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.
Why not? communism is freedom. It means workers are not controlled by corporate giants and the economy of each locality is controlled by the people who live there.
Is that how they sold it to you?
Responsible for close to 1 billion dead.
You damn sure don't control your worth or destiny, under communism. The new Freedom.
The unintended consequences of closing Insane Asylums. Not everyone needs a mommy their entire life.
And yet you engage in magical thinking that benevolent angels inhabit the halls of government. They are enlightened people who have defeated the weaknesses of human nature, They would never engage in murder, oppression, tyranny, starvation or persecution of the people they so dearly cherish. The history books are all wrong. It was the evil corporations all along. Sure, they are the reason we have teeth after 30 years old, but the toothpaste oligarchy are behind the scenes exerting influence that should only be in the purview of a most holy government. And corporations have plenty of money. It's just in the wrong hands.
Pretty much sum it up for you? It does for anyone with a brain.
It has nothing to do with the government. The government right now upholds private property laws and profit motives.
If ownership is handled on the basis of personal property, and people/communities controlled their own resources democratically, you would only need a small central government that is highly democratic.
But with your vision, permaculture and forms of sustainable living with the environment are impossible because the people who control the capital, banks and corporations, don't find them profitable to invest in.
The beauty of America is destroyed for an industrial function that controls how the workers live and eat.
Instead as Americans we should look at citizens as workers, not consumers.
I'm surprisingly finding this communism discussion very interesting. Those of you expressing your communist views even though I don't agree with some of your points and am not a fan should stand your ground and not let these guys on the far right silence you with insults. Your views are just as valid as theirs.
It has nothing to do with the government. The government right now upholds private property laws and profit motives.
If ownership is handled on the basis of personal property, and people/communities controlled their own resources democratically, you would only need a small central government that is highly democratic.
But with your vision, permaculture and forms of sustainable living with the environment are impossible because the people who control the capital, banks and corporations, don't find them profitable to invest in.
The beauty of America is destroyed for an industrial function that controls how the workers live and eat.
Instead as Americans we should look at citizens as workers, not consumers.
Peddle your poorly concealed ideas that profit and ownership of property are immoral back to the communist hoard at Mother Jones. It cracks me up that you have a notion that people should be allowed to own a comb or a toothbrush but not a plot of ground. And it's even funnier that you want to leave the management of that ground to the wisdom of the majority (your so-called highly democratic construct) and that Jesus communists, free from human shortcomings, will divide up the fruits of that ground like the parable of the loaves and fishes.
Everything you used to write your post required capitalism, or as you try to describe it in pejorative terms, an industrial function that controls how people live and eat. I'm sure you would rather the government have that power. It's not gonna happen Scooter. Too many people have too many guns, love their freedom, and are growing weary of talking.
Peddle your poorly concealed ideas that profit and ownership of property are immoral back to the communist hoard at Mother Jones. It cracks me up that you have a notion that people should be allowed to own a comb or a toothbrush but not a plot of ground. And it's even funnier that you want to leave the management of that ground to the wisdom of the majority (your so-called highly democratic construct) and that Jesus communists, free from human shortcomings, will divide up the fruits of that ground like the parable of the loaves and fishes.
Everything you used to write your post required capitalism, or as you try to describe it in pejorative terms, an industrial function that controls how people live and eat. I'm sure you would rather the government have that power. It's not gonna happen Scooter. Too many people have too many guns, love their freedom, and are growing weary of talking.
It is you that takes freedom away from the people. Corporate structure and financial loans are used to keep a profitable labor force.
The land and capital you talk about is managed by shareholders with no care for the needs of said environment.
Take Plymouth Rock. The pilgrims had their land control shareholders in London, they freed themselves by taking control.
That doesn’t mean they are free to do anything, regulation and the like are fine, but it would be derived from the substance needs of the workers.
Capital would be less concentrated meaning less consumer choices, but is that a bad thing? A lower standard of living in exchange for a freer more sustainable society is fine in my book. The myth of greatness was only present from the neoliberal era after WW2, it is not an inherent part of American culture.
100 million dead people is not a great platform from which to proclaim the virtues of an ideology. And no, their views are not valid. They lead to mass human suffering.
How many have been exterminated by the United States Military Industrial Complex in the last 20 years alone vs the communists?
It is you that takes freedom away from the people. Corporate structure and financial loans are used to keep a profitable labor force.
The land and capital you talk about is managed by shareholders with no care for the needs of said environment.
Take Plymouth Rock. The pilgrims had their land control shareholders in London, they freed themselves by taking control.
That doesn’t mean they are free to do anything, regulation and the like are fine, but it would be derived from the substance needs of the workers.
One more thing. You can choose a lower standard of living for yourself and be good with it, but you don't get to choose that for me. I do. It's my choice. That's freedom.
Capital would be less concentrated meaning less consumer choices, but is that a bad thing? A lower standard of living in exchange for a freer more sustainable society is fine in my book. The myth of greatness was only present from the neoliberal era after WW2, it is not an inherent part of American culture.
Well, that's garbage. The environment in the US is not some dystopian wasteland. People do care about the environment, but are not going to allow environmental concerns to be used as a lever to nudge them into socialism.
No. Workers are people who voluntarily enter into employment arrangements. They are not partners, they have assumed no capital risk, and they have no ownership stake. A revenue generating enterprise does not exist primarily to serve the needs of workers; the enterprise is not a social welfare construct, nor should it be. The enterprise exists to create a good or service for consumption. It's funny and illuminating that you argue against the economic system that has lifted more people out of poverty across the globe than any other economic system. It's an enigma to me.
I once found a transcript of an online chat between two communists that very much wanted to hide this fact and were livid that they could not disappear it from public discourse. Who does that? Who supports an economic system that guarantees mediocrity and limits potential? Talk about suffocating the human spirit. That's communism.
@bmexman - you never answered my question about what career path you are seeking that will provide the "good, well-paying job" you seek, nor the credentials you feel should warrant you have sad job/career.
Mathman... I keep waiting on this response also.
I have kids now in their 30's who have good degrees and fantastic jobs. They can easily change Companies since they have very marketable Careers. Tons of opportunities in this world.
Something here sounds fishy. Maybe it's something simple like Felony convictions and drug abuse. We may never know.
MY BIL is still waiting for that CEO job offer after about 8 years of unemployment. It's beneath him to take anything less. He might blame Capitalism also.
"War is peace. Freedom is slavery. Ignorance is strength". You have learned your lessons well.
You must produce to fuel Oceania against the never-ending war!
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.
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.
