Want to see how a "communist" looks like ?

Obviously not a clue what a communist is. Tesla was the last person I would have expected to see a photo of on a thread with that title.

I live around communists... Tesla was no communist. Where DO people come up with this off the wall stuff?

I try very hard not to label things as socialist, communist, capitalist, etc. because the definitions/usage of the various “ists” has continually changed over time. I just know that this statement:

Originally posted by pai mei
This :
Gospel of consumption

"Machines can save labor, but only if they go idle when we possess enough of what they can produce. In other words, the machinery offers us an opportunity to work less, an opportunity that as a society we have chosen not to take. Instead, we have allowed the owners of those machines to define their purpose: not reduction of labor, but “higher productivity”—and with it the imperative to consume virtually everything that the machinery can possibly produce."

is a correct statement and that society has redefined the goal of capitalism over time as well. We have been sold into “consumerism” as being the goal of capitalism as evidenced by this:

Originally posted by GreenBicMan
reply to post by pai mei

 

I don't know man, thats pretty out there for me.

Don't you just like the sound of driving a ferrari and dominating financial markets? Thats my reality in my head, akin to the one you have in yours. I hope we both find our "happy place".

Happy = the sound of driving a ferrari and dominating financial markets.

Even when the price of doing so is that one has to work more than they would like in order to be able to consume enough to make them “happy”. We are convinced that “happy”, or “successful”, means having more than the competing person.

reply to post by expat2368


What do those "communists" do ?

Tesla worked extremely hard to get his experiments off the ground and in a working state. He did not sit on his arse to depend on others, he depended on no one but himself.
If he were a Commie, someone else would had done the work for him.

Originally posted by Alxandro
Tesla worked extremely hard to get his experiments off the ground and in a working state. He did not sit on his arse to depend on others, he depended on no one but himself.
If he were a Commie, someone else would had done the work for him.

Did you saw Karl Marx's collected works? He was very productive commie even if half of it was written by other commie Engels I'm somehow communist and I work hard. You are just mindlessly repeating propaganda slogans.

reply to post by Iamonlyhuman


I didn't say I am competing with the next person, I could care less what anyone desires personally, that was just "my world". Guess I will go back to the reality of the 4 dr hyundai with no power windows

howdy yall,

OP i hear you. Your message is actually simple and clear, which is why some are trying to drown it out...

TPTB are afraid of any scenario involving a free and funded, powerful populace... Such a populace might decide to do any number of things, many of those things would NOT involve supporting an entrenched elite.

What blows my mind the most is that the american working class identifies with its oppressor, ie rich... (like the comment by that Ferrari driver wannabe a few posts back)

It is unfashionable to identify with the poor, or even the middle class...

im from the midwest USA, where almost everyone you ask puts themselves in the "upper middle class"... by which they mean both parents have a job and at least one does OT...

If this argument had never used the dreaded C word (communist), and instead focused on a potential reduction in hours per worker at no cost to the "system"... well i think it would be an easier sell.

you are fighting layers of conditioning here and your targets may not even be aware that they have been conditioned...

not only is "communism" "bad", ( we in the US "KNOW" this already no THINKING required) but many workers are actually addicted to slavery, requiring the percieved social status of working hard for the right people, this is the corporate attitude, i work this hard to be a fortune 100 peon, id rather do 70 hrs a week here as a grunt than be the manager of a burger king.

both are slaves. both only get money from another mans hand, both have no access to resourcs beyond a limited set of social permissions which are revocable as soon as the credits obtained through pleasing the elite expire or are used up. both wear silly uniforms and respond to insane requests. (i have both fast food and F100 experience in the US)

This is all semi secret due to the influence of propaganda and public school. The PUBLIC SCHOOLS told them all how bad communism is...

its really kinda hilarious. point out that workers control the means of production, and people who think they "know" about communism go "what?"

OK sorry for the long post, but as a SELF IDENTIFIED EDUCATED PROLE, a reduction in work inputs from individuals and an increase in access to civilization for each of its members is obviously superior to any other model regardless of names.

when people start telling me how bad communism is i usually show them my library card and agree with them.

[edit on 6-2-2010 by uwascallywabbit]

[edit on 6-2-2010 by uwascallywabbit]

reply to post by uwascallywabbit


Why wouldn't you want to drive a Ferrari?

