in the state's interest to serve or engineer any of these particulars within its sphere. The only purpose of government under Fascism was to uphold the state as supreme above all else, and for these reasons it can be said to have been a governmental statolatry. Where Nazism spoke of "Volk", Fascism talked of "State".

While Nazism was a metapolitical ideology, seeing both party and government as a means to achieve an ideal condition for certain chosen people, fascism was a squarely anti-socialist form of statism that existed as an end in and of itself. The Nazi movement, at least in its overt ideology, spoke of class-based society as the enemy, and wanted to unify the racial element above established classes. The Fascist movement, on the other hand, sought to preserve the class system and uphold it as the foundation of established and desirable culture, although this is not to say that Fascists rejected the concept of social mobility. Indeed a central tenet of the Corporate State was meritocracy. This underlying theorem made the Fascists and National Socialists in the period between the two world wars sometimes see themselves and their respective political labels as at best partially exclusive of one another, and at worst diametrically opposed to one another. This seemed to be especially the case in 1934 when Engelbert Dollfuss the Austrofascist leader of Austria was assassinated by Nazi Brown shirts on Hitler's orders in preparation for a planned Anschluss, which prompted Mussolini to move troops to the Austrian-Italian border in readiness for war with Hitler.


This conversation has jumped from its original topic.

Oh I think I understand the difference in a broad view now.
Thanks.

Cuba is the best example of modern communism.

No, it's not. Even if we believe that Cuba is a thriving grass-roots democracy, as Castro claims, Cuba would be merely socialist, not communist.

The Kibbutz movement might have qualified.

Pulling this back on topic, I'll give this a try.

My guess it's a mixture of the utpoian idealism, and teenage rebellion.

The whole let's all be friendly and everything will be perfect here on Earth is a very powerful drug, just as good as a religion.

And I thought you were a social democrat.

You should see the looks on people's faces when I tell them that I'm a social democrat. Of course, it takes me several minutes to explain what the hell I'm talking about. People seem to have a hard time reconciling the fact that I fought in Iraq with my being a social democrat. They assume that I'm a Republican nationalist who hates the "towel-heads". And when I tell them that I speak French and want to move there, their heads explode.

What's with teenage commies?

The answer is fairly simple. Teenagers see themselves as disenfranchised, and therefore either create their own franchise (we call this kind preps, and they are, for the most part, mindless) or choose to join a movement to renfranchise themselves (this type tends to be pretty intelligent, if idealistic and dogmatic).

Not being a part of the system tends to make you want to fight against that system. It's just like middle aged land-owners tend to be much more conservative, to protect the system that they are firmly intrenched in.

They'll grow out of it, but then they'll just be more mindless 5 to 9 drones. Frankly, at time I prefer the commies.

or choose to join a movement to renfranchise themselves (this type tends to be pretty intelligent, if idealistic and dogmatic).

They are simply sheep who search for a shepard and seem to find it in the internet's seductionist appeal of communism.

Geeze, I guess you could call me one of those. I can read Russian, I can say like 7 words in Russian, I have a Ushanka with a soviet pin on it, and when I wear it people call me a Communist. Fair enough, I play along and call them a greedy capitalist pig. But am I really a Communist? HELL NO! Communism simply hasn't worked in the past, doesn't work now, and won't work in the future. At least I know the truth. So go ahead and call me a Commie. I'll just call you a greedy capitalist pig.

What's with teenage commies?

The answer is fairly simple. Teenagers see themselves as disenfranchised, and therefore either create their own franchise (we call this kind preps, and they are, for the most part, mindless) or choose to join a movement to renfranchise themselves (this type tends to be pretty intelligent, if idealistic and dogmatic).

Not being a part of the system tends to make you want to fight against that system. It's just like middle aged land-owners tend to be much more conservative, to protect the system that they are firmly intrenched in.

Best explanation so far.

Disenfranchised of the world, unite! Nous ne sommes rien, soyons tout.

Communist propoganda seems to shoot for boosting patriotism. Thats what I find so attractive anyway. I see hardly any patriotism in the Unites States anymore. mabe thats why people have commie flags tacked up in their garages

I see hardly any patriotism in the Unites States anymore.

I see it everywhere.

It is true that Soviet patriotic symbols tend to be better than ours; their national anthem, motto, and flag were all infinitely superior. And the heroic popular struggle against capitalist imperialism tends to move me more than the comparable US propaganda.

I see it everywhere.

It is true that Soviet patriotic symbols tend to be better than ours; their national anthem, motto, and flag were all infinitely superior. And the heroic popular struggle against capitalist imperialism tends to move me more than the comparable US propaganda.

I'll drink to that

I see it everywhere.

It is true that Soviet patriotic symbols tend to be better than ours; their national anthem, motto, and flag were all infinitely superior. And the heroic popular struggle against capitalist imperialism tends to move me more than the comparable US propaganda.

This is all very true.

Cuba doesn't even call itself Communist.

Am I missing some subtlety here: they call their head of state the First Secretary of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of Cuba. Would seem to suggest they do call themselves communist.

Am I missing some subtlety here: they call their head of state the First Secretary of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of Cuba. Would seem to suggest they do call themselves communist.

They call their party Communist, not their country. That is to say, they believe in Communism, and they are pursuing it, but they are still in the socialist stage.

They call their party Communist, not their country. That is to say, they believe in Communism, and they are pursuing it, but they are still in the socialist stage.

That's the subtlety I thought you might be driving at.

I'm an 18 year old democratic socialist

I'm a 15 year old democratic socialist

I can't choose which wing to slide towards anymore.
A few months ago I was wandering in the path of a right-winger.
However after working at a church I am starting to lean towards left-wing but then again I hate some of the liberal whining so..

I'm going to sit in the middle and throw rocks at both sides.

I can't choose which wing to slide towards anymore.
A few months ago I was wandering in the path of a right-winger.
However after working at a church I am starting to lean towards left-wing but then again I hate some of the liberal whining so..

I'm going to sit in the middle and throw rocks at both sides.

Bah, left and right is a false dichotomy. Even the 2 axis chart isn't completely accurate.

I'm an 18 year old democratic socialist

Me too.

Oh, so because i'm 19 I am not allowed to have political beliefs opposing the status quo, hey? Sigh.

Oh, by the way, I am an anarchist. Feel free to whip those rocks my way.

You're blaming Cuba for the trade embargo the US has put on it, preventing it from importing modern automobiles?
Are you suggesting communist nations suck because the US cripples them economically?!

What's your point? Neither are Minneapolis and St. Paul. Doesn't make them the same city.

A-f*cking-men to that.

St Paul is far superior to Mpls. :p

I can't choose which wing to slide towards anymore.
A few months ago I was wandering in the path of a right-winger.
However after working at a church I am starting to lean towards left-wing but then again I hate some of the liberal whining so..

I'm going to sit in the middle and throw rocks at both sides.
Why don't you forget the semantics of the left/right debate? Proclaim yourself a centrist and operate instead off logic, picking the logical ideas of both sides, and discarding the rest.

