Obama '08?

engineer wrote:

You made the following jump: Communism leads to brutal, totalitarian regimes. Brutal, totalitarian regimes kill millions of their own people. Regimes that kill millions of their own people are bad, therefore Communism is bad.

Makes sense to me.

engineer wrote:

The strawman is the first step. You sited an extreme observation, painted it as typical, then attacked it. It is certainly historically accurate that communism in some cases has lead to brutal, totalitarian regimes, but your assumption that it will always do so is the strawman. Several European countries have communist parties in their parliaments who don't murder everyone.

That doesnt make any sense as an argument here. Yes, communist parties have functioned within democratic systems - and even fulfilled benefitial roles. But that has nothing to do with OBill's submission that "Communism leads to brutal, totalitarian regimes." Because these communist parties were never the power holders. At most, they were junior coalition partners; 90% of the time, they were opposition parties. The West-European communist parties never got to impose "communism" in their countries; ergo, the submission that "communism leads to brutal, totalitarian regimes" is not negated by them.

engineer wrote:

TKO could equally argue that since <Internet> Hitler and Mugabee were democratically elected and that Democracy leads to totalitarianism, millions of deaths, etc.

Hardly. Every single time a communist party got exclusive governmental power in a country, it led to totalitarianism (try to come up with an exception if you will). Only a relatively small share of democratic elections have led to totalitarianism. The parallel is false.

0 Replies

Walter Hinteler wrote:

In 1947, the PDF was in the French government, Maurice Thorez as deputy prime minister.
And in the 1984 government, they received four cabinet posts.

Which just confirms George's point that they "never achieved dominant political power" :wink:

It does worry me to agree with both Thomas and George <grin>, but hey, communism is one of those few political evils that should unite both left and right. I dont mind a communist opposition party, even a strong one -- especially in these post-Soviet days where communist parties have blurred into a kind of general, none too ideological populist leftism anyway. I might even vote for one, depending on the country, its historical legacies, and the people running said party, if I'm pissed off enough about the powers that be. But history has abundantly shown that while communists need not be evil, communism certainly is.

Every single time a communist party got to control the government, it ended up with totalitarianism sooner rather than later. And not by accident. The various fundamentals of Marxist-Leninist ideology make it inevitable. From the concept of the "dictatorship of the proletariat," which was obliged to deal ruthlessly with any retrograde elements that would hinder the progress of history, through to the party's elite prescribed role as the "avant garde" of the proletariat, which had the mission to create a communist state even if the population's majority still lacked the class consciousness to, you know, actually approve of it, these fundamentals all but identify the exact path to totalitarianism that any communist government will travel.

It's what separates the communists from assorted socialists, social-democrats, etc.

0 Replies

Finn, I don't want to ignore your response, but I think we've taken that debate as far as it can go. Hillary has since suspended her attempts at Party division and I fully expect the vast majority of her supporters to follow suit. I concede your point that a limited number of fence sitters could have continued to support her continued division tactics for reasons other than being Republicans, Bigots, or Idiots (a very limited number :wink: ) My biggest error was in defining non-democrats as Republicans. Unlike you; I don't see much difference between the labels Liberal and Democrat and less in how they'd be applied to Hillary or Obama and consider neither a dirty word anyway. Policy-wise; no as much as you Republicans would like to convince them otherwise; there is no rational reason for a jump from Hillary to McCain. The many theoretical justifications you offer between "emotional", "not rational" and "really disappointed" are essentially kinder, gentler, and softer versions of idiotic.

I know you must be relishing the Liberals ganging on Liberals aspect of the Primary, but I suspect you'll see it subside before November. I also suspect the one vocal standout is choosing to be one more in an attention whore kind of way, while setting himself up with the justification to whine about his glass being half empty for many more years to come. I kindly offer that as an alternative to bigotry or idiocy. :razz:

0 Replies

It seems communism doesn't work when the government is authoritarian from the beginning, and they take away human rights from the citizens. It seems to work okay when commuism is introduced within a democracy, and people wish a more liberal socialist economy.

0 Replies

cicerone imposter wrote:

It seems communism doesn't work when the government is authoritarian from the beginning, and they take away human rights from the citizens. It seems to work okay when commuism is introduced within a democracy, and people wish a more liberal socialist economy.

Well put.

T
K
O

0 Replies

Diest TKO wrote:

cicerone imposter wrote:
It seems communism doesn't work when the government is authoritarian from the beginning, and they take away human rights from the citizens. It seems to work okay when commuism is introduced within a democracy, and people wish a more liberal socialist economy.
Well put.

T
K
O

Well put if you're looking for an absurd cop out. CI is either describing a society that isn't actually governed by communism, or a society that doesn't (and to my knowledge never did) exist.

0 Replies

O'Bill, Communism is an economic system.

0 Replies

CI, Communism is a myth.

