Why is communism a bad word?

[HeyYou]

When someone doesn't have any intention to do anything reprehensible the person won't oppose any law that prevents her from doing this reprehensible thing. This is the kind of elementary truth the marxist-leninists and the right-wing/fascists still don't seem to understand.

 

To ensure the creation of wealths generates an economical development you need a big financial transparency and laws to prevent the boses from hogging all the money to collect the secondary houses and sport cars they will never use. These things require an important separation of the powers, preventing the psychopaths from usurping the power and an important intervention of the state in the economy.

The problem of the goods produced by the Third-World slaves remaining as expensive as when they were produced by less exploited workers applies with the dematerialised music, video games and alike products as well by the way.

 

The flexi-precarity is the absence of security of the employment, the absence of laws to protect the deserving workers from the abuses of their boss. That bane makes many persons can't plan their future, buy a house or a car which compromises the employment in these sectors.

So what do you propose for those laws? Currently, the wealth gap in the US is the biggest it ever has been, and is increasing. Income for the top 5% has been increasing dramatically, while for the rest of us, it has remained pretty much stagnant. Every day you can read about some company going bankrupt, yet the top management gets millions of dollars from their 'golden parachutes'. Meanwhile, all the folks that were collecting pensions, are now left out in the cold.....

 

A couple decades ago, a man would get a job, and stay there for most, if not all, of his working career. Not any more. I think the average 'lifespan' of a typical job these days is about 3 years..... What has changed? Society has. We keep getting more government intervention via the EPA, and various 'insurance' policies that the government requires...... such as Unemployment Insurance..... (which, for the employer, is pretty much useless, as even though they have been paying into that fund, if some employee starts collecting unemployment, the EMPLOYER still gets to pay it. NOT the state. What have they been doing with all that money they collect?????

 

We also have the problem of a government that simply does not seem to be able to operate within a reasonable budget. They ALWAYS have a shortfall, on the order of a trillion dollars per year. Hence, the US is now something to the tune of 25 Trillion dollars, and climbing..... Anyone else tried to run their budget like that, they would be in prison in short order... but, for the government, that's OK? I will NEVER understand that one......

[Oblivionaddicted]

The government doesn't protect people's rights because there isn't enough separation of the powers to force it do so.

 

I already listed the solutions to change it: prevent the psychopaths form usurping the power, give all the parties the same financing, make the medias independent from the state and the company bosses notably.

Edited June 7, 2020 by Oblivionaddicted

[SurtrDraugr]

I realize that I'm getting into this a bit late, but I thought it was worth adding another perspective.

 

I see Communism as a bad word because it, by its very nature, promises one thing and then delivers the opposite. The Communist ideal is one of absolute economic equality, communitarianism, and often the destruction of most (or even all) hierarchy. It is impossible to achieve, because it goes against human nature. As such, the pursuit of Communism will inevitably lead to major conflict, misery, and likely great amounts of death. In short, it promises paradise, and yet it delivers Hell. This is not due to the circumstances of any particular area or regime, but due to the nature of Communism. It radicalizes people with a vision of something unobtainable, and then motivates them to perform actions that actually move society further from that goal, not closer.

 

How's that?

[Oblivionaddicted]

I realize that I'm getting into this a bit late, but I thought it was worth adding another perspective.

 

I see Communism as a bad word because it, by its very nature, promises one thing and then delivers the opposite. The Communist ideal is one of absolute economic equality, communitarianism, and often the destruction of most (or even all) hierarchy. It is impossible to achieve, because it goes against human nature. As such, the pursuit of Communism will inevitably lead to major conflict, misery, and likely great amounts of death. In short, it promises paradise, and yet it delivers Hell. This is not due to the circumstances of any particular area or regime, but due to the nature of Communism. It radicalizes people with a vision of something unobtainable, and then motivates them to perform actions that actually move society further from that goal, not closer.

 

How's that?

Communism is compatible with the separation of powers, marxism-leninism like the right-wing/fascist culture are not.