Why don't you forget the semantics of the left/right debate? Proclaim yourself a centrist and operate instead off logic, picking the logical ideas of both sides, and discarding the rest.

Um, that's what every rational person does. We just disagree on what's logical and what's moral.

Um, that's what every rational person does. We just disagree on what's logical and what's moral.

Mmmhm. But we're not within the political mainstream, so we must be insane and totally irrational. Duh.

Mmmhm. But we're not within the political mainstream, so we must be insane and totally irrational. Duh.

Like those people who thought slavery and genocide were wrong. How insane.

Mmmhm. But we're not within the political mainstream, so we must be insane and totally irrational. Duh.

well obviously. why don't you just surrender and join the groupthink consensus of politics. 'cause all those people can't possibly all just be wrong.

Like those people who thought slavery and genocide were wrong. How insane.

fuckin' loonies, them. i heard they even had this one guy who was so crazy that he thought that the 'problem' of slavery was so dire that he had to take up arms against it, because to not do so was an evil. total nutter.

Well, the prefrontal lobe isn’t fully developed until you’re in your early twenties, so I guess on some level their lack of reasoning is excusable.

Well, I for one blame that rock 'n' roll music and those darn videogames. Corrupting the youth, and planting these subversive ideas!

And Kevin Costner... Damn you, Kevin Costner! :mad:

Well, I for one blame that rock 'n' roll music and those darn videogames. Corrupting the youth, and planting these subversive ideas!

And Kevin Costner... Damn you, Kevin Costner! :mad:
Nah Costner is the anti-Commie.I blame Chuck Norris.

Why don't you forget the semantics of the left/right debate? Proclaim yourself a centrist and operate instead off logic, picking the logical ideas of both sides, and discarding the rest.

Because in the society I live in, it is either black or white (Pun seeing as how there are fewer than 1000/70,000 black people in this town)
Right or Left

It is obviously a rebel thing just like Johnny Cash with his Black shirts.

It is obviously a rebel thing just like Johnny Cash with his Black shirts.

That man was a sin on earth, black clothes, black sunglasses, he dressed in the Lord's appeal for a funeral! For shame Cash!

Teenaged Communists=Weren't Breastfed by their mothers.

This post isn't directed entirely at anyone in particular but Naliitr sparked that annoyance I had in my head on Friday.
In my Civics class I have two communists - each of them fits into a hilarious stereotype, one being the nerdy type who is infatuated with Russian history, the other being some crazy obnoxious neo-nazi who doesn't even understand the concepts which he announces his faith to each day.

Why do teenagers think calling themselves a communist supporter is some sort of new 'cool'?

I am not bashing communism, it does work - see Cuba, they have a great time.
I am scratching my head as to why people seem to love it so much, there is 0% chance a capitalist will ever become a communist because.

1. Neo-nazi's aren't communists. Neither are people who are infautuated with Russian history.

2. I promote communism because communism allows everyone to have an equal chance in life, and it prevents war, poverty (unless everyone's lazy), and there's free health care! Not because it's "cool"

3. According to Karl Marx himself, a country must first be capitalist in order for the communist revolution to begin. (Paraphrased)

Best explanation so far.

Disenfranchised of the world, unite! Nous ne sommes rien, soyons tout.

Been there. Done that. Realized that people suck too much foir it to ever be practical or good for people.

Does that make me more or less disenfranchised?

prevents war, poverty (unless everyone's lazy),
Lazyness FTW!

And no, I am not going to go through this entire thread reading the responses. Oh, and yes I do hate kids who do communism because they think it's "cool" or because it's "anti-american! and I hate america!" It's anti-capitalist, not anti-american. And what is with this whole "hating america makes me cool!" thing?

Like those people who thought slavery and genocide were wrong. How insane.

well obviously. why don't you just surrender and join the groupthink consensus of politics. 'cause all those people can't possibly all just be wrong.


*snort* :p

While I have no real opinions about Communism, I really think it is stupid alot of kids think communism is cool, If you asked a person about the history of communism, Karl Marx, and Lenin, they probably wouldn't know much, or very VERY basic history about them, that almost everyone would know, though their are some that probably know a little bit more then the rest of them.

While I have no real opinions about Communism, I really think it is stupid alot of kids think communism is cool, If you asked a person about the history of communism, Karl Marx, and Lenin, they probably wouldn't know much, or very VERY basic history about them, that almost everyone would know, though their are some that probably know a little bit more then the rest of them.
I know a few other communists at my school. I quiz them when ever I come into contact with them. "QUICK! WHO IS KARL MARX!" "Umm.... A guy named Karl Marx?"

Because young people are one of the most shat on groups it is unsuprising that they look towards a political ideology that holds equality at its core for answers. Shit pay, shit jobs, patronising attitudes from older people, lack of legal rights, etc. is it really any wonder why the kids are turning more and more left?

Also the general tendency of teenagers to be left-wing may come from all the messages their parents gave them as youngsters which are still left in their minds- sharing, helping people, not being judgemental, being kind. Maybe all these thoughts contribute. But hey, what do I know? I'm a teenage communist.

well obviously. why don't you just surrender and join the groupthink consensus of politics. 'cause all those people can't possibly all just be wrong.

Oh they can. More than Half of the U.S. thought Slavery was right.

Because young people are one of the most shat on groups it is unsuprising that they look towards a political ideology that holds equality at its core for answers. Shit pay, shit jobs, patronising attitudes from older people, lack of legal rights, etc. is it really any wonder why the kids are turning more and more left?

Also the general tendency of teenagers to be left-wing may come from all the messages their parents gave them as youngsters which are still left in their minds- sharing, helping people, not being judgemental, being kind. Maybe all these thoughts contribute. But hey, what do I know? I'm a teenage communist.


The most shat on group? How about the poor, the needy, those without a voice. And older people being patronising? Good Lord! To the barricades my brothers, because I'm sick of Mom telling me to tidy my room and Dad is going on about how I should get a job. Youth of the world unite, you have nothing to lose but your lack of getting any job other than a paper round.

My God, it's like the political ideology of an Avril Lavigne song, only thrice as irritating.

Uncle Noel doesn't know what he's talking about.
Teenagers tend to be communists, because they tend to be idealists. I was a communist until 10th grade, when I became totally disillusioned. And now I'm a cynical old bastard, at age 16. :(

Oh they can. More than Half of the U.S. thought Slavery was right.

That was kinda his point. He was being sarcastic.

Uncle Noel doesn't know what he's talking about.
Teenagers tend to be communists, because they tend to be idealists. I was a communist until 10th grade, when I became totally disillusioned. And now I'm a cynical old bastard, at age 16. :(

As was I, but now I'm a grumphy old bastard aged 21.

Why do you think socialism in the US would be equivalent to authoritarian Leninist/Stalinist "socialism" in underdeveloped countries?

socialism is, in general, less effecient than capitalism. There are much bigger incentives for companies competing against other companies to discover the most efficient means of doing things. There are reasons the US has so much economic power.

