It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

America On Verge Of Communist Takeover, Says Former Castro Revolutionary

page: 24
61
<< 21  22  23    25  26 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 11 2012 @ 07:10 AM
link   

Originally posted by ElectricUniverse

Originally posted by ANOK
..
I don't believe Humans need controlling. The only reason government controls people is to keep them passive, and excepting a system that is not in their best interest.

You should read about the revolution in Spain, and how successful the workers were without government.
...
It worked in Spain for two years very successfully. It failed because of the overwhelming forces of fascism.
That is why we must be very careful in understanding what is socialism, and what is fascism, in order to know what we're supporting. Most people support fascism without even realising it.

Capitalism doesn't work for the majority of people. It fails someone everyday.
...


Now, everyone should read what ANOK claims in the above because it shows his true identity, and the true goal that people like him want.

I have tried to inform him before about the truth of the "Red revolution", which in Spain is called to this day the "Red Terror" or "Terror Rojo" because socialists, communists and other leftwingers set out to MURDER tens of thousands of people who were capitalists, and even religious, including many clergy... But ANOK continues claiming "it was great for everyone" when in fact it wasn't.

Even leftwingers sources show at least partially the truth as to what happened during the "Red Terror" in Spain in 1939. But new socialists like ANOK, write/talk about that time as if it was the best thing that happened in the world, when in fact leftwingers committed atrocities in just a couple of months.

The murder spree by the reds lasted about two months, it happened during summer of 1939.

This is the truth that new socialists like ANOK don't want you to know about. But ANOK is not the only new socialist who has tried to re-write the truth about the "Red Terror" in Spain, and other atrocities committed by other leftwingers.


The Red Terror(3) in Spain (Spanish: Terror Rojo en España) is the name given by historians to various acts committed "by sections of nearly all the leftist groups"[4][5] such as the killing of tens of thousands of people (including 6,832(6) members of the Catholic clergy, the vast majority in the summer of 1936 in the wake of the military rising), as well as attacks on landowners, industrialists, and politicians, and the desecration and burning of monasteries and churches.[6] News of the military coup unleashed a social revolutionary response and no republican region escaped revolutionary and anticlerical violence - though in the Basque Country this was minimal.[7]
...
Some estimates of the Red Terror range from 38,000(11) to 72,344 lives.(12) Paul Preston, speaking in 2012 at the time of the publication of his book The Spanish Holocaust, put the figure at a little under 50,000.
...
Historian Julio de la Cueva has written that, "despite the fact that the Church...suffer[ed] appalling persecution" in the Loyalist rearguard, the events have so far met not only with "the embarrassing partiality of ecclesiastical scholars, but also with the embarrassed silence or attempts at justification of a large number of historians and memoirists.
...

en.wikipedia.org...(Spain)

Within 2 months the reds, which consisted of socialists, communists and other leftwingers, murdered from 38,000 people to over 72,000 people. Simply for being capitalists, you didn't have to be rich, and for being religious, or clergy.

Because of these atrocities, the rise of Francisco Franco was assured, and Franco set up to eradicate the reds for the crimes they committed, as well as going after leftwinger sympathizers who had helped point out people who were capitalists or religious and were executed by the Reds.

The new socialists, and communists like to claim that socialism/communism has "never truly been tried" because they know that once people understand the atrocities that happen under a socialist/communist system, most people will not accept these systems at all.


edit on 11-8-2012 by ElectricUniverse because: (no reason given)


Again with the ridiculous stereotyping.

Rightwingers have murdered PLENTY of people too. The danger isn't really the "wing" it's how extreme your views are.

Hardcore believers of ideology are the danger, not moderates from either side.

As for the claim that 'new socialists, and communists like to claim that socialism/communism has "never truly been tried"' - the same can be said for Libertarians, and many other extremist groups.

Moderation is the key.




posted on Aug, 11 2012 @ 07:14 AM
link   

Originally posted by ElectricUniverse

Originally posted by thepresident

You are making things up, people dislike the Tea Party because they are blantant hypocrites
who largely backed W Bush's big government policies and liberty busting agenda for
nearly a decade.