The separation of powers is the fundament of democracy.

 

These are things you don't seem to understand.

Edited June 18, 2020 by Oblivionaddicted

[AmaccurzerO]

 

I realize that I'm getting into this a bit late, but I thought it was worth adding another perspective.

 

I see Communism as a bad word because it, by its very nature, promises one thing and then delivers the opposite. The Communist ideal is one of absolute economic equality, communitarianism, and often the destruction of most (or even all) hierarchy. It is impossible to achieve, because it goes against human nature. As such, the pursuit of Communism will inevitably lead to major conflict, misery, and likely great amounts of death. In short, it promises paradise, and yet it delivers Hell. This is not due to the circumstances of any particular area or regime, but due to the nature of Communism. It radicalizes people with a vision of something unobtainable, and then motivates them to perform actions that actually move society further from that goal, not closer.

 

How's that?

Communism is compatible with the sepration of powers, marxism-leninism like the right-wing/fascist culture are not.

The separation of powers is the fundament of democracy.

 

These are things you don't seem to understand.

 

Communism is not compatible with separation of powers. Not in practice. Never. History proves it.

 

To continue repeating the same rethorical a thousand times does not make your statements true. Not today. Today we can research. Today, if someone attempts to deceive you with such statement is because you do not make your homework.

 

But these are things you dont seem to understand.

Edited June 18, 2020 by AmaccurzerO

[Oblivionaddicted]

 

 

I realize that I'm getting into this a bit late, but I thought it was worth adding another perspective.

 

I see Communism as a bad word because it, by its very nature, promises one thing and then delivers the opposite. The Communist ideal is one of absolute economic equality, communitarianism, and often the destruction of most (or even all) hierarchy. It is impossible to achieve, because it goes against human nature. As such, the pursuit of Communism will inevitably lead to major conflict, misery, and likely great amounts of death. In short, it promises paradise, and yet it delivers Hell. This is not due to the circumstances of any particular area or regime, but due to the nature of Communism. It radicalizes people with a vision of something unobtainable, and then motivates them to perform actions that actually move society further from that goal, not closer.

 

How's that?

Communism is compatible with the sepration of powers, marxism-leninism like the right-wing/fascist culture are not.

The separation of powers is the fundament of democracy.

 

These are things you don't seem to understand.

 

Communism is not compatible with separation of powers. Not in practice. Never. History proves it.

 

To continue repeating the same rethorical a thousand times does not make your statements true. Not today. Today we can research. Today, if someone attempts to deceive you with such statement is because you do not make your homework.

 

But these are things you dont seem to understand.

 

Can you give me the name of one single dictator who made a coup d'état by nationalizing a company? http://image.jeuxvideo.com/smileys_img/12.gif

Can you give me the name of one single dictator who made a purge by creating a welfare-state? http://image.jeuxvideo.com/smileys_img/12.gif

 

All the things the dictators need to make a coup d'état or a purge are the police, the army, the control of the justice and of the medias.

 

I repeat the same rethorical because I know it highlights some truths the right-wing fascist propagandists like you prefer to keep hidden.

 

So according to you it is impoossible to have on one hand free medias, an independent justice, an equal financing for all the parties, a maximum financial transparency ; to make it an important separation of the powers and on the other an economy only made of public companies? http://image.jeuxvideo.com/smileys_img/12.gif

 

I'm impatient to see your demonstration. http://image.jeuxvideo.com/smileys_img/39.gif

[AmaccurzerO]

 

 

 

I realize that I'm getting into this a bit late, but I thought it was worth adding another perspective.

 

I see Communism as a bad word because it, by its very nature, promises one thing and then delivers the opposite. The Communist ideal is one of absolute economic equality, communitarianism, and often the destruction of most (or even all) hierarchy. It is impossible to achieve, because it goes against human nature. As such, the pursuit of Communism will inevitably lead to major conflict, misery, and likely great amounts of death. In short, it promises paradise, and yet it delivers Hell. This is not due to the circumstances of any particular area or regime, but due to the nature of Communism. It radicalizes people with a vision of something unobtainable, and then motivates them to perform actions that actually move society further from that goal, not closer.

