Newspaper article (by me!)

[Magness]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Dramnek_Ulk:

Capitalism is extremely fragile and does not work nor will ever from an ethical point of view, it barely work in an economic sense. Companies are always expecting to be bailed out by the government, or be given subsidies and preferential treatment and it is so easy for it all to come crashing down. And the whole system has to have lots of safeguards in place to stop it all falling apart. The whole system has to be supported on a never-ending cycle of debt and subsidy adn there must alwasy be someone at the bottem of the chain.

---

1. Of course, companies are trying to get a leg up on the competition. That's why it's called competition. And just because they ask/demand subsidies from the government, doesn't mean that you have to give it to them!!! The US government rarely subsidizes or bails out companies or industries. Don't blame capitalism for the inability of European governments to say "NO".

And just because a company goes broke and goes under, that does not mean that capitalism has failed. Not in the least. That indicates that capitalism has succeeded!!! In large part, capitalism is a darwinian process ... survival of the fittest.


Capitalism a failure? Look at the US economy since WW2, it has grown steadily since 1945. Yes, there are regular down turns. It's called the "business cycle" and it seems to occur about once per decade. It's very annoying, but not unexpected. But all in all, the US economy is massive and strong and provides well for its people. And it generally works best when the government keeps its hands off. (Yes, some regulation of various kinds is needed, but this is generally done for "good" reasons or to help increase overall stability to the economy.)


What about the Soviet economy? Constant shortages of necessary items. A pathetic distribution system. Everyone, with the exception of those few party members at the top, lived in the same general level of poverty. Yeah, here's how I desccribe communism ... Let's increase the living standard at the bottom by about 2% and then let's make EVERYONE live at that standard. Why? Because if we cannot all have the livings standard of the rich, then we're all gonna live like the poor because we (the party elite) have decided that's what's "fair".

Simplistic, I know. But what the heck, that is what happened.

When companies fail, people pay the price in terms of lowered living standards and grinding poverty.
And you can point at Russia all you like and say communism doesn’t work, but that is meaningless, as it was NOT properly applied, as people who have read Marx would know, You should know what it is and what its intentions are before you criticise it, if you do that’s fine but otherwise pointing at Russia and making assumptions is not good. Much argument is based around the fact that “it will fail?” Where is the evidence for this? (I repeat Russia/China was not communism as Marx intended) the evidence for the failure of capitalism all around us, it is in Afghanistan, it is in the 3rd world and it is in the companies we work for and in the people who govern us, try reading some of the theory and thoughts of Marx and thinking up your own meaningful ideas of great significance as to why communism would fail, if it was applied on a global scale without the capitalist elements needed at the moment for outside trade would it really fail? You probably do not have enough facial hair to understand or appreciate communism, being clean-shaven only helps the capitalists.

[Barry the Sprout]

(Dadadadada!!! DA DA!! Charge!)

Wow lots has happened since I last posted here. And as you probably guessed I have lots to say.

The thing about Communism, which Dramnek is saying in a different way, is that it can only happen as a natural progression from capitalism and it requires a complete change in the mindset of the people involved. Capitalism is founded on greed/self interest (delete as you see fit) and as such that has been the basis for our minds for quite some time now. Our whole lives are governed by the principles we live under and as such it changes our minds in an attempt to make us accept what is really a destructive system.

Capitalism promotes one class of people against another. You can say that this is fair as people effectively decide which class they are going to be in,but that only works if everyone starts from square one. Which they blatantly don't. The overwhelming majority of society work for the benefit of others as it is the only way for them to live. They are wage slaves, or the proletariat. They are a class of people created expressly by capitalism, with an interest in destroying the very system which created them. That is the irony of it in my view.

So why is it still around? Because people still don't realise their own power. It is almost second nature to accept that communism is completely impossible and that man is naturally greedy. Capitalism assaults all other ways of life and then points and laughs when they fail. The problem with capitalism is that it is entrenched in people's minds more than in the physical world. But it is my sincere beleif that eventually people will realise that there is another way to do this.

