What would a true communist society/country look like?

[Xamonas Chegwé]

The fact that communism was rubbish shouldn't disguise the fact that capitalism smells of piss.

The fact that the world population has far outstripped any system's ability to cope with their bloated numbers probably accounts for the smell of piss.

Why do the most unpleasant, impoverished places on earth always have the biggest populations?

Its a plot by islamofascistneoprogkryptostalinists!

That's right. Make light of the only post in the whole thread that even vaguely alludes to the real nitty-gritty.

Actually, I was making light of your inevitable and predictable answer to your own question. (Apologies if that wasn't to be it.)

In fact, the two countries with the largest populations on the planet also have the fastest growing economies as well - and the fastest conversion rate between peasant and middle classes. And, curiously, one is staunchly capitalist and one (nominally, I will admit) is communist. Your simplistic view is a little skewed.

[Ian]

That's right, yanks... AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAALLL the rest of the world has it wrong and football (association football) is more boring than your "foot"ball ;P

Our brand of footy has facilitated ceasefires... yours hasn't I rest my case.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soccer_War
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soccer_hooligan

[Eriku]

That's right, yanks... AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAALLL the rest of the world has it wrong and football (association football) is more boring than your "foot"ball ;P

Our brand of footy has facilitated ceasefires... yours hasn't I rest my case.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soccer_War
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soccer_hooligan

http://www.commongroundnews.org/article ... =1&id=2079
http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/2005/de ... t.football
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/footba ... Coast.html

also: http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/2005/de ... t.football

Riots occur in your neck of the woods too... cancelled concerts, football matches, ice hockey matches... it's really been QUITE some time since the English have had much trouble with their hooligans, and their modern policing has been lauded with regards to this.

AND... you'd do well to read one of those wiki articles you linked to...

Context

Although the nickname "Football War" implies that the conflict was due to a football game, the causes of the war go deeper. The roots of the war were issues over land reform in Honduras and immigration and demographic problems in El Salvador. Honduras is more than five times the size of neighbouring El Salvador, even though in 1969, El Salvador had a population that was more than double that of Honduras. At the beginning of the twentieth century, Salvadorans had begun migrating to Honduras in large numbers. By 1969, more than 300,000 Salvadorans were living in Honduras. These Salvadorans made up twenty percent of the peasant population of Honduras.[3] In Honduras, as in much of Central America, a large majority of the land was owned by large landowners or big corporations. The United Fruit Company owned ten percent of the land, making it hard for the average landowners to compete. In 1966, the United Fruit Company banded together with many other large companies to create la Federación Nacional de Agricultores y Ganaderos de Honduras (FENAGH; the National Federation of Farmers and Livestock-Farmers of Honduras). FENAGH was anti-campesino as well as anti-Salvadoran. This group put pressure on the Honduran president, General Lopez Arellano, to protect the property rights of wealthy landowners.[4]
In 1962, Honduras successfully enacted a new land reform law.[5] Fully enforced by 1967, this law gave central government and municipal land much occupied illegally by Salvadoran immigrants and redistributed this land to native-born Honduran peoples as specified by the Land Reform Law. The land was taken from both immigrant farmers and squatters regardless of their right to ownership and the status of their immigration. Thousands of Salvadorans were displaced by this law and were forced to emigrate once again. Salvadoran newspapers then heightened the already stressed relationship between the two countries by showing the many supposed atrocities being committed against Salvadorans in Honduras.[citation needed]
Thousands of Salvadoran labourers were expelled from Honduras, including both temporary harvest workers and longer-term settlers. This general rise in tensions ultimately led to a military conflict.

[Toontown]

The fact that communism was rubbish shouldn't disguise the fact that capitalism smells of piss.

The fact that the world population has far outstripped any system's ability to cope with their bloated numbers probably accounts for the smell of piss.

Why do the most unpleasant, impoverished places on earth always have the biggest populations?

Its a plot by islamofascistneoprogkryptostalinists!

That's right. Make light of the only post in the whole thread that even vaguely alludes to the real nitty-gritty.

Actually, I was making light of your inevitable and predictable answer to your own question. (Apologies if that wasn't to be it.)

In fact, the two countries with the largest populations on the planet also have the fastest growing economies as well - and the fastest conversion rate between peasant and middle classes. And, curiously, one is staunchly capitalist and one (nominally, I will admit) is communist. Your simplistic view is a little skewed.

Which means absolutely nothing, except that those countries are speeding for the wall at a faster rate.