 

How's that?

Communism is compatible with the sepration of powers, marxism-leninism like the right-wing/fascist culture are not.

The separation of powers is the fundament of democracy.

 

These are things you don't seem to understand.

 

Communism is not compatible with separation of powers. Not in practice. Never. History proves it.

 

To continue repeating the same rethorical a thousand times does not make your statements true. Not today. Today we can research. Today, if someone attempts to deceive you with such statement is because you do not make your homework.

 

But these are things you dont seem to understand.

 

Can you give me the name of one single dictator who made a coup d'état by nationalizing a company? http://image.jeuxvideo.com/smileys_img/12.gif

Can you give me the name of one single dictator who made a purge by creating a welfare-state? http://image.jeuxvideo.com/smileys_img/12.gif

 

All the things the dictators need to make a coup d'état or a purge are the police, the army, the control of the justice and of the medias.

 

I repeat the same rethorical because I know it highlights some truths the right-wing fascist propagandists like you prefer to keep hidden.

 

So according to you it is impoossible to have on one hand free medias, an independent justice, an equal financing for all the parties, a maximum financial transparency ; to make it an important separation of the powers and on the other an economy only made of public companies? http://image.jeuxvideo.com/smileys_img/12.gif

 

I'm impatient to see your demonstration. http://image.jeuxvideo.com/smileys_img/39.gif

 

Do you want a name of a dictator who made a coup d'etat by nationalizing a company?:

 

Fidel Castro. Fidel Castro not only nationalized all companies, it also expropiated all national companies: small, medium and big companies. He forbid private property and free press. And that's is one of the ways you install a dictaroship. Check your eye in the mirror. :dance:

 

And your rethorical is non-sense. Fascism is so linked to the right as is it to the left-wing. Do you even know that nazi meant national-socialist? NATIONAL_SOCIALIST. Can you read it well now? Do you need bigger characters? Do you need a longer list? I am not here for that. Do your homework, dude. And dont believe all what your left-wing profersors want to put in your mind. Free your mind.

 

I vote for freedom of market and freedom of speech. I am agaisnt monopolios as well as against dictarotships. We have more points in common than those you want to see. But communism ideology is so fascist as the right-wing fascist you always mention.

Edited June 18, 2020 by AmaccurzerO

[Oblivionaddicted]

 

 

 

 

I realize that I'm getting into this a bit late, but I thought it was worth adding another perspective.

 

I see Communism as a bad word because it, by its very nature, promises one thing and then delivers the opposite. The Communist ideal is one of absolute economic equality, communitarianism, and often the destruction of most (or even all) hierarchy. It is impossible to achieve, because it goes against human nature. As such, the pursuit of Communism will inevitably lead to major conflict, misery, and likely great amounts of death. In short, it promises paradise, and yet it delivers Hell. This is not due to the circumstances of any particular area or regime, but due to the nature of Communism. It radicalizes people with a vision of something unobtainable, and then motivates them to perform actions that actually move society further from that goal, not closer.

 

How's that?

Communism is compatible with the sepration of powers, marxism-leninism like the right-wing/fascist culture are not.

The separation of powers is the fundament of democracy.

 

These are things you don't seem to understand.

 

Communism is not compatible with separation of powers. Not in practice. Never. History proves it.

 

To continue repeating the same rethorical a thousand times does not make your statements true. Not today. Today we can research. Today, if someone attempts to deceive you with such statement is because you do not make your homework.

 

But these are things you dont seem to understand.

 

Can you give me the name of one single dictator who made a coup d'état by nationalizing a company? http://image.jeuxvideo.com/smileys_img/12.gif

Can you give me the name of one single dictator who made a purge by creating a welfare-state? http://image.jeuxvideo.com/smileys_img/12.gif

 

All the things the dictators need to make a coup d'état or a purge are the police, the army, the control of the justice and of the medias.

