As I alluded to previously, my philosophy is a little bit of everything, with my own twist.
Its foundations are in Marxism, with particular emphasis on Lenin’s interpretation of Capital. It also draws heavily on Trotsky, and to a lesser extent on Mao. It is tempered with the revolutionary philosophies of Castro and Ho Chi Minh, and then borrows extensively from modern Chinese economic theory. Finally, it adopts the philosophical strains of utilitarianism and cultural and moral relativism. Then, a handful of my own personal modifications, and you have my philosophy in a nutshell.
What I believe in includes but is not limited to the following:
(1) The supremacy of socialism over capitalism.
(2) A strong one party state.
(3) The distribution of power throughout the party as a barrier against tyranny.
(4) Recognition of all positive Eastern rights.
(5) Recognition of all negative Western rights, provided that they do not interfere with the good of the people (most don’t - freedoms of religion and speech are fine with me; private gun ownership is out).
(6) The use of violence only when absolutely necessary.
(7) Non-aggression and non-imperialism.
(8) Aiding other states in acquiring socialism.
(9) Marginalization though not elimination of organized religions.
(10) A centrally-planned economy WITH private businesses.
Sooo… you actually have no philosophical backings for your statements, just some theoretical and nebulously defined principles of something you like to call communism but is really a mutated utopianism combined with fascism?
Educated, employed and resides in America. Were you actually to turn up, back in Russia or China, espousing this nonsense, (let’s be real, it’s not really communism, it’s just a slurry of half concepts at best), you’d find yourself in the gulag or up against a wall, right quick, I suspect.
I choose to believe your Mama drank too much vodka before discovering she was preggers. You’re so cute with your half baked silliness, all I can say is Viva the Revolution, Comrade! Keep up the good fight! Oh, and good luck with that!
Yes, democracies can produce bad leaders, and communist authoritarian states can produce good ones. But you’re only telling part of the story - sure, eight years of Bush was bad. But where is he now? Retired, following free and fair elections that brought the opposition to power without a shot being fired - not even the single bullet you’d have prescribed for Stalin and Gorbachev. Our constitution demanded Bush’s removal from power, and he was removed.
I’m curious - how much freedom of speech are you willing to tolerate? Say that I speak out against your ideal regime - am I to be exiled to the gulag? What if I start a pro-democracy blog? A newspaper? What happens if I organize demonstrations calling for reform?
At what point do I earn a bullet to the back of my head?
Anyone care to guess what “all positive Eastern rights.” might mean?
The right to stand in line for bread?
To abandon alcohol ravaged children to orphanages with conditions less inviting than the Warsaw ghetto?
The right to tremble in fear for holding an opposing view?
The right to disappear anyone, anytime?
The right to be brutalized by a police/army, usually drunk, and indiscriminately abusive, without recourse?
The right to be held hostage in your own country, denied the right to travel?
In fairness to the OP, I suspect he’s referring to something like the rights espoused in the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, which focuses upon rights to education/housing/social security/etc. International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights - Wikipedia It attracted a lot more enthusiastic attention in the developing world than in the developed states, for the most part.
You’re being just a tad dramatic there, aren’t you? Bush wasn’t removed; he was simply no longer eligible to hold office. He could have been removed in '04, but the electorate chose otherwise.
If you don’t believe that communism is the “one true way”, then how do you justify giving it a permanent monopoly on power through a single-party state?
And there was no way to get rid of him. The U.S.S.R. was saddled with a bloodthirsty incompetent at the helm until he dropped dead. Yet you still argue for the foolishness of single-party rule.
Then why not just let the plutocrats control everything? They at least have demonstrated that they’re competent managers, unlike the boot-lickers that rise to the top in a one-party system.
No, I stand by it - the legal machinery of the democratic state removed Bush from power as surely as if he’d been taken out back and shot. The great virtue of our constitution is that it achieved this salutory result without a single drop of blood being spilled. Under the OP’s system, we’d be stuck with our bad leaders until they dropped or someone shot them.
I know what you mean. It really sucks when you’re reasonably trying to murder a couple of million enemies of the revolution and they start shooting back at you. Oh, what’s a poor Communist to do?
I assume you were asleep during the entire Brezhnev era.
Your answer about the relative success of Taiwan is interesting - you allege it was because other countries invested in them. OK, why is Cuba such a shit hole even though the USSR subsidized them?
I would also like a little detail on why it is that whenever a country is divided into Communist and capitalist parts, the capitalist part always outperforms the commies. Sush as North vs. South Korea, and East and West Germany.
Of course the North vs. South Korea is not really fair - NK started with most of the heavy industry on their side. Yet they starve.
Commissar, since it has been established that you are not a communist, you should take the honourable and honest route by asking a mod to change the title of your thread, rather than compound your blatant naivety and ignorance of well known facts with dishonour and dishonesty.
Well, if the racist guy was a troll, said person went to a lot of effort finding someone from a racist board, did some basic research, all just to come here and troll? Pretty pathetic.
Fucking time limits! At any rate, I don’t know if THIS guy is a troll or not. However, assuming he’s NOT, at this point, I wouldn’t bother trying to argue with him, because his entire argument is basically full of shit. I don’t think I’ve EVER agreed with both Crafter_Man AND Starving Artist in a political thread before.
