I am hopeful that comrade Commissar and jrodefeld will combine forces to develop a Master Plan to save the human race from itself.
It’ll be a doozy, incorporating Trotsky, the gold standard, a centralized economy and Austrian economics.
Oh yeah, you know who else was a Communist? Hitler, that’s who!
You know who else dated ya moms? 
I’m not a scholar on communism, but it seems that most forms of classical communism are, in general, quite repressive, and not particularly productive or efficient in terms of having an economic paradigm that delivers a decent standard of living relative to their peers among nations.
In other words classical communism is kind of a persistent under achiever, and has generally been abandoned or changed so profoundly, to classify it as “communism” is kind of a misnomer. Why do you champion a political and economic model that even most communist states, like China, have abandoned in practice?
Okay. You’re cynical.
Hey, you told me to.
In a sane world you would be just as welcome as our recent racist visitor.
Count me as happy that Communists in the US are little more than joke. To look at the track record of Mao and want to emulate it is just beyond belief. Not to mention any of the despicable paranoid Communist leadership of the former Soviet Union.
I like how British writer Simon Sebag Montefiore who wrote an excellent biography on Stalin put the communist ideology.
“The random destruction of classes of people now, to create the perfect socialist society later.”
Yea, this thread is a trolling whoosh. I regret posting an earlier reply.
Mods: Please lock it.
I should point out that, when I say that I approve of Castro, I mean that I approve of the ideals and concepts of his revolution, given the state Cuba was in at the time. I think there is something to be admired in his determination not to be a vassal of the US.
The current state of Cuba as a result of his decisions, I’m not so happy about. But given how things were under Batista, I do think I approve of the original revolution.
But I’m biased towards revolutionaries.
Fake communism has been discredited. True communism is impracticable to impossible.
Is it possible that what you really are is a socialist or left-liberal? They’re often stigmatized as commies, because their ideas are actually more dangerous to those on the right - being both more common-sense and more respectful of individuals’ real day-to-day problems, ie, more of a threat to the American Way.
Do you concede that self-avowed communist regimes have historically had bad records on issues like human rights and political freedom? And, at best, their economies are not clearly superior to capitalist states.
If so, what factors do you feel cause real world communist states to fail to live up to the theoretical ideals of Communism?
I don’t know and don’t care if you’re trolling, but I LOL at this.
:dubious: …Aaaaalrighty then. Sheesh. Where are they all coming from?
Agreed.
One of the problems with communism is that it’s difficult pull off unless you have a totalitarian form of government. Because it goes against human nature, the only way to realize communism is to force it on people.
Considering this for my next sig.
Whoa. I actually AGREE with Crafter_Man. looks outside to see if the Rapture is occurring
Now I’m scared.
As for the OP, when you say you abhor Stalin, how can you justify your admiration of Lenin, when he was pretty much as bad, only with a smaller body count. (The difference being that Lenin had poor health through much his tenure). In fact, I once read a joke that said the only GOOD thing Stalin did was that he made Lenin look good by comparison.
I suppose that you can consider me either a Communist or a socialist, or both, depending on how you define those terms. Personally, I find there to be so much overlap and ambiguity in the terminology that I like to use them interchangeably.
However, I am not a socialist in the same sense as some Scandinavian socialists, for example. I adamantly oppose the idea that socialists/Communists can co-exist with other parties in a representative democracy. No, there must be but one party, and it must control the government at all times.
I am in my early thirties, Euphonious Polemic. I find it interesting that you are willing to extrapolate “a relatively poor grasp of history and geopolitics” from my limited posts here at this point. Basically, it seems to me that you have jumped to a premature conclusion as soon as you read that I am a Communist. This is the difficulty I often have when discussing Communism with Westerners; frankly, they don’t want to think about it, preferring to dismiss anyone with Marxist-Leninist leanings as a brainwashed idiot.
I think that, yes, Communism is a great system for large national systems. In fact, I think that it tends to work better with bigger systems, as this allows the ruling party to truly leverage economies of scale to the benefit of the people. As an example, I once again point to China. Marx would have been proud, indeed.
I do not believe that people are innately good, bad, or anything else, really. They just are. It is the responsibility of the government to make sure that they lead good lives without causing too much trouble for anyone else.
Then you’re a totalitarian, and all you differ in is the color of your jackboots.
Well, for some definition of proud. :dubious:
You do realise that the enormous challenges that China is facing today actually have many similarities to the circumstances that motivated Marx in the first place, yes?