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.
I'm in my 30's and I'm neither. Libs and conservatives will be the death of this country.
That seems a little strong being most of us and most people period lean one way or the other. Regardless, most of us have both views, depending on the issue. Oh, you have a few who are so one way that they can't see any positive on the other side, these people are not thinking straight in my anyway. I think what you are referring to is extremism.
How long before slightly modified Marxism becomes the whole thing?
There is nothing wrong with 100% Marxism. I just think certain parts of it need to be modified.
Quote:
Originally Posted by roysoldboy
I think someone has misled you back there in college. I doubt you can have such a thing but maybe I am wrong.
Does it ever get old blaming colleges every time someone utters support of Communism? Seriously, I have a degree in FINANCE, which is nothing but the study and promotion of capitalism, and the only time Karl Marx was remotely mentioned was one passage from one of his works in a business ethics class I had to take. Then again, it also had passages from several other classical economists, and the book presented all the passages objectively, and the professor never offered his opinion on anything.
Why is it so difficult for people like you to understand that it is possible for a person to espouse Communism without the "brainwashing" of "liberal education".
Quote:
Originally Posted by roysoldboy
I say this because the Soviet Union got as far as the part of Marxism that I just can't accept and stayed there for 70 years when people were led to believe that the government would wither and die once people had accepted Marxism.
The Soviet Union never practiced Marxism or Communism. That is why their form of governments were specifically called Leninism, Stalinism, etc. This was not even remotely close to Marxism. It was state run capitalism, pure and simple. The ruling class using the states power to enslave the underclass in the name of "communism", and not only profit off their backs, but keep the profit themselves.
Quote:
Originally Posted by roysoldboy
While I was in college, back in 1952, I made a heckling speech about communism thinking I would be heckled out of the room. I got clear through my communist pitch and not one question was asked so I had to try to convince all those 19 year olds that the system wouldn't work. It was hard but once I got them to understand what the Dictatorship of the Proletariat really was they began to see the light. That is just modified Marxism that they try to get people to believe will wither and die once the people learn to live with communism.
In 1952, you were speaking to a class load of idiots. If you werent, at the point you mentioned people "learning to live with Communism", someone would have completely took you apart right there. Unfortunatley, you obviously went to school with a great deal of dim bulbs.
Quote:
Originally Posted by roysoldboy
I would like to ask you how you manage to keep communism without an all powerful government to make people go along with the old from each according to his abilities to each according to his need.
1. The key thing you are mistaken is that in true communism, a government is not needed to "force" people in to participation. If they dont want to participate, they leave, if enough dont want to participate, they change the government. Government would be there to plan the economy, facilitate the uses of communal lands, and provide for the sickly and infirm, and the protection of the people. They would not be there to place disenters in to prison camps.
2. The "to each according to his abilities, each according to his needs", should not be "literally interpreted". For instance, I interpret that as each able person will be guaranteed a position to which his minimum needs will be met. This is equivalent to a guaranteed living wage. However, I also would add that a minimum level of production would be required from said worker in exchange for said wage, or they would be fired. No person who was able bodied and pulled their own weight at work would make below living wage.
Quote:
Originally Posted by roysoldboy
After a while those who work hard and earn more realize that they are being "had" and start backing off. The Soviets took all farm products for the government to sell in the cities at low prices and it didn't take the peasant farmers long to see what was being done to them. I wonder if it would happen as soon here as it did there.
The first mistake in that assumption could easily be corrected by making sure there is a minimum wage, but then also allowing those who overperform to be compensated based on the additional production. The key is restricting capital ownership. You see, even if someone made more money because he produced more, it wouldnt amount to more then a bigger TV or a nicer car. It would never amount to him being able to enslave the slower worker and his whole family line, like capitalism does.
Last edited by Randomdude; 11-05-2009 at 12:46 PM..
That seems a little strong being most of us and most people period lean one way or the other. Regardless, most of us have both views, depending on the issue. Oh, you have a few who are so one way that they can't see any positive on the other side, these people are not thinking straight in my anyway. I think what you are referring to is extremism.
Nita
No, I mean the fact a single pool of people is picking sides for one of only two polar opposites. No one thinks for themselves, they just join a party and follow along. There are no further viewpoints to "keep it real".
There are a couple of things an American should not build his/her entire identity around. One is being a consumer, the next is being a christian, and the last is being a liberal or conservative. Life is far more complex than that, and each is a trap for ignorance and "sheeple" mentality.