It was like whores protesting against prostitution and you are either a fool or a liar if
you ignore that key to the anti Tea Party sentiment


Let's see who is actually lying shall we?...


The Tea Party movement is an American political movement that advocates strict adherence to the United States Constitution (see Originalism),[1] reducing U.S. government spending and taxes,[2][3][3] and reduction of the U.S. national debt and federal budget deficit.[2] The movement is generally considered to be conservative,[4] libertarian,[5][6] and populist.[7][8][9] The movement has sponsored protests and supported political candidates since 2009.[10][11][12]

en.wikipedia.org...

It is obvious that the one lying, AGAIN, it is YOU...

Now please leave the discussion for grown and intelligent people, thank you.



The Tea Party movement was started by one group, but then co-opted by the right-wing media machine. While it suited them.

As for as it being "pro-constitution" well, it's pro- "one reading" of the constitution, which is pretty radically right wing.

The REALITY is that the constitution isn't as rigidly defined or interpreted as Tea Party adherents want you to believe. Again, they are extremists and as such are not great for society.

America is wildly polarised; extremism is not the answer, at all.



posted on Aug, 11 2012 @ 04:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by longlostbrother

Again with the ridiculous stereotyping.

Rightwingers have murdered PLENTY of people too. The danger isn't really the "wing" it's how extreme your views are.

Hardcore believers of ideology are the danger, not moderates from either side.

As for the claim that 'new socialists, and communists like to claim that socialism/communism has "never truly been tried"' - the same can be said for Libertarians, and many other extremist groups.

Moderation is the key.


You are not going to be lying through your teeth without presenting REAL EVIDENCE for your claims...

BTW Intrepid, when I present evidence that a member is lying this is no grounds for you to remove my post, thank you very much...

In about 80-90 years leftwinger dictatorships which includes socialist, fascist, and communist dictatorships have murdered from over 115 million people to over 160 million people, and that's not counting the deaths of sodiers from battles...

The total death toll done by socialist regimes far exceeds the deaths caused by all wars, including world wars, and other conflicts worldwide in the 20th and 21st century.




edit on 11-8-2012 by ElectricUniverse because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 11 2012 @ 04:19 PM
link   
reply to post by longlostbrother
 


wow, and you keep on lying... Please do clarify how the "tea party movement" is extremist?...

You are starting to sound like Janet Napolitano...are you sure you are not her?...



posted on Aug, 11 2012 @ 05:34 PM
link   
reply to post by ElectricUniverse
 


During any uprising people are going to get killed. You have to realise what was going on in Spain at the time.

Most of the killing was a reaction to years of exploitation and oppression by heavy handed state.


According to historian Antony Beevor: "In republican territory the worst of the violence was mainly a sudden and quickly spent reaction of suppressed fear, exacerbated by desires of revenge for the past" - in contrast with, "the relentless purging of 'reds and atheists' in nationalist territory."

en.wikipedia.org...

You are simply looking at this from one side, and ignoring what was actually going on.

You seem to focus on left-wing violence, and ignore the violence of the right-wing, and capitalist class, that is a daily reality, not just a reaction to past events during an uprising and civil war.

Many previous capitalists and clergy joined the revolution.

You simply focus on the negatives of the left, but only focus on the positives of the right. I don't glorify the violence of the Spanish revolutionaries, or even support it. To ignore the successes of the system because of what people did is just stupid. People died because they apposed the revolution, and there was a civil war between nationalists and republicans.

I find it hilarious when it comes to the left you get all anti-violence, but you support a system that is inherently violent on a daily basis, not even to mention the use of state military to expand capitalists desire for global market control. Far more working class people were killed by the Spanish state, clergy and capitalists, than the the revolutionaries killed them.

You know you wouldn't be living in the USA enjoying it's "freedom" without violence? Where is your outrage about that? You think freedom comes for free? You must live in lala land if you think the state will give you your freedom without a fight.