 

I repeat the same rethorical because I know it highlights some truths the right-wing fascist propagandists like you prefer to keep hidden.

 

So according to you it is impoossible to have on one hand free medias, an independent justice, an equal financing for all the parties, a maximum financial transparency ; to make it an important separation of the powers and on the other an economy only made of public companies? http://image.jeuxvideo.com/smileys_img/12.gif

 

I'm impatient to see your demonstration. http://image.jeuxvideo.com/smileys_img/39.gif

 

Do you want a name of a dictator who made a coup d'etat by nationalizing a company?:

 

Fidel Castro. Fidel Castro not only nationalized all companies, it also expropiated all national companies: small, medium and big companies. He forbid private property and free press. And that's is one of the ways you install a dictaroship. Check your eye in the mirror. :dance:

 

And your rethorical is non-sense. Fascism is so linked to the right as is it to the left-wing. Do you even know that nazi meant national-socialist? NATIONAL_SOCIALIST. Can you read it well now? Do you need bigger characters? Do you need a longer list? I am not here for that. Do your homework, dude. And dont believe all what your left-wing profersors want to put in your mind. Free your mind.

 

I vote for freedom of market and freedom of speech. I am agaisnt monopolios as well as against dictarotships. We have more points in common than those you want to see. But communism ideology is so fascist as the right-wing fascist you always mention.

 

Fidel Castro was already dictator when he nationalized all the companies. You're either a very lame manipulator, or retarded. http://image.jeuxvideo.com/smileys_img/12.gif

 

How do you define when a party is socialist?

• By relying on its name since the dictators are known to lie as they breath? http://image.jeuxvideo.com/smileys_img/12.gif
• Or by comparing the characteristics of socialism with the policy applied by said regime?

Socialism is a system where the state interveins as a counter power to protect the workers, consumers and people in general from the countless slaver and public poisoner bosses (the social class with the highest rate of psychopaths by the way) to redistribute the wealth and ensure the workers who create the wealth and the members of the lowest social classes don't live in destitution.

 

Hitler forbid the syndicates, increased the working times, decreased the salaries and used the wealths to finance its imperialist policy and replace the exploited workers with war-prisoners/slaves it lented to private companies. And you dare presenting the nazis as socialists? http://image.jeuxvideo.com/smileys_img/39.gif

 

You vote for the freedom of speech and that's why you never denunced the company bosses who control the medias since the freedom of the press is a fundament of democracy. http://image.jeuxvideo.com/smileys_img/39.gif

Edited August 3, 2020 by Oblivionaddicted

[HeyYou]

 

Socialism is a system where the state interveins as a counter power to protect the workers, consumers and people in general from the countless slaver and public poisoner bosses

So instead of slaver bosses, we get slaver government.

 

And

 

 

ensure the workers who create the wealth and the members of the lowest social classes don't live in destitution

So why is it, communist countries seem to have the most folks living in poverty??

[AmaccurzerO]

 

 

 

 

 

I realize that I'm getting into this a bit late, but I thought it was worth adding another perspective.

 

I see Communism as a bad word because it, by its very nature, promises one thing and then delivers the opposite. The Communist ideal is one of absolute economic equality, communitarianism, and often the destruction of most (or even all) hierarchy. It is impossible to achieve, because it goes against human nature. As such, the pursuit of Communism will inevitably lead to major conflict, misery, and likely great amounts of death. In short, it promises paradise, and yet it delivers Hell. This is not due to the circumstances of any particular area or regime, but due to the nature of Communism. It radicalizes people with a vision of something unobtainable, and then motivates them to perform actions that actually move society further from that goal, not closer.

 

How's that?

Communism is compatible with the sepration of powers, marxism-leninism like the right-wing/fascist culture are not.

The separation of powers is the fundament of democracy.

 

These are things you don't seem to understand.

 

Communism is not compatible with separation of powers. Not in practice. Never. History proves it.