Not that we aren't worried about the entire Leninist/Stalinist thing, but compare our economy's rate of growth to say... france...

In any system involving energy, every time you have a conversion, you're loosing something. Money is a bit more like weed though. Every set of hands it passes though between the producer and the consumer takes a little bit out of the bag.

in addition, in general with government, the more money you give it the more you're asking someone along the line to mis-spend it. if someone is going to misspend your money, shouldn't it be you?

Because Communism seems alot better than the world paved by the generations before: Dog-eat-dog, no compassion, lying, cheating, stealing...

Speaking as a "yoof", I must be quite rare in never having gone through the communist phase. I remember when it was first mentioned to me (around age 12) it did sound vaguely attractive, but then I asked that fatal question: If you are guaranteed a standard of living, why go out to work?

Gets them every time :D

Originally Posted by Liberated New Ireland
Uncle Noel doesn't know what he's talking about.
Teenagers tend to be communists, because they tend to be idealists. I was a communist until 10th grade, when I became totally disillusioned. And now I'm a cynical old bastard, at age 16.

As was I, but now I'm a grumphy old bastard aged 21.

I see the youth are getting smarter FASTER these days. VERY encouraging..!

And as Castilla noted:
..but then I asked that fatal question: If you are guaranteed a standard of living, why go out to work?

Youth tend to WANT as much for free as possible (which is their definition
of "freedom" by the way), which is really just the infantile "suckling" instinct
taken beyond it's natural limits (the "dry" teet).

This want for "freedom" (their definition) manifests itself in the desire to
create a "super teet" that never runs dry.

Those who realize that once the "real teet" has run dry they must "work" to
tap into "that which keeps the body and mind functioning" (some energy
stream), which is whatever "stuff" (currency) is available that supplies food
(wealth) for continuing survival and prosperity.

These people create the "milk" that the infantile (communists) see as the
target of their "right" to "freedom" (to "suck for free").

Why do the infantile (communists) always degenerate into slave drivers of
some unfortunate mass of humanity? Into cranky and abusive infants who
bully others (most notably their parents) with tears and noise and bowls of
food thrown at the walls?

Because that's what spoiled children do, and the blame is more appropriately
placed on the parents of these infants (communists) than on the infants
themselves.


-Clamato, "..what a FREAKY idea..!"

Because Communism seems alot better than the world paved by the generations before: Dog-eat-dog, no compassion, lying, cheating, stealing...

"..SEEMS.."

Don't you just LOVE that word..!



-Clamato, "..what a FREAKY idea..!"

When I was a dumb little kid in high school, I was infatuated with communism.

Not anymore though, not since i grew up.

To my everlasting credit, I stopped being an 'anarchist' after middle-school.

Speaking as a "yoof", I must be quite rare in never having gone through the communist phase. I remember when it was first mentioned to me (around age 12) it did sound vaguely attractive, but then I asked that fatal question: If you are guaranteed a standard of living, why go out to work?

Gets them every time :D
(Hardly communist but) 1918 RSFSR Constitution:
"He who does not work shall not eat"

Ta daa!

Umm you can move to a communist country, A relative of mine, born in america, moved to communist Russia.

I'm 18. The reason many teenagers are communists is because they are inescapably stupid. I see it all the time. I don't know if you should blame the schools, the parents, the teens themselves, or some combination of factors, but for all the factual knowledge teens have these days, they also experience a severe lack of sense and historical perspective. Most people are willfully stupid, and that frightens and disappoints me.

Teenage Communism is perhaps best exemplified by the Che t-shirts manufactured in Thailand sweat shops.

When I was a dumb little kid in high school, I was infatuated with communism.

Not anymore though, not since i grew up.

To my everlasting credit, I stopped being an 'anarchist' after middle-school.

I'm 18. The reason many teenagers are communists is because they are inescapably stupid. I see it all the time. I don't know if you should blame the schools, the parents, the teens themselves, or some combination of factors, but for all the factual knowledge teens have these days, they also experience a severe lack of sense and historical perspective. Most people are willfully stupid, and that frightens and disappoints me.

Teenage Communism is perhaps best exemplified by the Che t-shirts manufactured in Thailand sweat shops.

WOW..!!! :)

I'm SO impressed with how many actual adults are in here these days..!!

Damn..!! It feels wonderful. I'm just GIDDY with new hope for the planet..!

We DO, though, need to hear more from the infantile folk out there
(communists) as to why communism is such a wonderful idea that should be
clung to after the naivete of youth subsides...


-Clamato, "..what a FREAKY idea..!"

Teenage Communism is perhaps best exemplified by the Che t-shirts manufactured in Thailand sweat shops.

Yes, because all of us wear those :rolleyes:

Sadly Thatche T-shirts don't seem to have the same kind of social cachet...

Yes, because all of us wear those :rolleyes:

ex·em·pli·fy

tr.v. ex·em·pli·fied, ex·em·pli·fy·ing, ex·em·pli·fies

1.
1. To illustrate by example:

Originally Posted by Castilla la Vieja
Speaking as a "yoof", I must be quite rare in never having gone through the communist phase. I remember when it was first mentioned to me (around age 12) it did sound vaguely attractive, but then I asked that fatal question: If you are guaranteed a standard of living, why go out to work?

Gets them every time

(Hardly communist but) 1918 RSFSR Constitution:
"He who does not work shall not eat"

Ta daa!

A slaver eats because he "works" at enslaving slaves.

A slave eats because his slavers MAKE him "work" to keep him alive to slave.

They follow your rule above perfectly correctly. "He who does not work does
not eat".


"We pretend to work, and they pretend to pay us..." Thus, the inevitable
destruction of all communist states.


-Clamato, "..what a FREAKY idea..!"

ex·em·pli·fy

tr.v. ex·em·pli·fied, ex·em·pli·fy·ing, ex·em·pli·fies

1.
1. To illustrate by example:

Awww, look, he's treating me like an idiot. Isn't that cute?

Sigh.

I should become a teenage objectivist. At least then I wouldn't have to worry about people taking me seriously, because it'd be doomed from the word go.

Urmm well seeing as you actually want to know why a lot of teenagers support communism -



It's basically the ultimate example of human kindness.

It isn't nationalistic (I hate nationalists, by the way, no group of people are "better" than the other and those who claim otherwise on grounds like "OMG ISLAM IS R SUCK!!1 THEY EAT CrISTIAN BABYS!1" or whatever are fools)

If it was put into practise properly then it would do the whole world a favour.

Following on from that point, economics wouldn't really be a problem if the whole world took it up, as there'd be no use for money.

Healthcare, education and general social welfare would improve because being helpful would be better rewarded than earning lots of money at the expense of the weak.



But on the other hand, I know full-well that communism will never really work in real life, simply because most people have no interest in helping others when they have interests of their own.

And actually, a lot of teenagers who buy Che t-shirts don't have the slightest idea about what he did, but think that he's 'cool' because he was a rebel who died young.

Which is a bit rubbish really.