Easing up on 60, voted for McGovern, but haven't voted for a Democratic presidential candidate since that jacka$$ Carter humiliated this country.
Local elections are something else, I pay attention to all the nitty-gritty stuff. I learned early on party affiliations or ideology are no guarantee of honest local officials, and City Hall can hurt you way more than DC.
I am in my late 50's, and consider myself to be a moderate.
I frequently have political positions that don't quite fall in either camp.
For example, I'm pro-choice for the first four months of a pregnancy, then willing to call the abortion a crime, with punishment, after that point (unless medically necessary). Likewise, I'm generally pro-gay rights (such as adoption and health insurance domestic partner coverage), but don't support gay marriage. Concerning foreign policy, I support the inclusion of Georgia and Ukraine in NATO, but was against the Iraq war. Also, I think the Federal Reserve plays an important and integrated part in helping our economy, but against many of the bailout issues.
I am in my late 50's, and consider myself to be a moderate.
I frequently have political positions that don't quite fall in either camp.
For example, I'm pro-choice for the first four months of a pregnancy, then willing to call the abortion a crime, with punishment, after that point (unless medically necessary). Likewise, I'm generally pro-gay rights (such as adoption and health insurance domestic partner coverage), but don't support gay marriage. Concerning foreign policy, I support the inclusion of Georgia and Ukraine in NATO, but was against the Iraq war. Also, I think the Federal Reserve plays an important and integrated part in helping our economy, but against many of the bailout issues.
Kind of an independent, I guess.
With a few exceptions you see it about the way I do. I was not against the Iraq war but think the exit stratigy (spelling) sucked. I am not totally pro-choice, but pretty much so. I think there are too many abortions being done and it is replacing birth control for some, I don't think intentionally, but it is happening and I only understand abortion in the first trimester, not even at 4 months.
Again, from other things you have said, it sounds like we are on the same track with my being slightly more to the right than you.
I would have to say you are more conservative, because while it seems you do not want the government to tell you what to do i.e. "I know the government does not have my best interests at heart nor am I fooled by them." You do want the government to tell other people what to do with their lives "I don't like the idea of legalized drugs." This is typical in conservatism.
Which is why I said "Only as much government as needed basically". We are still going to need some government and I think fostering a sense of personal responsibility and a non-nanny state will weed out many drug users, I would prefer to see that drugs, which we all know are addictive and very very bad, not be legalized. So I am not saying you can't do drugs, I think they shouldn't be made accessible or legal. Having absolutely no controls in our lives is called anarchy too and leads to complete chaos.
Which is why I said "Only as much government as needed basically". We are still going to need some government and I think fostering a sense of personal responsibility and a non-nanny state will weed out many drug users, I would prefer to see that drugs, which we all know are addictive and very very bad, not be legalized. So I am not saying you can't do drugs, I think they shouldn't be made accessible or legal. Having absolutely no controls in our lives is called anarchy too and leads to complete chaos.
Yup and that is basically "conservatism" along with the following possitions.
I do not want the government to tell me what to do with my body, but I want it to tell women they cant get an abortion.
I do not want the government to tell me how much money I can make, but I support tort reform because lawyers make too much money and I want the government to stop that.
I do not want the government meddling in my marriage, but the government should stop gay people from getting married.
I do not want the government to provide a public option healthcare plan, but they better not do any cuts to my medicare.
I want the government to crackdown on acorn, because they violate campaigning and election laws, but Evangelical churches should be able to violate campaigning and election laws by handing out voter guides against their tax exempt status rules.
These along with the aformentioned issue on drugs are all about how "conservatives" want the government to control everyone's life, but their own. That is just typical "conservatism".
As to anarchy that is no government whatsoever. Libertarianism is not about using the state to foster a sense of responsibility, but having individuals create their own sense of responsibility through trial and error. In an ideal libertarian society the only things that should be banned are aggressive acts against other people. i.e. murder, theft, rape, assult, etc. Everything else, i.e. laws to prevent "victimless" crimes such as, drugs laws, laws against bad health choices, seat belt laws, etc. are not enacted, because of the belief that individuals, not government, need to be the ones to foster personal responsibility. If the government is fostering "personal responsibility" it really cannot be called "personal" responsibility now can it.
Last edited by Randomstudent; 11-06-2009 at 10:44 AM..
20s/moderately liberal. I would be conservative if the conservative party would put the Constitution over making sure CEOs are as wealthy as possible as well as stop trying to make their religious beliefs into law.
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.