0 Replies

OCCOM BILL wrote:

Diest TKO wrote:
cicerone imposter wrote:
It seems communism doesn't work when the government is authoritarian from the beginning, and they take away human rights from the citizens. It seems to work okay when commuism is introduced within a democracy, and people wish a more liberal socialist economy.
Well put.

T
K
O
Well put if you're looking for an absurd cop out. CI is either describing a society that isn't actually governed by communism, or a society that doesn't (and to my knowledge never did) exist.

Let's be fair OB, does the world described by Capitolism, Liberalism or Conservatism actually exist. All philosophies exist in a ideal universe.

Socialism and a uniform method fails for the same reasons Conservatism fails; an over simplified solution based on over idealistic perceptions of humans.

The best system is going to be a composite of all philosophies.
K
O

0 Replies

Diest TKO wrote:

OCCOM BILL wrote:
Diest TKO wrote:
cicerone imposter wrote:
It seems communism doesn't work when the government is authoritarian from the beginning, and they take away human rights from the citizens. It seems to work okay when commuism is introduced within a democracy, and people wish a more liberal socialist economy.
Well put.

T
K
O
Well put if you're looking for an absurd cop out. CI is either describing a society that isn't actually governed by communism, or a society that doesn't (and to my knowledge never did) exist.

Let's be fair OB, does the world described by Capitolism, Liberalism or Conservatism actually exist. All philosophies exist in a ideal universe.

Socialism and a uniform method fails for the same reasons Conservatism fails; an over simplified solution based on over idealistic perceptions of humans.

The best system is going to be a composite of all philosophies.
K
O

That's plenty fair enough... but it doesn't have anything to do with the initial dispute. Communism has a clear track record of being a gateway to brutal totalitarianism. I'm sure I need not even bother providing more examples, just as surely as I know you can't provide evidence to the contrary.

T
K
Oh for crying out loud, what is this TKO nonsense about?

0 Replies

EDIT: Sorry, this is me, nimh -- didnt see that Anastasia was still logged in on this computer.

Diest TKO wrote:

cicerone imposter wrote:
It seems communism doesn't work when the government is authoritarian from the beginning, and they take away human rights from the citizens. It seems to work okay when commuism is introduced within a democracy, and people wish a more liberal socialist economy.
Well put.

T
K
O

How can communism be "introduced within a democracy"? That's a contradiction in terms. You can have communists in a democracy (a communist party, trade union, etc), but you cant have communism in a democracy. The basic tenets of communism make democracy impossible.

Diest TKO wrote:

Let's be fair OB, does the world described by Capitolism, Liberalism or Conservatism actually exist. All philosophies exist in a ideal universe.

Socialism and a uniform method fails for the same reasons Conservatism fails; an over simplified solution based on over idealistic perceptions of humans.

The best system is going to be a composite of all philosophies.

Are we still talking about communism here? Because socialism Not Equal

communism. Communism, at least since 1917, describes a very specific system and ideology; it's not some kind of synonym for generally leftwing ideals.

Unlike socialist thought, you cant "composite" together communism and democracy. The two are mutually incompatible (as Gorbachev soon found out).

0 Replies

anastasia wrote:

How can communism be "introduced within a democracy"? That's a contradiction in terms. You can have communists in a democracy (a communist party, trade union, etc), but you cant have communism in a democracy. The basic tenets of communism make democracy impossible.
[...]
Unlike socialist thought, you cant "composite" together communism and democracy. The two are mutually incompatible (as Gorbachev soon found out).

Correct - that's why no communist party got any larger importance - and that's why the "other" communist parties in (West) Europe became a kind of left-wing subgroup to the existinmg socialist and social-democratic parties.
(The actual internal party problems in "Die Linke" are exactly proving this.)

0 Replies

As I've mentioned before, communism is an economic system. In reality, most economies of the world, past or present, are/were a combination of both capitalism and communism. Total or almost total communism doesn't work, because it doesn't provide the incentives and motivation for the populace to be creative or produce quality.

0 Replies

I guess it's okay to sidetrack the Obama thread for a while until some news comes along.

Nihm - I am aware of the difference between socialism and communism. I was trying to grab a number of ideas to illustrate that they all exist in a theoretical space.

The reality is that our society is not a uniform capitalistic democracy and that we benefit from elements of

Communism
Socialism
etc

It's undeniable. Honestly. The idea of redistribution of wealth is certainly unpopular, but face it, that's a part of our society too. Don't like it, well then go tell the republicans to prove the trickle down effect works. Our money is all top heavy. If you think that the country cannot act in it's own interest, you're crazy. The difference between these ideas is only the execution ultimately.

OB - I DO think that it has everything with the initial depute. Labeling Obama as a Communist is just propaganda. Communist is not a bad word. However we certainly have been taught to think it is. That is the initial depute. Your thoughts on those who have suffered from communism may have some merit. I'm not here to say it's perfect, and certainly is a poor uniform ideology, I'm here to say that it's not evil or inherently wrong.