Possibly if they knew what he did then they either wouldn't buy the t-shirts of a murderer, or would realise that making money for people by buying a 'communist' t-shirt is amazingly ironic.

Awww, look, he's treating me like an idiot. Isn't that cute?

Sigh.

Act and ye shall receive.

I didn't say "every single teenage communist on the planet wears Che t-shirts" and you know it.

I should become a teenage objectivist. At least then I wouldn't have to worry about people taking me seriously, because it'd be doomed from the word go.

Score against teenage objectivism!

I hope you don't think that's what I am though.

Score against teenage objectivism!

I hope you don't think that's what I am though.
Wait, are you suggesting that there is some other alternative? I thought that all people were either Randian assholes or Communist losers.

Wait, are you suggesting that there is some other alternative? I thought that all people were either Randian assholes or Communist losers.

No,.. some are actually asshole losers.

In fact, most assholes ARE losers,.. and most losers ARE assholes.

Which camp are YOU rooting for..? :)



-Clamato, "..what a FREAKY idea..!"

No,.. some are actually asshole losers.

In fact, most assholes ARE losers,.. and most losers ARE assholes.

Which camp are YOU rooting for..? :)



-Clamato, "..what a FREAKY idea..!"
But all the asshole losers must still be divided into COMMUNISM or OBJECTIVISM, right? I mean, we're all clear on the fact that everybody has to pick one or the other, right?

But all the asshole losers must still be divided into COMMUNISM or OBJECTIVISM, right? I mean, we're all clear on the fact that everybody has to pick one or the other, right?

Well it has to be either/or SOMEhow. If not communism/objectivism, then liberal/conservative, democrat/republican or left/right. MUST HAVE DICHOTOMY!

Oh, joy, a thread about communism being argued against by people who don't know what it is.

Sheesh, if you're going to argue against it, try learning about it first.

With that said, people who latch onto something because it's trendy, or because it's anti-trendy (and being anti-trendy is trendy) are obnoxious.

Well it has to be either/or SOMEhow. If not communism/objectivism, then liberal/conservative, democrat/republican or left/right. MUST HAVE DICHOTOMY!

Well naturally. You see, like most people, I can only comprehend one philosophical position: Mine.

I am also able to comprehend that some people disagree with me, so their philosophy is Not Mine. Not Mine is the opposite of Mine. These are the only possible philosophies.

Oh, joy, a thread about communism being argued against by people who don't know what it is.

Sheesh, if you're going to argue against it, try learning about it first.

With that said, people who latch onto something because it's trendy, or because it's anti-trendy (and being anti-trendy is trendy) are obnoxious.

Aye, very true.

YEAH! ANARCHISM!!! I THINK WE'RE SMASHING THE ANCIENT CAPITALIST BONDS THAT ARE HOLDING US DOWN OR SOMETHING!

BUT GREEN DAY SUPPORT IT, WHATEVER IT IS, SO IT MUST BE KEWL!!1!

Well it has to be either/or SOMEhow. If not communism/objectivism, then liberal/conservative, democrat/republican or left/right. MUST HAVE DICHOTOMY!

MUST or MUST NOT have dichotomy, surely?

This post isn't directed entirely at anyone in particular but Naliitr sparked that annoyance I had in my head on Friday.
In my Civics class I have two communists - each of them fits into a hilarious stereotype, one being the nerdy type who is infatuated with Russian history, the other being some crazy obnoxious neo-nazi who doesn't even understand the concepts which he announces his faith to each day.

Why do teenagers think calling themselves a communist supporter is some sort of new 'cool'?

I am not bashing communism, it does work - see Cuba, they have a great time.
I am scratching my head as to why people seem to love it so much, there is 0% chance a capitalist will ever become a communist because, oh yes, you can't move to a communist country!

So why does every acne-infested teenager seem to think communism is their destiny? They will never be apart of it and if they ever got the chance, they would probably leave in under a week. Cars hardly exist in communistic countries, it is all about the 'public transport' trucks that stuff a bunch of sweaty workers in together for long periods of travelling. People don't have access to the wonders of capitalism in communism. I am guessing the angsty teens think the government will hold their hand through life in communism and they never have to do any work, think again, it is far worse than capitalism for work-loads in communism. Get rich or die trying, hah! Not unless you're a tour guide I suppose.

And if I ever, ever, ever see anybody saying "I'm an anarchy supporter!" I shall whip multiple rocks at them.

Thanks for your extremely unbiased narrative. I can see you really don't have a strong political view. I can also see that you have a clear understanding of the reasons why people might turn left during their teenage years.

a man who at 16 isnt a liberal has no heart, a man whom isnt a conservative at 60 has no head ......

why cant we all remain idealist teenagers rather than grow up accepting that there is nothing we can do but strive for selffish self preservation ...

wow .... i wish i was peter pan, and you sir are captain hook

The problem I have with communism is a part of Marx's writing where it roughly says that, in a communist society, a man can be whatever he want to be. He can be a fisherman in the morning, a plumber in the afternoon and an expert on butterflies in the evening.

I'm fine with that, except who will feed me? I just can't imagine a whole load of people waking up and saying 'Today.....I'll be a farmer again.' If you could say, Noel- you can either be a farmer and work very hard growing crops.......or an artist, I know what I'd pick.

Since i recently turned 20, i can legitimately utter the infuriating and ultimately auto-rejected theory that teenagers are stupid.

Teenaged Communists=Weren't Breastfed by their mothers.


youre right, I was breastfed by my father

The problem I have with communism is a part of Marx's writing where it roughly says that, in a communist society, a man can be whatever he want to be. He can be a fisherman in the morning, a plumber in the afternoon and an expert on butterflies in the evening.

I'm fine with that, except who will feed me? I just can't imagine a whole load of people waking up and saying 'Today.....I'll be a farmer again.' If you could say, Noel- you can either be a farmer and work very hard growing crops.......or an artist, I know what I'd pick.


feed yourself .....

The most shat on group? How about the poor, the needy, those without a voice. And older people being patronising? Good Lord! To the barricades my brothers, because I'm sick of Mom telling me to tidy my room and Dad is going on about how I should get a job. Youth of the world unite, you have nothing to lose but your lack of getting any job other than a paper round.

My God, it's like the political ideology of an Avril Lavigne song, only thrice as irritating.

See. these attitudes create people like me.

See. these attitudes create people like me.

I thought underlying social inequalities imposed by the capitalist hiearchy created people like you. :)

Why do all you guys think communist teens are:

1. Stupid
2. Ignorant
3. Bored
4. Combination of the three?

I agree however that teens are more idealistic, and once they get a job they forget all their "sins" from their youth.

I ensure you all that I'm a teen and a communist, that I'm not stupid, I know what horrendous crimes were/are being commited in the USSR/North Korea and that I'm certainly not bored.

Yay to me!:fluffle:

I thought underlying social inequalities imposed by the capitalist hiearchy created people like you. :)

We need to smash the bourgoise and their notions of pocket money and getting grounded for doing anything irresponsible!

VIVA LA REVOLUTION!

Or something...

feed yourself .....