Their economies are growing because they are essentially capitalist, and population growth spurs economic growth in capitalist countries. But that's not a good thing, in the long run. Mainly because the long run is going to be suddenly concatenated by a collision with an unyielding wall of reality. The country that reaches the wall first, dies first.

[LaMont Cranston]

Eriku, That's right, the American version of football is MUCH more interesting and exciting. Hey, at least we agree on one thing. After all, how many All-Americans has the rest of the world produced? It just goes to show that when it comes to producing All-Americans, our form of democratic capitalist/socialism is vastly superior. I mean, The Ohio State University has, in and of itself, produced more Heisman Trophy winners (i.e. Howard Cassidy, Archie Griffin, Eddie George) than the rest of the world combined.

I hope this puts to rest all of this sophmoric crap about how communism is going to bury us.

The Shadow knows...

[Eriku]

Eriku, That's right, the American version of football is MUCH more interesting and exciting. Hey, at least we agree on one thing. After all, how many All-Americans has the rest of the world produced? It just goes to show that when it comes to producing All-Americans, our form of democratic capitalist/socialism is vastly superior. I mean, The Ohio State University has, in and of itself, produced more Heisman Trophy winners (i.e. Howard Cassidy, Archie Griffin, Eddie George) than the rest of the world combined.

I hope this puts to rest all of this sophmoric crap about how communism is going to bury us.

The Shadow knows...

silly man... I could use the winter olympics as a yard stick and Norway would be the winner... does this mean our FAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAR left society trumps yours?

[LaMont Cranston]

Eriku, Actually, I have nothing but good things to say about Norway. My wife's late mother (otherwise known as my mother-in-law) came from a Norwegian family in Minnesota, so that means my wife is half-Norwegian. I know about things like lefsa (did I spell it right?) and lutefisk.

If I've gotten a bit silly and derailed this thread a bit, it's because I got kind of tired of sandi's evasive answers. It's been a long time since I've met one of those folks who touted the supposed virtues of communism, and it has brought back a lot of memories. It has also reminded me of how arrogant, sophmoric, evasive and full-of-themselves political wannabe know-it-alls tends to be.

Or, it just could be that the real issue before us really is about American football vs soccer.

[Ian]

That's right, yanks... AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAALLL the rest of the world has it wrong and football (association football) is more boring than your "foot"ball ;P

Our brand of footy has facilitated ceasefires... yours hasn't I rest my case.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soccer_War
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soccer_hooligan

http://www.commongroundnews.org/article ... =1&id=2079
http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/2005/de ... t.football
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/footba ... Coast.html

also: http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/2005/de ... t.football

Riots occur in your neck of the woods too... cancelled concerts, football matches, ice hockey matches... it's really been QUITE some time since the English have had much trouble with their hooligans, and their modern policing has been lauded with regards to this.

AND... you'd do well to read one of those wiki articles you linked to...

Context

Although the nickname "Football War" implies that the conflict was due to a football game, the causes of the war go deeper. The roots of the war were issues over land reform in Honduras and immigration and demographic problems in El Salvador. Honduras is more than five times the size of neighbouring El Salvador, even though in 1969, El Salvador had a population that was more than double that of Honduras. At the beginning of the twentieth century, Salvadorans had begun migrating to Honduras in large numbers. By 1969, more than 300,000 Salvadorans were living in Honduras. These Salvadorans made up twenty percent of the peasant population of Honduras.[3] In Honduras, as in much of Central America, a large majority of the land was owned by large landowners or big corporations. The United Fruit Company owned ten percent of the land, making it hard for the average landowners to compete. In 1966, the United Fruit Company banded together with many other large companies to create la Federación Nacional de Agricultores y Ganaderos de Honduras (FENAGH; the National Federation of Farmers and Livestock-Farmers of Honduras). FENAGH was anti-campesino as well as anti-Salvadoran. This group put pressure on the Honduran president, General Lopez Arellano, to protect the property rights of wealthy landowners.[4]
In 1962, Honduras successfully enacted a new land reform law.[5] Fully enforced by 1967, this law gave central government and municipal land much occupied illegally by Salvadoran immigrants and redistributed this land to native-born Honduran peoples as specified by the Land Reform Law. The land was taken from both immigrant farmers and squatters regardless of their right to ownership and the status of their immigration. Thousands of Salvadorans were displaced by this law and were forced to emigrate once again. Salvadoran newspapers then heightened the already stressed relationship between the two countries by showing the many supposed atrocities being committed against Salvadorans in Honduras.[citation needed]
Thousands of Salvadoran labourers were expelled from Honduras, including both temporary harvest workers and longer-term settlers. This general rise in tensions ultimately led to a military conflict.

