PreteenCommunist - ask me anything ^.^

Yes, because the person behind is well-thought-out and not ideologically paralyzed like you.

History and mankind's entire existence has been misery, one person dominating the other. Slaughter, exploitation, extortion, abuse. Take off the curtains of bull(*)(*)(*)(*) and you will see the mechanisms of this machine. Capitalism is a mere step in humanities' history, a temporary state that will either destroy itself or will lead to some other stage in our society. Looking at the Communism in such an archaic way (Moralistic bourgeois nonesence) will be more of a hinderance that a help Mr. High Horse.

Have you any idea of the evil and misery done by the US in the last hundred yeas, and continuing to this day? The US has had a long history of exploitation and 'evil' acts, very similar to the Khmer Rouge (which they inadventently supported in the UN). United Fruit company in Guatemala (An entire history of horror and opression similar to what Ancaps want), the war in East Timor, Indonesia, economic warfare by Reagan in Venezuela (which by the way is being felt to this day), Pinochet in Chile, Dirty war in Argentina, the mass murder of Native Americans, CIA backing autocrat in Iran, and SO SO much more.

We are not argueing for state-based Marxism-Leninism here, far from it. Communism in general is a very wide set of political and socio-economic tendencies, just like mainstream politics. Left-Communism exemplifies the nature of anti-authoritarian Marxism, and western Marxists have always been hostile to the USSR and other 'tankie' ideologies. In fact, Bakunin has warned Marxists of the threat that vanguardism showed in that it would always lead to a brutal dictatorship.

 

Ok, I could really switch that to be interpreted as something to help the idea of class exploitation. For example, the 'compromising' of consciousness is very true, a master is in euphoria when he is beating (or in this case making bank off of) his slave/worker. It takes away a part of his reality and takes him to dreamworld where he is at the top. But really, he does not know that he is the one who is also a slave to the system.

Agree with you on that other point.

 

Shameless!!

LOL!!

AA

 

OK...a question.

The ship you are on is sinking and you are out in the South Pacific where there are only a few uninhabited islands close enough for you to reach by lifeboat.

Everyone on the ship drowns below deck except you and to men.

There 2 men hate each other and each are asking you to jump into the only 2 life boats left.

One man is the almost girlish metro-sexual that you have previously indicated you are attracted to....the other man is the...."I can build you a shopping mall with my knife and some flint."...type who is the He-Man muscular type.

Who's life boat do you chose to get into knowing that both men will row in opposite directions to each other?

AA

 

You know the old communist motto. Whatever is yours is mine, and whatever is mine is mine.

 

Of course I'm speaking about your fantasy communist nation after it has reached the pinnacle of pure communism. Not transitional in any way.

Even though a true communistic society only can exist in the imaginations of people like you, you must realize that real people will live in your utopia. And any group of people will have a large group percent that will not pull their own weight and just leech off the work of others. Even if only 5 out of 100 able-bodied, young people in your pure communist state decide they are not going to work and just lay about---what are you, the leader, going to do with them?

---let them starve and give them no welfare?

---expect their blood relatives to take care of them (but these don't matter in your new communal system do they)?

---give them welfare and free food and healthcare and everything else for doing nothing?

---send them out of your country?

----put them in a work camp and re-educate them?

---or execute them to make an example of them?

 

OP....Communist? That only works for ants and bees.

People are too self centered and greedy to be good communists. Move over to socialism as in social democracy, it is more balanced.

With communism you work like a dog for a piece of stale bread and get no $ for it while the greedy communist kingpins running the ship reap the rewards...fudge that. Similar to what we have now in the US of A except we get a few bucks for our effort.

 

Ok so I think what this boils down to is this. You are, correct me if I am wrong, against money and class distinction. So, I'll start with money and its importance.