 

To continue repeating the same rethorical a thousand times does not make your statements true. Not today. Today we can research. Today, if someone attempts to deceive you with such statement is because you do not make your homework.

 

But these are things you dont seem to understand.

 

Can you give me the name of one single dictator who made a coup d'état by nationalizing a company? http://image.jeuxvideo.com/smileys_img/12.gif

Can you give me the name of one single dictator who made a purge by creating a welfare-state? http://image.jeuxvideo.com/smileys_img/12.gif

 

All the things the dictators need to make a coup d'état or a purge are the police, the army, the control of the justice and of the medias.

 

I repeat the same rethorical because I know it highlights some truths the right-wing fascist propagandists like you prefer to keep hidden.

 

So according to you it is impoossible to have on one hand free medias, an independent justice, an equal financing for all the parties, a maximum financial transparency ; to make it an important separation of the powers and on the other an economy only made of public companies? http://image.jeuxvideo.com/smileys_img/12.gif

 

I'm impatient to see your demonstration. http://image.jeuxvideo.com/smileys_img/39.gif

 

Do you want a name of a dictator who made a coup d'etat by nationalizing a company?:

 

Fidel Castro. Fidel Castro not only nationalized all companies, it also expropiated all national companies: small, medium and big companies. He forbid private property and free press. And that's is one of the ways you install a dictaroship. Check your eye in the mirror. :dance:

 

And your rethorical is non-sense. Fascism is so linked to the right as is it to the left-wing. Do you even know that nazi meant national-socialist? NATIONAL_SOCIALIST. Can you read it well now? Do you need bigger characters? Do you need a longer list? I am not here for that. Do your homework, dude. And dont believe all what your left-wing profersors want to put in your mind. Free your mind.

 

I vote for freedom of market and freedom of speech. I am agaisnt monopolios as well as against dictarotships. We have more points in common than those you want to see. But communism ideology is so fascist as the right-wing fascist you always mention.

 

Fidel Castro was already dictator when he nationalized all the companies. You're either a very lame manipulator, or retarded. http://image.jeuxvideo.com/smileys_img/12.gif

 

How do you define when a party is socialist?

• By relying on its name since the dictators are known to lie as they breath? http://image.jeuxvideo.com/smileys_img/12.gif
• Or by comparing the characteristics of socialism with the policy applied by said regime?

Socialism is a system where the state interveins as a counter power to protect the workers, consumers and people in general from the countless slaver and public poisoner bosses (the social boss with the highest rate of psychopaths by the way) to redistribute the wealth and ensure the workers who create the wealth and the members of the lowest social classes don't live in destitution.

 

Hitler forbid the syndicates, increased the working times, decreased the salaries and used the wealths to finance its imperialist policy and replace the exploited workers with war-prisoners/slaves it lented to private companies. And you dare presenting the nazis as socialists? http://image.jeuxvideo.com/smileys_img/39.gif

 

You vote for the freedom of speech and that's why you never denunced the company bosses who control the medias since the freedom of the press is a fundament of democracy. http://image.jeuxvideo.com/smileys_img/39.gif

 

Lame manipulator and retarded? Your lack of arguments and knowledge of History make you recurre to insults? Wow!

 

I am not daring presenting the nazis as socialists. It is fact and it is implicit in the name and in its policies. For the record, Fidel Castro forbid the syndicates, decreased the salaries and used wealth to finance its socialist agenda across Latin America, created the UMAP ( which means forced labor camps for political dissidents) and monopilized all the industries and medias. Any resemblance with the nazis (national-socialist party) is a coincidence? Actually, not. If you dont understand it, well, there is not much to do.

 

There is freedom of press when there are public and private medias (small, medium and big medias). When only goverment controls press, there is not freedom of press. Isnt clear?

 

You repeat again and again the word "psychopaths" when referring to some groups, but in the late posts, you have started to behave like one. Stop behaving like one to keep this debate friendly and to find common points.

Edited June 18, 2020 by AmaccurzerO