You should also take a look at the Industrial revolution and see the violence capitalists wrought on the workers, before the workers got laws changed. Or the thousands of people who were displaced because of the law changes that started labour exploitation. I very much doubt you will see capitalism in a negative light because of it. Sorry but your arguments are hypocritical.


edit on 8/11/2012 by ANOK because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 11 2012 @ 06:20 PM
link   
reply to post by ElectricUniverse
 


"Clarity about the aims and problems of socialism is of greatest significance in our age of transition. Since under present circumstances free and unhindered discussion of these problems has come under a powerful taboo [due to the rise of McCarthyism] I consider the foundation of this magazine [Monthly Review] to be an important public service." Albert Einstein

McCarthyism



posted on Aug, 12 2012 @ 02:35 AM
link   

Originally posted by ElectricUniverse
reply to post by longlostbrother
 


wow, and you keep on lying... Please do clarify how the "tea party movement" is extremist?...

You are starting to sound like Janet Napolitano...are you sure you are not her?...


They believe there's only one proper reading of the US Constitution; that's extremist. They believe they are the only group that care about America. Also extremist.



posted on Aug, 12 2012 @ 05:54 AM
link   
This might be of interest...


Communism vs Totalitarianism

Communism and totalitarianism stands apart in their political and economic ideologies. Some people may link communism to totalitarianism but the fact is that they two are different in every aspect.

Totalitarianism is a term that means total control. But in communism there is no total control. While the society is all-powerful in communism, it is the state that is powerful in Totalitarianism.

In Totalitarianism, the state controls everything and there is no value for an individual’s thoughts or opinions. On the other hand, Communism is a political ideology that believes in a stateless or class less society.

Totalitarianism can also be termed as authoritarianism or monarchism. The individuals have no share in the decision-making. Communism thinks in terms of the society as a whole and it is the community that takes all major decisions.

In Totalitarianism, the individuals lack much freedom and they are bound by the state. On the other hand, the society has a free hand in communism. Even the people live in fear at the hands of a totalitarian government.

While a totalitarian government is right wing, communist government is left wing....


From The Origins of Totalitarianism, Hannah Arendt

en.wikipedia.org...

Hannah Arendt


edit on 8/12/2012 by ANOK because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 13 2012 @ 05:21 AM
link   

Originally posted by ANOK

During any uprising people are going to get killed. You have to realise what was going on in Spain at the time.

...


Again nothing but excuses... The people murdered by the leftists were not armed, and it included thousands of clergy... But I guess their views equals an ak47 pointing at your head according to your kind...

You have called on several occassions the Red Terror as "a change we all should strive for", not on those words, but you have been implying this.

Even after being shown the facts you have wanted to hide time and again, you keep trying to find ways to excuse the MURDER of people who don't agree with your views, which is a clear tell-tale sign of what sort of goal people like you want.

You claim one thing, yet your socialism is just like any other, nothing but another dictatorship in which disarmed people will get murdered for having a different opinion and not wanting anything to do with socialism...



posted on Aug, 13 2012 @ 05:24 AM
link   
reply to post by ANOK
 


socialism/communism is tolitarianism... It is called "DICTATORSHIP of the proletariat" for a reason, and not every worker is part of the "proletariat", only those who are ardent communists are considered "proletariat".

Marx himself explains it as a VIOLENT revolution, and in this sort of revolution even workers fight, kill and murder other workers for having a different view...



posted on Aug, 13 2012 @ 05:32 AM
link   

Originally posted by ANOK

"Clarity about the aims and problems of socialism is of greatest significance in our age of transition. Since under present circumstances free and unhindered discussion of these problems has come under a powerful taboo [due to the rise of McCarthyism] I consider the foundation of this magazine [Monthly Review] to be an important public service." Albert Einstein

McCarthyism


wow...really?... Einstein had to escape a form of socialism/NAZISM and went to live in a capitalist nation... Just because he was good in mathematics doesn't mean his view on politics must be good...