Money is perhaps one of the greatest inventions of human thought simply because it can convert labour and resources into a numerical value. It is a universal median of exchange, if you will. So, rather than make my goat worth five loaves of bread, or three sacks of grain, I just make it 20 gold coins. And no matter what anyone else has, it will still be worth 20 gold coins. Money itself actually has no value save the value we place on it. A euro is only a euro because we say it is a euro. Most money is electronic these days. There are more electronic purchases with electronic money than actual currency in circulation. And yet, as long as everyone trusts the fact that a euro is a euro, it has value. That's the beauty of money. In a state without money, you don't have this means of exchange. Ahhh, but you're a communist. So you would advocate for the fact that exchange never needs to happen if everyone gets everything, right. So money is, at heart, not really necessary in a communist state.

This brings me to the social elite premise. Why do your friends not want to be janitors? or taxi cab drivers? What if these jobs paid you through the roof, and doctors and architects received a pittance. While yes, you may still dream of being an architect, or being a doctor, if the wages were reversed, being an architect would not let you survive. And yes, there are a few that are willing to sacrifice their quality of life for the job they love, but can you take that gamble? Can you assume that the few in society that want to be janitors will? This is the issue with doing a job for intrinsic value. The fact remains that being a janitor has very rare intrinsic value, and so the amount of people who strive to be a janitor is very low. So you can gamble on the fact that, yes, maybe a few will go and be janitors. But what if there are not enough janitors. What will you do then? Ahh but you are against the division of labour, or having everyone do separate jobs. Ok, so this brings you back in time about 300 years, before the Renaissance. Where everyone's job was a trade job. In a system like this, communism has the potential to work. Because there are no scientists, few musicians, no need for merchants, you can have everyone do everything, and pull together in a small community. I think that if the numbers were small, and the time period were a little bit older, you could do it. Communism would flourish. But in a state as big as the EU for example, with jobs that require a lifetime of study, and the rest of the world living in capitalism, it is nigh impossible.

Which brings me back to the necessity of an elite. The doctrine of fascism is at heart, that a social elite is necessary to society. And while the economy is not exactly capitalist, nor is it socialist (but I suppose you could call it that) it won't go as far as communism. You may not think money is the reason people want to be doctors, at a large scale and with emotion and feeling removed from the picture, money is indeed, one of the only reasons people become doctors. There is some level of control at the individual level, but you cannot be overly optimistic and assume that people will pull their weight. Because if someone drops the ball, what then? Are you going to Stalin them in line? Are you going to let it fall apart? Without a strong sense of nationalism instilled in the entire population, you can't bank on people pulling their weight for no reward. It's not that people won't, its just the off chance that they won't. You want a foolproof society, not one where you have to hope and pray that the fabric holds together. Which is why, while capitalism has its problems, it works better, because we can at least know that the fabric of society will hold together, even if it is stretched too tight right now.

So, to, I suppose, finish the story, the problem with capitalism. It stratifies society more and more as time goes on. Again, maybe about 300 years ago, it was perfect. But as time went on, rich became richer, poor became poorer, an impossible social aristocracy arose, and we arrive at today. I rest my case that people are never at discontent with a social elite so long as they can somehow achieve that social elite. For example, if you are poor, but you know that, if you work hard, you can become rich, then you would work hard. That's what made America so great about 100 years ago. Nowadays, that social elite is becoming harder and harder to achieve, which is why people are losing their contentedness with society. Which is why you, at age 14, are looking to communism for salvation. The fascist society (Im talking Mussolini here, not Hitler, he was a different story) crafted a social elite that was easily achievable but hard enough to get to that people were still motivated. That's why people did not seek to go outside the law to achieve social elite status (crime went down), poverty plummeted, and the country of Italy economically boomed (until Mussolini screwed it up rebuilding the Roman Empire, sheesh). Hitler made the Aryan race his social elite and the Jews were removed from the fabric of society which is why his story is different even though it holds true. Furthermore, Germany is a clear example of the social elite issue. Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels both turned to communism because of the circumstances in Europe and specifically Germany at the time. Hitler turned on the Jews because they made up the social elite that was impossible to achieve at the time. Marx and Engels crafted communism to destroy elitism and poverty in one blow. Brilliantly true story.