I think engineer made a good point that there are easy arguments to say that a democracy only promotes totalitarianism or even imperialism. Do we really want to go there? Maybe it's the actions of individuals, not the ideologies they hide behind.

Democracy can offer hope. That could make is more exploitable. Many good things can be exploited. There is no rational reason to fear or demonize communism. It doesn't mean you need to go out and buy a red turtleneck.

T
K
Only a special forum post sig. I've been doing it on every forum I've been a part of for the last 10 years. Don't read into it so much. This is similar to Joefromchicago's special sig. It's just fun. Nothing else.

0 Replies

Bi-Polar Bear wrote:

you've forgotten who you're speaking of... he uses a COLLEGE RULED mead notebook...

COLLEGE, SMOLLEGE! Can you be more SPECIFIC? :wink:

0 Replies

Diest TKO wrote:

OB - I DO think that it has everything with the initial depute. Labeling Obama as a Communist is just propaganda.

And foolish propaganda at that. Propaganda that's to fantastic to be believed serves not even it's own purpose.

Diest TKO wrote:

Communist is not a bad word. However we certainly have been taught to think it is. That is the initial depute.

As someone pointed out above; a communist isn't necessarily bad. Communism most certainly is. Believing otherwise falls somewhere between naivety and dangerousness. The fairytale of communism that is attractive to some in theory; is an utter time bomb in practice. Human nature would never allow it to happen any other way.

Diest TKO wrote:

Your thoughts on those who have suffered from communism may have some merit. I'm not here to say it's perfect, and certainly is a poor uniform ideology, I'm here to say that it's not evil or inherently wrong.

Some merit? We're talking about 100,000,000+ first hand victims... and still counting. Pay these people their due.

Diest TKO wrote:

I think engineer made a good point that there are easy arguments to say that a democracy only promotes totalitarianism or even imperialism. Do we really want to go there?

I'd like to see either of you attempt to make one of these easy arguments. They would likely be swiftly taken apart from by lefties and righties alike, because it just aint so.

Diest TKO wrote:

Maybe it's the actions of individuals, not the ideologies they hide behind.

This sentence demonstrates that you are already half way to understanding the why : Human nature. A person can be noble, fair minded and seek nothing but what's good for the community. People are greedy selfish bastards that will forever strive to improve their own lot in life. They can only ever be held in reasonable check with both the carrot and the stick. Since no system can change this; it is important to choose one that can work with it. Communism cannot. For the vast majority of citizens in a communist system; there is no carrot... which forces the lucky few to rely increasingly on the stick. This has been amply demonstrated to horrific proportions over and over again.

Diest TKO wrote:

Democracy can offer hope. That could make is more exploitable. Many good things can be exploited. There is no rational reason to fear or demonize communism. It doesn't mean you need to go out and buy a red turtleneck.

Here is your most critical error. All systems can offer hope. Unlike Communism, Democracy can deliver. Most people need only know that they can improve their own lot in life by working harder and voting their own interests to keep themselves in check. Doesn't even matter that they may never get there. Take away this hope; and you'd better have an abundance of sticks. In every attempt at communism; the power hungry still rise to the top as is the case in every system... and their capitalistic (selfish) human nature mandates that they set themselves up to maintain their superior lot in life. The have-nots, having no hope, have to be kept in check by force or a revolution will soon take place. Few things are more predictable or deadly in practice.

None of this is to say our system is perfect... or necessarily even good. But it's a damn site better than any system built with the fundamental, fatal flaw of taking hope away from the people.

"When the Government Fears the People, There is Liberty; When the People Fear the Government, There is Tyranny" - Thomas Jefferson

0 Replies

Diest TKO wrote:

Only a special forum post sig. I've been doing it on every forum I've been a part of for the last 10 years. Don't read into it so much. This is similar to Joefromchicago's special sig. It's just fun. Nothing else.

Wrong Joe.

0 Replies

That would be Joe (and don't you forget it) Nation.

0 Replies

cicerone imposter wrote:

As I've mentioned before, communism is an economic system. In reality, most economies of the world, past or present, are/were a combination of both capitalism and communism.

Only in a very creative definition of "communism". Maybe you mean socialism. Communism is quite a specific beast. Though many economies have integrated some socialist or at least social-democratic elements, I really dont see how you can say that "most economies of the world" have combined something of communism, specifically, into their system.

Sorry, this is a peeve of mine. Americans often throw these terms around as if communism, socialism, social democracy, whatever, they're all just kind of synonyms for leftwing ideas, in general. But the difference between communism and social democracy is, as Bill has been pointing out, several dozen million victims. You cant just insert "communism" as alternative wording when you mean some kind of state intervention in the economy, or some kind of redistributive tax system, or whatever thing along those lines you're aiming for. It's disrespectful to both sincere social-democrats and socialists, who have been championing the same things and have nothing to do with the totalitarian bunch that's governed the communist world, and it's disrespectful to the people who fell victim to the very specific vagary that was communism.

0 Replies

And again, that was me, above. Sorry for the confusion.

0 Replies

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know