Hardly a spirit of fraternal unity, though, is it? Because if you fed yourself, then I suppose you could exchange your grain for goods and services. And after that, you could all agree that when you exchanged stuff you'd have a common medium say, um, money.

And then what do you know, steel mills and terrace housing.

The most shat on group? How about the poor, the needy, those without a voice. And older people being patronising? Good Lord! To the barricades my brothers, because I'm sick of Mom telling me to tidy my room and Dad is going on about how I should get a job. Youth of the world unite, you have nothing to lose but your lack of getting any job other than a paper round.

My God, it's like the political ideology of an Avril Lavigne song, only thrice as irritating.

How about the fact that we're not concious enough to be able to vote, but we are concious enough to be tried as an adult in court. I don't think D'homme was talking about parents asking him to tidy his room. I think he was talking about the government forcing us to behave in a certain way without asking our opinion or taking our complaints seriously.

I thought underlying social inequalities imposed by the capitalist hiearchy created people like you. :)

Nope. Not in the slightest.

We need to smash the bourgoise and their notions of pocket money and getting grounded for doing anything irresponsible!

VIVA LA REVOLUTION!

Or something...

Being grounded is a demonstration of the middle class perversion in regards to money. There is no morality that is abstracted from the means of production. Only when the youth seize the means of production can they free themselves of the bourgeoise and the capitalist system.

Though they shouldn't operate heavy machinery, of course, as they might hurt themselves.

Other than that, to the barricades my brothers and sisters! The Peoples' Flag is stained in the blood of the martyrs!

How about the fact that we're not concious enough to be able to vote, but we are concious enough to be tried as an adult in court. I don't think D'homme was talking about parents asking him to tidy his room. I think he was talking about the government forcing us to behave in a certain way without asking our opinion or taking our complaints seriously.

I know. We call it 'irony'.

Even when I was sixteen I didn't think that the vote should be lowered to my age. Not when the majority of conservations involved scenarios such as 'who would win in a fight between a tiger and a bear?'

Its the bear of course.

Nope. Not in the slightest.

Then I can only assume we're both wrong, and insemination is to blame.

I know. We call it 'irony'.

Even when I was sixteen I didn't think that the vote should be lowered to my age. Not when the majority of conservations involved scenarios such as 'who would win in a fight between a tiger and a bear?'

Its the bear of course.

That's odd, because I have quite a large group of friends who have political interests. True, not all teenagers want to vote, but not all adults want to vote either. It's not as though one reaches the age of 18 and suddenly becomes politically aware.

Then I can only assume we're both wrong, and insemination is to blame.

Agreed. Damn insemination.

Agreed. Damn insemination.

It should be made a controlled substance! Possession or distribution of which should be a felony!

Here's a suggestive emoticon.
:gundge:

I'm an anarchy supporter!
Why? What is anarchy?

Why? What is anarchy?

The notion that organised government is to blame and that people should have complete freed in their lives to weave wicker chairs and such.

or overturning cars.

Been there. Done that. Realized that people suck too much foir it to ever be practical or good for people.

Does that make me more or less disenfranchised?

It makes you just as disenfranchised as you were before, just more cynical.

My cynicism doesn't interfere with my support for socialism for a number of basic reasons:

1. People suck even more when they rule or are ruled.
2. If people rule themselves, they have only themselves to blame if they mess up.
3. When people are more or less equal, each individual's corruption balances out every other individual's corruption.

Why? What is anarchy?

Ask the Sex Pistols.

socialism is, in general, less effecient than capitalism. There are much bigger incentives for companies competing against other companies to discover the most efficient means of doing things. There are reasons the US has so much economic power.

In an accountable socialist system, the population controls the economy, and thus can encourage efficiency through simple democratic means. Furthermore, there is absolutely no reason why competition could not exist in a socialist economy.

Not that we aren't worried about the entire Leninist/Stalinist thing, but compare our economy's rate of growth to say... france...

France is not socialist.

In any system involving energy, every time you have a conversion, you're loosing something. Money is a bit more like weed though. Every set of hands it passes though between the producer and the consumer takes a little bit out of the bag.

in addition, in general with government, the more money you give it the more you're asking someone along the line to mis-spend it. if someone is going to misspend your money, shouldn't it be you?

I don't believe I've advocated statism anywhere.

Why? What is anarchy?

A system lacking a centralized state, that is to say, one without a ruling class of government officials and a coercive enforcement system of the police and military.

Why? Because even if human beings are worthless contemptible savages, giving some worthless contemptible savages undue power over the other worthless contemptible savages is no solution.

If human beings are not worthless contemptible savages, then it is tyranny to treat them as if they were.

Ask the Sex Pistols.

The Sex Pistols weren't even really talking about governmental anarchy when they wrote "Anarchy in the UK". The song actually talks about personal anarchy and the rejection of outside codes, not the destruction of government itself. To be fair, it was a bit of a piss-take too.

While I do agree that most communist teenagers are blatan idiots who dont know waht the fuck theyr'e talking about (like my friend Leah who runs around screaming about hte triumpuh of socialism, yet bashes anarchy), there are a select few, such as myself, who've actually red the Manifesto and toher works of Marx and know what we're talking about.

Yep I see a whole line of people just begging to go back to living under Communist rule .

The only communist I know live in a Democracy . I know NO ONE who lived under communism that thinks it was a good thing or even that it should exist .
In fact the most vocal COMMUNIST seem to be those that never have lived under Communist rule ...strange is it not ? All those Poles and Germans and Russians and Bulgarians and Romanians ukaranians etc. etc. ad nauseum...you see them all out screaming for a return to the GOOD OLD DAYS ???

Yep I see a whole line of people just begging to go back to living under Communist rule .

The only communist I know live in a Democracy . I know NO ONE who lived under communism that thinks it was a good thing or even that it should exist .
In fact the most vocal COMMUNIST seem to be those that never have lived under Communist rule ...strange is it not ? All those Poles and Germans and Russians and Bulgarians and Romanians ukaranians etc. etc. ad nauseum...you see them all out screaming for a return to the GOOD OLD DAYS ???


Actually....


they do. A lot of Eastern European nations have strong communist party support.

*Sigh* stalinists, they suprise us all sometimes.

Actually....


they do. A lot of Eastern European nations have strong communist party support.

*Sigh* stalinists, they suprise us all sometimes.

I don't think the reformed Communist parties of Eastern Europe are comparable to the Stalinist parties from which they emerged. If they are elected they are not going to go about dismissing parliaments and cracking down on dissent.

In some ways, the collapse of the Soviet Union was very good for the Left; it shook every pro-Soviet party on the planet, making them acknowledge that grievous errors were made and leading them to reaffirm their support for democracy and civil liberties. Admittedly, it also tended to dampen their radicalism, but enough of this neoliberal nonsense, combined with all the resource and environmental problems we have lurking in the background, and that may well change.

Yep I see a whole line of people just begging to go back to living under Communist rule .