Again, all we have to do is see how you view the "Red Terror" of Spain, and how according to you "it worked very well" to understand the facts about socialism...



posted on Aug, 13 2012 @ 03:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by ElectricUniverse
reply to post by longlostbrother
 


wow, and you keep on lying... Please do clarify how the "tea party movement" is extremist?...

You are starting to sound like Janet Napolitano...are you sure you are not her?...


Well, let's start off with this handy definition of what the Tea Party believes in: rationalwiki.org...
Come off it, the Teabaggers are doing their best to drag the GOP to the right into good old days that never actually ever existed.



posted on Aug, 13 2012 @ 03:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by ElectricUniverse

Originally posted by ANOK

"Clarity about the aims and problems of socialism is of greatest significance in our age of transition. Since under present circumstances free and unhindered discussion of these problems has come under a powerful taboo [due to the rise of McCarthyism] I consider the foundation of this magazine [Monthly Review] to be an important public service." Albert Einstein

McCarthyism


wow...really?... Einstein had to escape a form of socialism/NAZISM and went to live in a capitalist nation... Just because he was good in mathematics doesn't mean his view on politics must be good...

Again, all we have to do is see how you view the "Red Terror" of Spain, and how according to you "it worked very well" to understand the facts about socialism...



Nice way to somehow disparage Einstein. He escaped the murdering rightwing scum that were the Nazis. That gave him an excellent insight into McCarthyism.



posted on Aug, 13 2012 @ 06:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by ElectricUniverse
wow...really?... Einstein had to escape a form of socialism/NAZISM and went to live in a capitalist nation... Just because he was good in mathematics doesn't mean his view on politics must be good...

Again, all we have to do is see how you view the "Red Terror" of Spain, and how according to you "it worked very well" to understand the facts about socialism...


Here we go with your nonsense again. Naziism was fascism, not socialism. What someone does doesn't define the term they label themselves with. Nazism had nothing to do with socialism.

Einstein was more than good with maths. Your excuses are hilarious. You think you're smarter than Einstein?
It doesn't take that much intelligence to see socialism is better for us than capitalism. So did Einstein flee Germany because of socialism, or because of fascism? Why would he flee if he was socialist? No, he fled fascism that was spreading around Europe at the time


Einstein was a socialist, and even wrote about it...


I am convinced there is only one way to eliminate these grave evils, namely through the establishment of a socialist economy, accompanied by an educational system which would be oriented toward social goals. In such economy, the means of production are owned by society itself and are utilized in a planned fashion. Albert Einstein


Why Socialism? Albert Einstein

And again I have explained the so called red-terror you waffle on about. How about the blue-terror of the capitalists state, on a daily basis? Capitalism is inherently violent to maintain it's goals, the socialists were violent simply as a reaction to years of oppression, and exploitation by a heavy handed state. Are you saying we should never react violently to protect ourselves? Should we have not reacted violently against Hitler?

The revolutionaries did very well during the revolution...


"For the first time since the attempts to establish socialism in Russia, Hungary and Germany following the First World War, the revolutionary struggle of the Spanish workers demonstrates a new type of transformation from capitalist to collective modes of production, which despite its incomplete nature was carried out on an impressive scale."

Karl Korsch - 1939.


libcom.org...

In Spain revolution, or not, people were being killed. The Nationalists were attempting a military takeover with the fascist Franco. What should the people have done? Lay down and accept it, or fight for their freedom? The people of Spain fought against the rise of fascism, as well as attempting to organize and control their economy with the absence of government.


"We must carry out a total revolution. Expropriation must also be total. This is not the time for sleeping, but for building...If the Spanish worker does not carve out his liberty, the state will retain and will reconstruct the authority of the government, destroying little by little the conquest made at the cost of a thousand acts of heroism."

-Solidaridad Obrera, Aug.26, 1936


libcom.org...

Sorry but again you arguments are contradictory. You obviously have no understanding of history. The Spanish revolution was the people standing up to tyranny, why anyone would have a problem with that is beyond me. Especially using violence as you argument when the system you support is inherently violent, and not just as a reaction to tyranny, or self-defense.