Yeah yeah yeah I know all that. I still say soccer is for little kids and college girls. Football is a man's sport.

That's the great thing about sports. I don't need reason or logic to defend my position. It is what it is because I like it that way.

[Ian]

That's right, yanks... AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAALLL the rest of the world has it wrong and football (association football) is more boring than your "foot"ball ;P

Our brand of footy has facilitated ceasefires... yours hasn't I rest my case.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soccer_War
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soccer_hooligan

http://www.commongroundnews.org/article ... =1&id=2079
http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/2005/de ... t.football
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/footba ... Coast.html

also: http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/2005/de ... t.football

Riots occur in your neck of the woods too... cancelled concerts, football matches, ice hockey matches... it's really been QUITE some time since the English have had much trouble with their hooligans, and their modern policing has been lauded with regards to this.

AND... you'd do well to read one of those wiki articles you linked to...

Context

Although the nickname "Football War" implies that the conflict was due to a football game, the causes of the war go deeper. The roots of the war were issues over land reform in Honduras and immigration and demographic problems in El Salvador. Honduras is more than five times the size of neighbouring El Salvador, even though in 1969, El Salvador had a population that was more than double that of Honduras. At the beginning of the twentieth century, Salvadorans had begun migrating to Honduras in large numbers. By 1969, more than 300,000 Salvadorans were living in Honduras. These Salvadorans made up twenty percent of the peasant population of Honduras.[3] In Honduras, as in much of Central America, a large majority of the land was owned by large landowners or big corporations. The United Fruit Company owned ten percent of the land, making it hard for the average landowners to compete. In 1966, the United Fruit Company banded together with many other large companies to create la Federación Nacional de Agricultores y Ganaderos de Honduras (FENAGH; the National Federation of Farmers and Livestock-Farmers of Honduras). FENAGH was anti-campesino as well as anti-Salvadoran. This group put pressure on the Honduran president, General Lopez Arellano, to protect the property rights of wealthy landowners.[4]
In 1962, Honduras successfully enacted a new land reform law.[5] Fully enforced by 1967, this law gave central government and municipal land much occupied illegally by Salvadoran immigrants and redistributed this land to native-born Honduran peoples as specified by the Land Reform Law. The land was taken from both immigrant farmers and squatters regardless of their right to ownership and the status of their immigration. Thousands of Salvadorans were displaced by this law and were forced to emigrate once again. Salvadoran newspapers then heightened the already stressed relationship between the two countries by showing the many supposed atrocities being committed against Salvadorans in Honduras.[citation needed]
Thousands of Salvadoran labourers were expelled from Honduras, including both temporary harvest workers and longer-term settlers. This general rise in tensions ultimately led to a military conflict.

Yeah yeah yeah I know all that. I still say soccer is for little kids and college girls. Football is a man's sport.

That's the great thing about sports. I don't need reason or logic to defend my position. It is what it is because I like it that way.

[Eriku]

Eriku, Actually, I have nothing but good things to say about Norway. My wife's late mother (otherwise known as my mother-in-law) came from a Norwegian family in Minnesota, so that means my wife is half-Norwegian. I know about things like lefsa (did I spell it right?) and lutefisk.

If I've gotten a bit silly and derailed this thread a bit, it's because I got kind of tired of sandi's evasive answers. It's been a long time since I've met one of those folks who touted the supposed virtues of communism, and it has brought back a lot of memories. It has also reminded me of how arrogant, sophmoric, evasive and full-of-themselves political wannabe know-it-alls tends to be.

Or, it just could be that the real issue before us really is about American football vs soccer.

Lefse, would be the proper way to write it... unless you meant to use it in the definite singular form... ei lefse, several lefser, lefsa... damn, now the word lost its meaning :\

Never come across lutefisk, myself... no big tradition for it in my family, despite being of fisherman's stock, on me mum's side.