The only communist I know live in a Democracy . I know NO ONE who lived under communism that thinks it was a good thing or even that it should exist .
In fact the most vocal COMMUNIST seem to be those that never have lived under Communist rule ...strange is it not ? All those Poles and Germans and Russians and Bulgarians and Romanians ukaranians etc. etc. ad nauseum...you see them all out screaming for a return to the GOOD OLD DAYS ???

Why would anyone in their right mind want to go back to the "good ol' days" of authoritarian state-captialist rule? Please, don't confuse a degenerated workers state with a communist nation, for th elove of God!

I'm not a commie, I'm a social democrat.

and btw...

NDP! NDP! NDP!.... :D

Why would anyone in their right mind want to go back to the "good ol' days" of authoritarian state-captialist rule? Please, don't confuse a degenerated workers state with a communist nation, for th elove of God!

Calling the Soviet Union both a degenerate worker's state and state capitalist could get you in trouble in some circles. The two theories are contradictory.

This post isn't directed entirely at anyone in particular but Naliitr sparked that annoyance I had in my head on Friday.
In my Civics class I have two communists - each of them fits into a hilarious stereotype, one being the nerdy type who is infatuated with Russian history, the other being some crazy obnoxious neo-nazi who doesn't even understand the concepts which he announces his faith to each day.

Why do teenagers think calling themselves a communist supporter is some sort of new 'cool'?

I am not bashing communism, it does work - see Cuba, they have a great time.
I am scratching my head as to why people seem to love it so much, there is 0% chance a capitalist will ever become a communist because, oh yes, you can't move to a communist country!

So why does every acne-infested teenager seem to think communism is their destiny? They will never be apart of it and if they ever got the chance, they would probably leave in under a week. Cars hardly exist in communistic countries, it is all about the 'public transport' trucks that stuff a bunch of sweaty workers in together for long periods of travelling. People don't have access to the wonders of capitalism in communism. I am guessing the angsty teens think the government will hold their hand through life in communism and they never have to do any work, think again, it is far worse than capitalism for work-loads in communism. Get rich or die trying, hah! Not unless you're a tour guide I suppose.

And if I ever, ever, ever see anybody saying "I'm an anarchy supporter!" I shall whip multiple rocks at them.
Oh, the angst, oh, the angst! *sigh*

I agree with you on all of the above except for the small part on anarchy. I have a view of (yes this may seem like a contradiction) controlled anarchy. Controlled anarchy is where there is a like 10 person elected government that has minimal controll over people... The government is only there to deal with other countries and stuff if you see what I mean... Other than that I think that people can govern them selves. but yea... It is only an idea at this point... I am hoping to put together some senarios soon and look to see if it would actully work... I havn't put much thinking into it at this point but yea...

I'm not a commie, I'm a social democrat.

and btw...

NDP! NDP! NDP!.... :D
Hey numb nuts socialism is the ugly little bro. of communism... There is basicly no difference except that you are too afraid to actually say you are a commie... :gundge:

Hey numb nuts socialism is the ugly little bro. of communism... There is basicly no difference except that you are too afraid to actually say you are a commie... :gundge:Um, are you from Canada or you're just a little retard from Texas?

Yes they're both socialist parties but how can Communism = NDP?

Hey numb nuts socialism is the ugly little bro. of communism... There is basicly no difference except that you are too afraid to actually say you are a commie... :gundge:

Your indepth analysis of the economic/political spectrum is astounding.....

Oh, the angst, oh, the angst! *sigh*

I agree with you on all of the above except for the small part on anarchy. I have a view of (yes this may seem like a contradiction) controlled anarchy. Controlled anarchy is where there is a like 10 person elected government that has minimal controll over people... The government is only there to deal with other countries and stuff if you see what I mean... Other than that I think that people can govern them selves. but yea... It is only an idea at this point... I am hoping to put together some senarios soon and look to see if it would actully work... I havn't put much thinking into it at this point but yea...

Yes, I am sure people could easily maintain their electricity, heat, food and health by themselves.

Your indepth analysis of the economic/political spectrum is astounding.....
I'm too board too start something that indepth but aside from one or two SMALL differences they are basically the same. I pay attention to politics, so I am about 80% sure of what I am talking about... Show me where I am wrong. I don't mind learning something new about commies and socies...

so I am about 80% sure of what I am talking about...68% to be exact.

68% to be exact.

Jesus built the first robot.

Calling the Soviet Union both a degenerate worker's state and state capitalist could get you in trouble in some circles. The two theories are contradictory.

Fromt he way I was told, and from my general understanding of both theories, I figured they meant the same thing.

Jesus built the first robot.LMAO!

Yes, I am sure people could easily maintain their electricity, heat, food and health by themselves.ok I will admit that I did not finish my thoughts but that is where the limited control from the government comes in. they don't make laws but they do follow what the people want. So if they want electricity the governments job is to rally enough people to get the job done. If enough people want it they will build it... Again this is all still being theorized by me and some of my friends so don't get pissy with me about it please.

I'm too board too start something that indepth but aside from one or two SMALL differences they are basically the same. I pay attention to politics, so I am about 80% sure of what I am talking about... Show me where I am wrong. I don't mind learning something new about commies and socies...


*sigh*
Fine.

Taking that the Soviet Union was Communist.(Hell, I'll even let you pick the era of leadership) Compare and contrast the old USSR with modern Scandinavian countries or the British Labour govt's of the late 1990's, early 2000's.

There alone is your difference both economically and politically.

*sigh*
Fine.

Taking that the Soviet Union was Communist.(Hell, I'll even let you pick the era of leadership) Compare and contrast the old USSR with modern Scandinavian countries or the British Labour govt's of the late 1990's, early 2000's.

There alone is your difference both economically and politically.
ok, ok valid point... I once again made one of my famouse blanket statements...

revision: socilist who all seem to want the government to take care of them with medicare and other services that would actually be easier and cheaper to get if they whent and got it for themselves...

Do you understand what group I am getting at? There is an increasingly thin line between socialist democrats in America and commies.. We are not absolutly there yet but soon we will be.

I'm too board too start something that indepth but aside from one or two SMALL differences they are basically the same. I pay attention to politics, so I am about 80% sure of what I am talking about... Show me where I am wrong. I don't mind learning something new about commies and socies...

Lots of different ways of looking at it. There is no coherent line that can be drawn.

I sometimes identify as communist rather than socialist for a number of reasons:

1. Because too many so-called "democratic socialists" are no longer socialists at all, prefering "reformed" capitalism. Most of the parties in the Socialist International are so, for instance.
2. Because in Western Europe, which to me is the political center of the world, I would probably vote with the Eurocommunist or Trotskyist parties and not with the Socialists (which plays into (1)).
3. Because I reject a centralized state apparatus and general statist reformism (except as a lesser evil), preferring decentralized worker's councils.
4. Because I believe, once socialist society has been established, that a great effort should be made to make labor as pleasurable and uncoerced as possible, and that this should involve, as much as is practical, the partial separation of material gain from it.
5. Because on the whole I am on the hard left of today's left. Which isn't saying all that much.

