Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
now tell us, where do you teach seeing you describe words like socialism totally differ from anyone else? I have to assume you are an economics professor but not a very good one.
I don’t teach, but anyone can educate themselves and learn that socialism has been a term used far before Marx, just look at Proudhon.
They can call themselves what ever they want, Socialist, Communist, or Democratic Socialists, it still ends up being a power grab by people who say they're in the same party or group. The outcome is the same regardless of what they call themselves. Even Unions that are supposed to represent the workers almost always end up turning into corrupt entities.
Capitalist unions that work with corporate to undermine workers are not the same as socialist federations that have worked managed workplaces.
Please read my previous post:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Winterfall8324
No that's not what socialism is about. US propaganda has made sure pol pot and the USSR is all people think about when they see communism/socialism, but just in the 19th century, that had nothing to do with what socialism was.
There were the anarchists and Marxists, both agreed that workers should control the means of production but disagreed on how to get there. Many Marxist like Rosa Luxembourg strongly opposed a powerful state and wanted democratic means to control economic systems (which were considered the same as political ones).
The anarchists (like I identify with) wanted a decentralized organization where worker managed unions and syndicates would form federations that would create supply chains and agree on production regulations, etc.
Look at places like the Zapatistas, Kurdistan, Catalonia in the 1930s, Anarchist Manchuria, or the free territories in Ukraine.
Even Marxist-Leninist countries like Burkina Faso under Thomas Sankara were hugely successful but the US media will never talk about places like that.
Per your link, Twin Oaks lose 1 in 5 members every year. Not so sustainable in their case. I lived in a Commune for a while. Lasted 6 months before I had to get back to the outside world.
Per your link, Twin Oaks lose 1 in 5 members every year. Not so sustainable in their case. I lived in a Commune for a while. Lasted 6 months before I had to get back to the outside world.
Did you read my sentence?
I said communes were built to fail in a capitalist society as they promote poverty. That is not what anarcho-communism is, read the other links, not the one I separated for that exact purpose.
Twin Oaks, where people have to work 42 hrs a week to have their community housing, medical and food covered without any opportunity to save for their futures or own a home. What happens if a resident gets cancer or a serious illness?
Sounds divine, Winter, why aren’t you already there?
Twin Oaks, where people have to work 42 hrs a week to have their community housing, medical and food covered without any opportunity to save for their futures or own a home. What happens if a resident gets cancer or a serious illness?
Sounds divine, Winter, why aren’t you already there?
For the LOVE OF GOD, I said in the exact post why communes don't count as they are built for poverty.
Do you understand why it was separate from the other links? Communes in capitalist societies are not socialist.
Cortez can out demagogue Pelosi and the zombies will eat it up.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.