As for why it hasn't worked elsewhere. It is fairly obvious from the arguments above. Because capitalism has to be overthrown by the working class it has a tendecy to cling on in people's minds if it is instead overthrown by the "representatives" of the working class. In Russia there was no strong workers movement to speak of. The country was dominated by a largely illiterate peasant population with the ability to hold the government to ransom. That is no way the kind of condition that a revolution is going to survive in. From square one the government had to resort to oppression and murder. If they had waited for a proper workers movement to have a revolutin with then things might have been different for Russian communism.

Also I should point out that communism is supposed to be a global phenomenon, which might explain its failure when applied in single countries who still have to maintain a capitalist economy to encourage trade. Just a thought...

Dramnek, just as an aside, your sig gets weirder everytime I am on here.

[Magness]

Blah, blah, blah..... More communist postings, most BS. Communists, nazis, socialists, fascists. Murdering bastards all. The one thing that they have in common is their common race to see who can murder more human beings before humanity gets tired of their bullcrap and dump them all in the trash compactor of history.

[John D Harris]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Magness:
Blah, blah, blah..... More communist postings, most BS. Communists, nazis, socialists, fascists. Murdering bastards all. The one thing that they have in common is their common race to see who can murder more human beings before humanity gets tired of their bullcrap and dump them all in the trash compactor of history.

---

A Man (assumtion made)After My Own Mind, the only down side I see Magness, is you're a Yankee Well nobody's perfect
Magness if you have Sierra's Civil War Generals 2 let me know I'm looking for some competition, Bobby Lee has nothing on me

[Magness]

John D Harris, I have southern (Louisiana and Mississippi) relatives. Does that help???

[Magness]

Oh BTW, JD Harris, calling a Red Sox fan a "Yankee" is a mortal sin in these parts!!! [img]graemlins/1pissed.gif[/img] [img]graemlins/biglaugh.gif[/img]

[John D Harris]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Magness:
Oh BTW, JD Harris, calling a Red Sox fan a "Yankee" is a mortal sin in these parts!!! [img]graemlins/1pissed.gif[/img] [img]graemlins/biglaugh.gif[/img]

---

Sorry, I didn't realize you were a Red Sox fan, everthing north of the Mason-Dixon line kinda blurs together

[Smeagol]

Dear Magnuss
Calling Communism and Fascism the same thing because they both murder people is just plain riduculous. If you had actually read any of the postings from the communists in this forum correctly, you would realise that they are not saying "oh the Bolsheviks were wicked" or "Man the CCCP rocked". They are agreeing with the Marxist idea of Communism, which is nothing like the murderous hell you make it out to be. You should try reading some Marx or Trotsky before calling communist a murderous regime. I'm not a communist myself (don't believe it will ever work, due to the fact that it needs to be worldwide and Americans seem to be incapable of listening to anyone elses point of view) but it's a lot better idea than your fascist rantings.

[Barry the Sprout]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Smeagol:
Dear Magnuss
Calling Communism and Fascism the same thing because they both murder people is just plain riduculous. If you had actually read any of the postings from the communists in this forum correctly, you would realise that they are not saying "oh the Bolsheviks were wicked" or "Man the CCCP rocked". They are agreeing with the Marxist idea of Communism, which is nothing like the murderous hell you make it out to be. You should try reading some Marx or Trotsky before calling communist a murderous regime. I'm not a communist myself (don't believe it will ever work, due to the fact that it needs to be worldwide and Americans seem to be incapable of listening to anyone elses point of view) but it's a lot better idea than your fascist rantings.

---

Thanks for that. Exactly what I have been saying for the last 4 pages of posts (except for the "don't think it will work part").

Magness and JD Harris, if you want to disagree with me then fine. But please don't just describe what me and Dramnek write as BS and not back it up. IMO you don't do yourselves or your cause any favours that way.

There must be more people out there! Come on... post... I want a proper argument. Lots of people must have views on this one.