On the other hand, there are is one major distinction that could be drawn which does not apply to me:

1. Communists support armed revolution, socialists do not. This was the original point of contention between the Communist parties and the Socialist parties, sparked by the October Revolution in Russia.

Lots of different ways of looking at it. There is no coherent line that can be drawn.

I sometimes identify as communist rather than socialist for a number of reasons:

1. Because too many so-called "democratic socialists" are no longer socialists at all, prefering "reformed" capitalism. Most of the parties in the Socialist International are so, for instance.
2. Because in Western Europe, which to me is the political center of the world, I would probably vote with the Eurocommunist or Trotskyist parties and not with the Socialists (which plays into (1)).
3. Because I reject a centralized state apparatus and general statist reformism (except as a lesser evil), preferring decentralized worker's councils.
4. Because I believe, once socialist society has been established, that a great effort should be made to make labor as pleasurable and uncoerced as possible, and that this should involve, as much as is practical, the partial separation of material gain from it.
5. Because on the whole I am on the hard left of today's left. Which isn't saying all that much.

On the other hand, there are is one major distinction that could be drawn which does not apply to me:

1. Communists support armed revolution, socialists do not. This was the original point of contention between the Communist parties and the Socialist parties, sparked by the October Revolution in Russia.
Ok you have my complete and utter respect for actually clarifying the things I was trying to say.

Only difference:
I come at this from a capitalist point of view... communism restricts me too much...

Fromt he way I was told, and from my general understanding of both theories, I figured they meant the same thing.

DHomme, because of his Trotskyist affiliations, can undoubtedly give you a better explanation than I can, but here's an attempt:

A degenerate worker's state is a worker's state that has been corrupted by the bureaucracy. Dialectically, it is still a worker's state, a step forward from capitalism, and as such it deserves certain kinds of support, but nevertheless another revolution is necessary to restore the full political power of the working class and make it a full worker's state again.

A state capitalist state is a state where the state bureaucracy has replaced the capitalists as the ruling class, and thus a state where capitalism is still effectively existing. Another revolution is still necessary, a socialist revolution, just as is necessary everywhere else.

Leon Trotsky adopted the former perspective; some later Trotskyist intellectuals, as well as large portions of the general non-Stalinist left, adopted the latter one.

ok, ok valid point... I once again made one of my famouse blanket statements...

revision: socilist who all seem to want the government to take care of them with medicare and other services that would actually be easier and cheaper to get if they whent and got it for themselves...

Do you understand what group I am getting at? There is an increasingly thin line between socialist democrats in America and commies.. We are not absolutly there yet but soon we will be.

The 'Socialists' in the United States would be considerably different from the 'Social Democrats' in Europe.

In Europe, it is making sure no one falss throughthe cracks of society. Attempting to make sure if people fall on hard times, they are supported just enough to keep them going until they get back to work.

Society as a whole helps them, and they in turn help society when they can. People in Europe for the most part see nothing wrong with helping each other- its not about being rich, its about the quality of life.

*sigh*
Fine.

Taking that the Soviet Union was Communist.(Hell, I'll even let you pick the era of leadership) Compare and contrast the old USSR with modern Scandinavian countries or the British Labour govt's of the late 1990's, early 2000's.

There alone is your difference both economically and politically.

Sweden etc. are welfare state capitalist, not socialist. The working class does not control the means of production and does not hold political power.

Do you understand what group I am getting at? There is an increasingly thin line between socialist democrats in America and commies.. We are not absolutly there yet but soon we will be.

Who are the "socialist democrats" in the US? Clarify who you are talking about, please; otherwise the term is absurdly vague.

Sweden etc. are welfare state capitalist, not socialist. The working class does not control the means of production and does not hold political power.

In my book, 'Welfare State' (though I detest the phrase) = Social Democratic state.

The 'working class' as you call them, don't hold power anywhere. As soon as the do, they cease to be the 'working class'.
I also don't agree with the assesment of the modern cleavages- classes.

Lots of different ways of looking at it. There is no coherent line that can be drawn.

I sometimes identify as communist rather than socialist for a number of reasons:

1. Because too many so-called "democratic socialists" are no longer socialists at all, prefering "reformed" capitalism. Most of the parties in the Socialist International are so, for instance.
2. Because in Western Europe, which to me is the political center of the world, I would probably vote with the Eurocommunist or Trotskyist parties and not with the Socialists (which plays into (1)).
3. Because I reject a centralized state apparatus and general statist reformism (except as a lesser evil), preferring decentralized worker's councils.
4. Because I believe, once socialist society has been established, that a great effort should be made to make labor as pleasurable and uncoerced as possible, and that this should involve, as much as is practical, the partial separation of material gain from it.
5. Because on the whole I am on the hard left of today's left. Which isn't saying all that much.

On the other hand, there are is one major distinction that could be drawn which does not apply to me:

1. Communists support armed revolution, socialists do not. This was the original point of contention between the Communist parties and the Socialist parties, sparked by the October Revolution in Russia.

Which only goes to prove that you're a rambling infantile lunatic with
delusions of sucking the great everlasting gob-stopper teet of the mommy-
state into the ecstatic oblivion of the mammo-lacto-pleasure-addict who
never developed past the emotional age of 4 months.

But then,.. there is a place for folks like yourself....

..in diapers cuddled in the arms of Miss Nursey, the Infantalist Dominatrix of
424 Baulk Street, Las Vegas, Nevada (open 12:30p to 2:30p, and after 6:00p
by appointment only).


-Clamato

In my book, 'Welfare State' (though I detest the phrase) = Social Democratic state.

Right. "Social democratic" does not mean "socialist" anymore.

Which only goes to prove that you're rambling infantile lunatic with delusions
of sucking the great everlasting gob-stopper teet of the mommy-state into
the ecstatic oblivion of the mammo-lacto-pleasure-addict who never
developed past the emotional age of 4 months.

But then,.. there is a place for folks like yourself....

..in diapers cuddled in the arms of Miss Nursey, the Infantalist Dominatrix of
424 Baulk Street, Las Vegas, Nevada (open 12:30p to 2:30p, and after 6:00p
by appointment only).


-Clamato

Why, thank you. Your compliments are appreciated.

This post isn't directed entirely at anyone in particular but Naliitr sparked that annoyance I had in my head on Friday.
In my Civics class I have two communists - each of them fits into a hilarious stereotype, one being the nerdy type who is infatuated with Russian history, the other being some crazy obnoxious neo-nazi who doesn't even understand the concepts which he announces his faith to each day.

Why do teenagers think calling themselves a communist supporter is some sort of new 'cool'?

I am not bashing communism, it does work - see Cuba, they have a great time.
I am scratching my head as to why people seem to love it so much, there is 0% chance a capitalist will ever become a communist because, oh yes, you can't move to a communist country!