Anyways, that's my rebuttal. You do seem quite learned though for your age. I'm 16, and most of the people I know even two years older dont know a thing about politics and foreign politics at all. So cheers and a salute to that.

 

What made you decide to become a communist?

 

You might want to watch this documentary: Communism by the backdoor

[video=youtube;LcEYa48yfzo]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LcEYa48yfzo[/video]

 

As with most Intellectuals, you have great theories, and proposals, however, as someone much older than yourself, having seen Communism up close, it is not as simple as you hypothesize, Communism starts off as you explain, however, people rebel against Party lines causing the use of force.

George Orwell said the following: “That rifle on the wall of the labourer's cottage or working class flat is the symbol of democracy. It is our job to see that it stays there.”


"Now I will tell you the answer to my question. It is this. The Party seeks power entirely for its own sake. We are not interested in the good of others; we are interested solely in power, pure power. What pure power means you will understand presently. We are different from the oligarchies of the past in that we know what we are doing. All the others, even those who resembled ourselves, were cowards and hypocrites. The German Nazis and the Russian Communists came very close to us in their methods, but they never had the courage to recognize their own motives. They pretended, perhaps they even believed, that they had seized power unwillingly and for a limited time, and that just around the corner there lay a paradise where human beings would be free and equal. We are not like that. We know that no one ever seizes power with the intention of relinquishing it. Power is not a means; it is an end. One does not establish a dictatorship in order to safeguard a revolution; one makes the revolution in order to establish the dictatorship. The object of persecution is persecution. The object of torture is torture. The object of power is power. Now you begin to understand me.”
― George Orwell, 1984"

 

We have Constitutions and "dry counties". That usually requires democratic input, in the US.

 

What do you personally think of the Worgl, Austria local money experiment that
took place during the Great Depression.

Notice post #4 here:

http://www.politicalforum.com/canad...nce-unified-theory-modern-world-problems.html

 

I was so impressed with this reply that I turned it into an opening post
in a new topic over in the Economics and Trade forum:

http://www.politicalforum.com/econo...ps-one-greatest-inventions-human-thought.html
Money is perhaps one of the greatest inventions of human thought!

The title is quoted from a discussion over in the Humor and Satire section
where HailVictory is debating PreteenCommunist, on Communism:

One of the reasons why I decided to make this into an opening post.... is because
HailVictory is initiating his campaign to eventually become President of the United States!

I enthusiastically agree with his theory that money........ is a truly great invention!

I feel that I have got to get HailVictory in contact with those of you who can
really assist him to tweak and improve his platform.

.........

I am in total agreement with you that money is an astonishingly brilliant invention.......
in theory.... money could be used in such a way that a vastly better world is
organized with the stuff?!?!

http://www.politicalforum.com/polit...national-wealth-must-occur-order-finance.html
A massive reevaluation of national wealth must occur in order to finance....
..... the shift over to a truly green and sustainable economy!

I just got back a brilliant summary of the numbers for the national wealth of the world's leading economies but.......
... it is apparent to me that we must look at these numbers and rethink the entire formula....... if we wish to finance the shift over to a truly green, truly sustainable economy.... and do it with the minimum amount of economic, political and social upheaval?!
...........
..........

 

Opinion on the following people:

George Orwell
Max Stirner ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)
Rosa Luxemburg
Vladimir Lenin
Paul Mattick
Antonio Gramsci
Leon Trotsky
Amadeo Bordiga
Noam Chomsky
Slavoj Zizek
Richard D Wolff

 

I agree with you, however we must understand that the Socialism of the Soviet Union was not what even the theories perceived it to be (ie worker's control over means of production, end of markets, and establishment of dominance of the working class (this definition can be expanded nowadays).