I just don't see the downside to that man.

reply to post by pai mei


Communism starts from a sound principle, but in method is destructive. The idea of giving resources to those who need them according to need, and for each providing according to ability, makes sound sense. However, Communism is too inclusive: it distributes resources uniformly without allowing those who are more competent to distinguish themselves. The resulting atmosphere of egalitarianism enforces an average upon all people by giving them no reward for achievement, which in turn fosters a group psychology that detests achievement. This separates the population into two groups: those who go along with the system and strive for nothing, and those who manipulate the system for their own ends. It is for this reason unsurprising that Communist states end in radical dictatorships which recklessly sacrifice their own people.

geez i like nifty gadgets and fast things as much as the next guy...
but im a PROLE, we dont get Ferraris, we get lies about Ferraris, dig this.

en.wikipedia.org...

and this

motors.shop.ebay.com...

ok in early Feb 2010 when that link to ferrari on ebay got cut, there are cars as cheap as 100k. some of these cars cost 650k. lets roll with the cheapest one they got. 100k for a real ferrari.

the average american household cant drop 2 years salary (entire pre tax income) on a ride that wont qualify as a daily driver... and if you want a new one, not a used one, it might be more like 6 years salary)

its a fantasy. most of us couldnt even afford to INSURE and MAINTAIN such a machine, because we are peasants.

Of course, you have a fantasy where you are no longer a peasant, and can therefore take such pleasures...

50k income, some smart investments, real estate appreciation, capital gains tax, income tax bracket slippage, sales tax alone on that 100k, luxury tax, personal property tax... in the 10-20 years it takes you to build up your "extra" 100k inflation will have you behind.

Theres an 80's Bill Cosby stand-up piece where he does a routine involving a race to the hospital in his 17 thousand dollar ferrari. that number was as astounding to that audience then as 650k is today.

its an illusion, and one you are not suppossed to see through.

IIRC, Porsche raised prices on some models within the last 10 years in order to maintatin the percieved exclusivity of the brand. (i think the argument was that the great sales of the low cost Boxster had "tarnished" the brand in the eyes of the elite) The cost increases had nothing to do with production requirements, They centered entirely on who "should be allowed" to drive that kind of car.


Bread and Roses people.

Im willing to contribute to society, but theres no reason that i cannot also take part in society.

[edit on 6-2-2010 by uwascallywabbit]

[edit on 6-2-2010 by uwascallywabbit]

[edit on 6-2-2010 by uwascallywabbit]

[edit on 6-2-2010 by uwascallywabbit]

Sorry but...BFpfAAAAHAHAHAHAHAHHH!

Originally posted by pai mei
The scientist that does not care about profit, works - to help others is a "communist".

Now anyone who helps another person is a communist too?

And about "work". When you do what you like, your passion, does not matter if other people see it as "work", that is not "work". It's what you like. If you would do it for free - that is not work.

So does that mean if you have a job you're a communist too?

pai mei and uwascallywabbit, you're both talking sense and I applaud your efforts for it, despite the apparent futility of defining communism (and in the case of this thread, pointing out examples of prominent historical geniuses with ideals similar to those espoused by self-described communists) for people who equate the term with the regimes that were established in such countries as Russia, China, and Cuba, when of course those were communist in name only. Those and other supposedly "communist" countries were more anti-communist than anything else - totalitarian states resembling corporations with boards of directors, using the word "communism" to sell the status quo to the masses. Re-branding, as it were. Disinformation, anyone?

Good work bringing in the "primitive communist" examples, pai mei - people often leave that out. And very nice example with the Ferrari, uwascallywabbit, explaining it in basic, material terms for people who have basic, material concerns, apparently (and of course, I'm not talking the sort of "materialism" in which Marx believed). It's an uphill battle, and you probably won't get much support here judging by the threads I've read on the subject in my time on this site, but good luck anyway.

For the record, I am not now, nor have I ever been a communist, but I do believe it is an inevitable and necessary step towards "enlightened anarchy." Give it a few centuries, at least. Maybe (probably) more. We'll get there.

Originally posted by In nothing we trust
Communism = Whats yours is ours now.

Marxist = Whats mine could be ours.

Capitalist = Whats mine is mine.

Socialist = Whats yours is mine.

That's why I'm a Capitalist and Libertarian. As a country the United States and it's citizens need to organize more.