"In Spain, millions of people took large segments of the economy into their own hands, collectivised them, administered them, even abolished money and lived by communistic principles of work and distribution -- all of this in the midst of a terrible civil war, yet without producing the chaos or even the serious dislocations that were and still are predicted by authoritarian 'radicals.' Indeed, in many collectivised areas, the efficiency with which an enterprise worked by far exceeded that of a comparable one in nationalised or private sectors. This 'green shoot' of revolutionary reality has more meaning for us than the most persuasive theoretical arguments to the contrary. On this score it is not the anarchists who are the 'unrealistic day-dreamers,' but their opponents who have turned their backs to the facts or have shamelessly concealed them." Murray Bookchin, "Introductory Essay," The Anarchist Collectives, Sam Dolgoff (ed.), p. xxxix



[Revolutionary Spain] shows you what human beings are like when they are trying to behave as human beings and not as cogs in the capitalist machine." George Orwell, Orwell in Spain, p. 254


I.8 Does revolutionary Spain show that libertarian socialism can work in practice?


"In Spain, during almost three years, despite a civil war that took a million lives, despite the opposition of the political parties . . . this idea of libertarian communism was put into effect. Very quickly more than 60% of the land was collectively cultivated by the peasants themselves, without landlords, without bosses, and without instituting capitalist competition to spur production. In almost all the industries, factories, mills, workshops, transportation services, public services, and utilities, the rank and file workers, their revolutionary committees, and their syndicates reorganised and administered production, distribution, and public services without capitalists, high-salaried managers, or the authority of the state.

"Even more: the various agrarian and industrial collectives immediately instituted economic equality in accordance with the essential principle of communism, 'From each according to his ability and to each according to his needs.' They co-ordinated their efforts through free association in whole regions, created new wealth, increased production (especially in agriculture), built more schools, and bettered public services. They instituted not bourgeois formal democracy but genuine grass roots functional libertarian democracy, where each individual participated directly in the revolutionary reorganisation of social life. They replaced the war between men, 'survival of the fittest,' by the universal practice of mutual aid, and replaced rivalry by the principle of solidarity . . .

"This experience, in which about eight million people directly or indirectly participated, opened a new way of life to those who sought an alternative to anti-social capitalism on the one hand, and totalitarian state bogus socialism on the other." Anarchist and CNT activist Gaston Leval, Op. Cit., pp. 6-7



edit on 8/13/2012 by ANOK because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 13 2012 @ 07:09 PM
link   

The creative drive unleashed

The Barcelona Tramways

As was the case with the collectives in the countryside, workers self-management in the cities was associated with remarkable improvements in working conditions, productivity and efficiency. Take for example the achievements of the Barcelona tramways. Just five days after the fighting had stopped, the tramways lines had been cleared and repaired and seven hundred tramcars, which was a hundred more than the usual six hundred, appeared on the road, all painted diagonally across the side in the red and black colours of the C.N.T. - F.A.I. The technical organisation of the tramways and the traffic operation was greatly improved, new safety and signalling systems were introduced and the tramway lines were straightened. One of the first measures of the collectivisation of the tramways had been the discharge of the excessively paid company executives and this then enabled the collective to reduce the fares for passengers. Wages approached basic equality with skilled workers earning 1 peseta more a day than labourers. Working conditions were greatly improved with better facilities supplied to the workers and a new free medical service was organised which served not only the Tramway workers but their families as well.


Industrial Collectivisation during the Spanish Revolution - Deirdre Hogan

According to the ignorant, people would simply just kill each other, or do nothing at all, without private owners, or the state, controlling everything. People wouldn't work without the motivation of money. However much killing there was over the civil war, it does not take away the economic and social success of the revolutionaries.


edit on 8/13/2012 by ANOK because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 13 2012 @ 07:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by sealing
Anytime there is a democrat president (especially a black one with a funny name)
right wing zealots (many ex cubans are republican) scream "Communism is coming!"
Never happens.


LOL it's already here and has been for decades. Just because it was not a traditional military overthrow does not mean it's not here. We have implemented nearly every plank of the communist manifesto...