Orwell made a great point against dominance of a Leninist Vanguard, those who hold power will seek to keep it, through violence if necessary. Orwell himself was a socialist (social democrat), and he knew that authoritarianism in Russia would turn into a nightmare as Stalin wanted to keep his power. However even Lenin himself was a dynamic human being, Soviet Russia was in the beginning going on a good run for what it had. However, the issue was the way it went, mostly as a result of western tensions and the rise of Stalin.

Orwell made several comments about a socialist society actually going right, and that was in his book Homage to Catalonia. Here's a quote:

"I had dropped more or less by chance into the only community of any size in Western Europe where political consciousness and disbelief in capitalism were more normal than their opposites. Up here in Aragón one was among tens of thousands of people, mainly though not entirely of working-class origin, all living at the same level and mingling on terms of equality. In theory it was perfect equality, and even in practice it was not far from it. There is a sense in which it would be true to say that one was experiencing a foretaste of Socialism, by which I mean that the prevailing mental atmosphere was that of Socialism. Many of the normal motives of civilised life– snobbishness, money-grubbing, fear of the boss, etc.– had simply ceased to exist. The ordinary class-division of society had disappeared to an extent that is almost unthinkable in the money-tainted air of England; there was no one there except the peasants and ourselves, and no one owned anyone else as his master.

— George Orwell, Homage to Catalonia, ch. VII"

 

Hi everyone...hisashiburi, long time no see yada yada.

Sorry about the random, unexplained absence. I came back to say that I'm probably going to be posting very sporadically on this site in the future, if at all. I'm thoroughly disillusioned with both politics and internet arguments, so you can imagine how I feel about these forums, and apart from that newspaper column (just google "Commissaress"), a few political events organised by the organisation behind said newspaper and probably some fruitless dinner-table debates with extended family members I haven't spoken to in 3 years, I will not be doing much more political stuff in general. There was no particular event which sparked this; my boredom with most political matters has just reached a nodal point (heh) and I would much rather spend my time on things which I feel develop me and make me happy than things which make me want to try out a recipe from the Anarchist Cookbook.

I've spoken to some really smart, thorough and intellectually honest people on here, and my good experiences have far outnumbered the bad ones (like, even the hypotheses that I was some middle-aged American guy were just funny). I wish everyone luck in whatever they're doing, in any potential running for office and of course in not getting killed during the revolution . Maybe I'll post something non-political in the future, but my appetite for such political discussion on forums - which was very healthy for over two years, as anyone unlucky enough to see my incredibly stupid posts as a 12-year-old on RevLeft would know - has largely run out. Politics was never my desired "field" anyway, so to speak, and I've just become far too jaded and cynical about the whole thing at this point.

If you want to stay in touch, you could PM me or use the email commissaress@gmail.com (kind of my "business" email). Otherwise, toodaloo and all the best ^_~

 

Probability still is in favor of you being a guy.

Not saying that is the fact.

That's just what the numbers dictate.

AA

 

Still at it are we? �� Ajde, let's not derail yet another thread...

(I do admire your conviction though; it probably gets you far.)

 

I will tell you what.....please answer the question I posed to you on this topic and we will take it from there...OK?

AA

 

I've spoken to some really smart, thorough and intellectually honest people on here


Aw, shucks. Ah'm just an ole country boy, ma'am.

I wish everyone luck in whatever they're doing




Same here. When you comin' over to 'Murica?

 

Sorry, what question?

 

Post #229 of this topic.

AA

 

I'm not planning to anytime soon, actually...all my planned holidays are within Europe because my family's kind of broke and every European student goes interrailing after their exams (and I'm mainstream af so I'm doing that too). I was just wondering recently what it would be like if we had a Political Forums meetup somewhere in the US. Not sure how well that would end.

 

If you are young don't be that stupid.

AA