Thanks for the replies, too many

What is that: "in communism I do all the work, others benefit" ? I thought that is "capitalism".
Yes - the ones that help others are communists as I define "communism". Tesla was a communist. Yes people are indoctrinated. Why do we need something like Haiti to say "how nice it is when people help each other"


I don't care about Marx. Or the "class struggle". What is that "no more rich people" ? Let them be as rich as they want. Have a Ferrari. What I aim for - is to end consumerism and working to produce garbage. See "Story of stuff". How to do that ? Make sure everyone has the basics to survive - food, water, shelter, some items, clothes, and the possibility to work only for them.

This means very little work for all - using the modern technology. Read those articles in the first post. Who does not work - gets nothing. He is free to live as he wants. Find a slave master if he likes. After that - if people want more stuff, they are free to work more. Want a Ferrari ? Work. Be as capitalist as you like. But you will have a problem - people will no longer depend on the system, so they will work only for what they want. No more wasting time 8 hours for someone else to get rich. They have the basics and are free to work only for them. Nobody will be able to threaten them "work for me or die". So the capitalists will have a problem finding people to work for them while they sit and do nothing. Yes this - where you do all the work and others go to Hawaii is capitalism - not communism.

A culture of "freedom" and of "not telling another what to do with his life" will develop. That is real freedom - not having your food locked up. Free access to it anytime you want - and nobody blackmailing you to work for him else no food. That is why the Indians were said to be free.

Some will want a Ferrari - and will work for it. FInd some masters, organize, I don't care. Don't include me if you need to do some dirty work like blowing up a mountain to extract the iron for your engine.
Yes - obtaining the basics and the machines that make them fast will require some "dirty work". But it will be 10% of today. And it will be really useful, to survive. Not this consumerism.

CHINA

Some will want to sit on the mountain and meditate. Some will want to read or travel. Some will want to paint, sing, play football. Some will want to be scientists, research and invent. Each person with his passion. Groups will form - people will associate with others with the same interests. If a group wanting Ferrari is formed - let them be free and work for it. If they find enough people to participate. Build yourself a castle, be as "rich" as you want. Don't include me into it. I would be free - to live as I like, working for what I like. Sorry if not enough "castle desiring people" get together and you have no castle.

Here, free people :
paimei01.blogspot.com...

No Arguments, no Intreaties, nor Tears of their Friends and Relations, could persuade many of them to leave their new Indian Friends and Acquaintance; several of them that were by the Caressings of their Relations persuaded to come Home, in a little Time grew tired of our Manner of living, and run away again to the Indians, and ended their Days with them. On the other Hand, Indian Children have been carefully educated among the English, cloathed and taught, yet, I think, there is not one Instance, that any of these, after they had Liberty to go among their own People, and were come to Age, would remain with the English, but returned to their own Nations, and became as fond of the Indian Manner of Life as those that knew nothing of a civilized Manner of Living. And, he concludes, what he says of this particular prisoner exchange “has been found true on many other Occasions.”

[edit on 7-2-2010 by pai mei]

im moved by what you wrote here PeiMei, thats some delicious stuff.

of course the purpose of machines is exactly as you have described it.

imagine that some of Teslas plans had been realized instead of blocked... free broadcast power to all corners of the globe would have tilted the balance of the whole 20th century. tilted it toward joe average and away from the fat cat manipulators.

heres one, japan would never have been goaded into a pearl harbor attack as their diesel supplies dwindled if there was a free source of energy available to anyone worldwide.

or... who'd be funding mideast terror with overpriced oil if there was free electricity in the air

etc. im sure you can find your own ramifications for free broadcast electricity.

oh heres one, billions of happy thriving people instead of what we call (with haughty hatred) THE THIRD WORLD.

would this make Tesla a Communist? Only if we play loosley with words. and we helpers lost the wordfight a while back. commie, bad word. hell even liberal is now a bad word.

May I suggest that Tesla was a UTOPIAN. He was a communist then only in the sense then that earth was his commune. he saw one society, humanity, and wanted to help it without regard to any particular fat cats power schemes.

PS i hear you about no interest in class war, its a sticky conflict.
I personally believe it is what kept Teslas best work from the masses.
Tesla wanted to set them free,
and TPTB were like,
"HEY! those are OUR masses!"
at least as far as I think

and PPS - capitalism really is a philosophy that says capital does work, so I dont have to. The downside is that it requires an exploitable pool of resource impoverished semi-citizens in order to jump upon command when capital is dangled in front of them.

A free and funded man might have something better to do.