First Plank: Abolition of property in land and the application of all rents of land to public purposes. (Zoning - Model ordinances proposed by Secretary of Commerce Herbert Hoover widely adopted. Supreme Court ruled "zoning" to be "constitutional" in 1921. Private owners of property required to get permission from government relative to the use of their property. Federally owned lands are leased for grazing, mining, timber usages, the fees being paid into the U.S. Treasury.)

Second Plank: A heavy progressive or graduated incometax. (Corporate Tax Act of 1909. The 16th Amendment, allegedly ratified in 1913. The Revenue Act of 1913, section 2, Income Tax. These laws have been purposely misapplied against American citizens to this day.)

Third Plank: Abolition of all rights of inheritance. (Partially accomplished by enactment of various state and federal "estate tax" laws taxing the "privilege" of transfering property after death and gift before death.)

Fourth Plank: CONFISCATION OF THE PROPERTY OF ALL EMIGRANTS AND REBELS. (The confiscation of property and persecution of those critical - "rebels" - of government policies and actions, frequently accomplished by prosecuting them in a courtroom drama on charges of violations of non-existing administrative or regulatory laws.)

Fifth Plank: Centralization of credit in the hands of the State, by means of a national bank with State capital and an exclusive monopoly. (The Federal Reserve Bank, 1913- -the system of privately-owned Federal Reserve banks which maintain a monopoly on the valueless debt "money" in circulation.)

Sixth Plank: Centralization of the means of communications and transportation in the hands of the State. (Federal Radio Commission, 1927; Federal Communications Commission, 1934; Air Commerce Act of 1926; Civil Aeronautics Act of 1938; Federal Aviation Agency, 1958; becoming part of the Department of Transportation in 1966; Federal Highway Act of 1916 (federal funds made available to States for highway construction); Interstate Highway System, 1944 (funding began 1956); Interstate Commerce Commission given authority by Congress to regulate trucking and carriers on inland waterways, 1935-40; Department of Transportation, 1966.)

Seventh Plank: Extension of factories and instruments of production owned by the State, the bringing into cultivation of waste lands, and the improvement of the soil generally in accordance with a common plan. (Depart-ment of Agriculture, 1862; Agriculture Adjustment Act of 1933 -- farmers will receive government aid if and only if they relinquish control of farming activities; Tennessee Valley Authority, 1933 with the Hoover Dam completed in 1936.)

Eighth Plank: Equal liability of all to labor. Establishment of industrial armies especially for agriculture. (First labor unions, known as federations, appeared in 1820. National Labor Union established 1866. American Federation of Labor established 1886. Interstate Commerce Act of 1887 placed railways under federal regulation. Department of Labor, 1913. Labor-management negotiations sanctioned under Railway Labor Act of 1926. Civil Works Administration, 1933. National Labor Relations Act of 1935, stated purpose to free inter-state commerce from disruptive strikes by eliminating the cause of the strike. Works Progress Administration 1935. Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938, mandated 40-hour work week and time-and-a-half for overtime, set "minimum wage" scale. Civil Rights Act of 1964, effectively the equal liability of all to labor)

Ninth Plank: Combination of agriculture with manufacturing industries, gradual abolition of the distinction between town and country, by a more equitable distribution of population over the country. (Food processing companies, with the co-operation of the Farmers Home Administration foreclosures, are buying up farms and creating "conglomerates.")

Tenth Plank: Free education for all children in public schools. Abolition of children's factory labor in its present form. Combination of education with industrial production. (Gradual shift from private education to publicly funded began in the Northern States, early 1800's. 1887: federal money (unconstitutionally) began funding specialized education. Smith-Lever Act of 1914, vocational education; Smith-Hughes Act of 1917 and other relief acts of the 1930's. Federal school lunch program of 1935; National School Lunch Act of 1946. National Defense Education Act of 1958, a reaction to Russia's Sputnik satellite demonstration, provided grants to education's specialties. Federal school aid law passed, 1965, greatly enlarged federal role in education, "head-start" programs, textbooks, library books.

www.criminalgovernment.com...
edit on 13-8-2012 by hawkiye because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 13 2012 @ 07:49 PM
link   
reply to post by hawkiye
 


The 'ten planks' is not communism. Read the Communist Manifesto that it was taken from, out of context.