So why does every acne-infested teenager seem to think communism is their destiny? They will never be apart of it and if they ever got the chance, they would probably leave in under a week. Cars hardly exist in communistic countries, it is all about the 'public transport' trucks that stuff a bunch of sweaty workers in together for long periods of travelling. People don't have access to the wonders of capitalism in communism. I am guessing the angsty teens think the government will hold their hand through life in communism and they never have to do any work, think again, it is far worse than capitalism for work-loads in communism. Get rich or die trying, hah! Not unless you're a tour guide I suppose.

And if I ever, ever, ever see anybody saying "I'm an anarchy supporter!" I shall whip multiple rocks at them.

Part of that whole rebellion-wannabe. I've seen people (teenagers) wearing Che Guevara t-shirts who didn't know a thing about the guy. It's kind of funny when you ask them about it and then enlighten them who he was and they are like "Oh. Okay. See. Communism is great." I just laugh and keep walking. If I wanted to have real fun I would ask them if they ever read the Communist Manifesto. I could probably count the number of "YES" answers but not the number of "NO" answers because of obviously large numbers in the latter.

Right. "Social democratic" does not mean "socialist" anymore.

To me? Yes.

It is much more Centerist then Leftist. Centre-Centre Left.

Why, thank you. Your compliments are appreciated.

Oh,.. Touche..!

Very well put.

I like you already,.. though the diaper does make me wonder what I should
actually DO if you begin to figgit and wimper to be "changed".

Far be it from ME to "change" anybody..!! I take people as they ARE..!!


-Clamato

Act and ye shall receive.

I didn't say "every single teenage communist on the planet wears Che t-shirts" and you know it.

I misinterpreted and I was in a shit mood. I'm sorry. :)

Score against teenage objectivism!

I hope you don't think that's what I am though.

Nah, I don't.

Aye, very true.

YEAH! ANARCHISM!!! I THINK WE'RE SMASHING THE ANCIENT CAPITALIST BONDS THAT ARE HOLDING US DOWN OR SOMETHING!

BUT GREEN DAY SUPPORT IT, WHATEVER IT IS, SO IT MUST BE KEWL!!1!And there's another theory that teenagers often support without knowing what it is and adults often argue against without knowing what it is.

No I'm a teenager and I am very anti-communist.

No I'm a teenager and I am very anti-communist.
You don't count. You're from an ex-communist state, and as such you're obviously unqualified to judge communism on its real merits. :D

You're from an ex-communist state, And I'm from Shangri-La.

You don't count. You're from an ex-communist state, and as such you're obviously unqualified to judge communism on its real merits. :D
You shoul've called it 'deformed workers state', or something like that -- I gather it is the proper term here. :) Or is Swilatia, like me, from a 'degenerated workers' state'?

You shoul've called it 'deformed workers state', or something like that -- I gather it is the proper term here. :) Or is Swilatia, like me, from a 'degenerated workers' state'?

A former (?) smelly dictatorship. Is any further qualification necessary?

DHomme, because of his Trotskyist affiliations, can undoubtedly give you a better explanation than I can, but here's an attempt:

A degenerate worker's state is a worker's state that has been corrupted by the bureaucracy. Dialectically, it is still a worker's state, a step forward from capitalism, and as such it deserves certain kinds of support, but nevertheless another revolution is necessary to restore the full political power of the working class and make it a full worker's state again.

A state capitalist state is a state where the state bureaucracy has replaced the capitalists as the ruling class, and thus a state where capitalism is still effectively existing. Another revolution is still necessary, a socialist revolution, just as is necessary everywhere else.

Leon Trotsky adopted the former perspective; some later Trotskyist intellectuals, as well as large portions of the general non-Stalinist left, adopted the latter one.

Thats pretty fucking accurate.

The 'Socialists' in the United States would be considerably different from the 'Social Democrats' in Europe.

In Europe, it is making sure no one falss throughthe cracks of society. Attempting to make sure if people fall on hard times, they are supported just enough to keep them going until they get back to work.

Society as a whole helps them, and they in turn help society when they can. People in Europe for the most part see nothing wrong with helping each other- its not about being rich, its about the quality of life.
Thats the same basic system of welfare and social security that exist in the United States .

I dont see anyone running around calling us a bunch of socialist ..except a few whacko's . Mostly on Fox...and maybe Ann Coulter .

A former (?) smelly dictatorship. Is any further qualification necessary?
Actually it is necessary. Wouldn't you delve into the 'smelly' part further?

Thats the same basic system of welfare and social security that exist in the United States .

Its really not.


I dont see anyone running around calling us a bunch of socialist ..except a few whacko's . Mostly on Fox...and maybe Ann Coulter .

Because Socialism doesn't exist in the United States. It is a dirty word. Too close to 'Commie' OMFGZ!!11!UBER COMMIE!1eleventy1!!1 :eek:

I misinterpreted and I was in a shit mood. I'm sorry. :)


Nah it's cool, no harm no foul. :fluffle:





















...commie.

:p

Actually it is necessary. Wouldn't you delve into the 'smelly' part further?

Sure, but delving into what made it smelly is more important than what kind of smelly it was, IMO. (although I identify more closely with the "State Capitalist" idea. I'm not fond of any of the Bolsheviks.)

...commie.

:p

Fascist. :p

Pure ignorance. A shallow, rosy, low-comprehension surface view of whatever they think communism is is readily exclaimed upon without deeper thought as to the idea's implications, or further research into the writings of people who actually know what they're talking about in the realms of economics or philosophy. Basically, a kid not smart or serious enough to really think it through sees the words "equality", "brother-love", and "free lunch" and goes "yeah, communism, word dude!". Since the unintelligent are majorities in pretty much all age groups, and the non-serious are a majority in kids, you get lots of uninformed youth who follow that progression.
What about teenagers who actually know something about Communism?

Why do so many kids call themselves Communists? I dunno about so many, I was pretty much the only person in my year in school to call myself that (although I know a few folk leaned that way.)Ireland being a social democracy and pretty middle of the road politically, I would say there is less feeling that we need to rebel by choosing communism. Also, I'd say the fact that saying you're a communist will not provoke people into hating you here is probably a factor - there's less fun in being part of a merely unpopular ideology than there is in being part of a vilified one (although there are lines - there are even fewer fascists here than communists.)
In college, the folk who are communist/anarchist seem to be fairly well-educated and smart people who know a fair deal about their philosophies. I would say these people are communists because they believe.
But they are VERY few. We're talking less than 1% of people are in the anarchist and socialist societies (obviously not counting Labour Youth), and as for those who are active? !'d say 50 in the whole college is an optimistic guess.

Oh, and I'm an anarchist supporter.
To be honest Hokan, I would suggest a wee course in the theory of communism and anarchism, which might suggest why young people are communists.

I'm going to round off with a quote.
"Anyone who is not a communist at the age of eighteen doesn't have a heart. Anyone who is still a communist at the age of forty doesn't have a brain."
(Attributed to GB Shaw. And I don't agree with the last part. Unless of course he's talking about partyist communism, in which case I'm utterly in agreement...)

EDIT: Soheran, if you lean towards decentralised government, then why vote at all? A party just leads to an elite which just leads to another state capitalist country...