That list is the temporary Marxist plan known as the 'transition period'. It is not a description of communism. It is the stage that Marx thought necessary to transfer the economy from capitalism to socialist. Marx called it the dictatorship of the proletariat.


Between capitalist and communist society lies the period of the revolutionary transformation of the one into the other. Corresponding to this is also a political transition period in which the state can be nothing but the revolutionary dictatorship of the proletariat. Marx and Engels, Selected Works, Vol. III, p.26.


III. The Transition Period: A Period of Revolutionary Transformations

Not all socialists are Marxists.

The anarchists were socialists who were apposed to the political path of Marx and wanted direct action.

"Anarchism is stateless socialism", Mikhail Bakunin


Communism is for us not a state of affairs which is to be established, an ideal to which reality [will] have to adjust itself. We call communism the real movement which abolishes the present state of things. The conditions of this movement result from the premises now in existence. Marx and Engels, Selected Works, Vol. I, p.38.


Communism was a movement for social and economic change, it was not government forcing totalitarianism. Those state systems calling themselves "communist", simply perverted Marxist theory for their own agendas.

The ultimate goal was/is the same for Marxist and anarchists, of all kinds, free association...


In the anarchist, Marxist and socialist sense, free association (also called free association of producers or, as Marx often called it, community of freely associated individuals) is a kind of relation between individuals where there is no state, social class or authority, in a society that has abolished the private property of means of production. Once private property is abolished, individuals are no longer deprived of access to means of production so they can freely associate themselves (without social constraint) to produce and reproduce their own conditions of existence and fulfill their needs and desires....


Free association (communism and anarchism)


edit on 8/13/2012 by ANOK because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 13 2012 @ 07:58 PM
link   
reply to post by ANOK
 


Well that's exactly what you need to fear isn't it ?

They always seem to stop right when just barely ready to get the train to "Utopia"


If those "Planks" were supposed to be a "Transition" period, why even implement them ?

Grampaw Karl knew exactly what he was writing.

The codewords are all there.

Karl wrote the master plan.



posted on Aug, 13 2012 @ 08:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by xuenchen
Well that's exactly what you need to fear isn't it ? They always seem to stop right when just barely ready to get the train to "Utopia"
If those "Planks" were supposed to be a "Transition" period, why even implement them ?

Grampaw Karl knew exactly what he was writing. The codewords are all there. Karl wrote the master plan.


What master plan are you talking about? What code-words? Please elaborate so we can discuss them.

The transition period was simply following the political path, formation of a workers political party etc., as apposed to revolution that the anarchists wanted. It was a plan not all socialists agreed with. There were other planes put forward. Marx is not the be-all and end-all of socialism.

BTW it was Granpaw Engels who wrote the Manifesto, Marx just updated it. It really should be called Engelism.

State systems that called themselves "communist" were simply using twisted Marxist theory for their own ends. The state using Marxism as an excuse to take power. Same thing Hitler did. Using the same misunderstanding you have, that Marxism is state control. Same thing with so called revolutionary communist armies in the third world. Marxism is a political path, not a military, or violent path to socialism.

Hating socialism because of what some countries did, is like hating Christianity because your clergy fiddles with kids.


edit on 8/13/2012 by ANOK because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 13 2012 @ 08:21 PM
link   


It doesn't take that much intelligence to see socialism is better for us than capitalism


Anyone who believes that tripe clearly shows a lack of intelligence.

www.usdebtclock.org...

Yeah social engineering which isn't working out so well in this country and anyone who says this nation is capitalist is sadly mistaken.

Capitalism is pure darwinism which the current state of the union clearly shows doesn't exist.
edit on 13-8-2012 by neo96 because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
61
<< 21  22  23    25  26 >>

log in

join