And we've not stepped on that many toes, really, so I wasn't assuming you had any beef... just applying your own silly logic (silly-gisms, if you will... I'm still waiting for DP to actually make me regret being punny)

I've tried to answer to the best of my ability, and as much as I am a beneficiary of the capitalist system, and as much as I know about the gruesomeness of communism, I don't necessarily agree that there's a net benefit to the world at large... I do emphasise the problems with capitalism on account of them being glossed over... democracy isn't anywhere near as democratic as we like to think, and it's clear to me that most people do buy the party lines about these things, when there's demonstrably no reason to do so. Add to that the fact that capitalism is obliged to pursue maximisation of profits above all else and I foresee horrendous consequences... My biggest concern being climate change... Even if that turns out not to be true, the havoc we've wreaked on the rich biodiversity of this planet is an absolute shame... Life's come about only ONCE for all we know, and here we are, flushing the incredible legacy of evolution down the toilet.

I'm not advocating one or the other... see it more as me expressing how little faith I have in mankind and our institutions... at least today... my faith fluctuates wildly

[Eriku]

That's right, yanks... AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAALLL the rest of the world has it wrong and football (association football) is more boring than your "foot"ball ;P

Our brand of footy has facilitated ceasefires... yours hasn't I rest my case.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soccer_War
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soccer_hooligan

http://www.commongroundnews.org/article ... =1&id=2079
http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/2005/de ... t.football
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/footba ... Coast.html

also: http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/2005/de ... t.football

Riots occur in your neck of the woods too... cancelled concerts, football matches, ice hockey matches... it's really been QUITE some time since the English have had much trouble with their hooligans, and their modern policing has been lauded with regards to this.

AND... you'd do well to read one of those wiki articles you linked to...

Context

Although the nickname "Football War" implies that the conflict was due to a football game, the causes of the war go deeper. The roots of the war were issues over land reform in Honduras and immigration and demographic problems in El Salvador. Honduras is more than five times the size of neighbouring El Salvador, even though in 1969, El Salvador had a population that was more than double that of Honduras. At the beginning of the twentieth century, Salvadorans had begun migrating to Honduras in large numbers. By 1969, more than 300,000 Salvadorans were living in Honduras. These Salvadorans made up twenty percent of the peasant population of Honduras.[3] In Honduras, as in much of Central America, a large majority of the land was owned by large landowners or big corporations. The United Fruit Company owned ten percent of the land, making it hard for the average landowners to compete. In 1966, the United Fruit Company banded together with many other large companies to create la Federación Nacional de Agricultores y Ganaderos de Honduras (FENAGH; the National Federation of Farmers and Livestock-Farmers of Honduras). FENAGH was anti-campesino as well as anti-Salvadoran. This group put pressure on the Honduran president, General Lopez Arellano, to protect the property rights of wealthy landowners.[4]
In 1962, Honduras successfully enacted a new land reform law.[5] Fully enforced by 1967, this law gave central government and municipal land much occupied illegally by Salvadoran immigrants and redistributed this land to native-born Honduran peoples as specified by the Land Reform Law. The land was taken from both immigrant farmers and squatters regardless of their right to ownership and the status of their immigration. Thousands of Salvadorans were displaced by this law and were forced to emigrate once again. Salvadoran newspapers then heightened the already stressed relationship between the two countries by showing the many supposed atrocities being committed against Salvadorans in Honduras.[citation needed]
Thousands of Salvadoran labourers were expelled from Honduras, including both temporary harvest workers and longer-term settlers. This general rise in tensions ultimately led to a military conflict.

Yeah yeah yeah I know all that. I still say soccer is for little kids and college girls. Football is a man's sport.

That's the great thing about sports. I don't need reason or logic to defend my position. It is what it is because I like it that way.

Fair dues. The fact that a super bowl half time is as heavily anticipated as the match itself, maybe even more, betrays the game's insignificance, to me ;P in the end, to me, it's aesthetics, tactics, atmosphere, a sense of unity and so on which attracts me to footy... if your brand of football fulfills similar functions for you, who am I to argue

[LaMont Cranston]

Eriku, I'd love to believe that my country, the good, old USA, always made the right moves. Yeah, I'd love to believe that, but I don't. I'm appalled by the amount of waste, corruption, intolerance, bigotry and a lot of other things that most of us see going on, and when I see shit like that oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico, I have to work at not to get thoroughly depressed. At this point in time, I have no idea why we need an military empire upon which the sun never sets, with troops and bases positioned all over the world.

I'd also love to believe that there was some wonderful system that was going to come along and end the exploitation and inequities that exist in the world, many of which are encouraged and/or supported by the US government. Still, with all of the problems, I can't find any system that works better than a government that is based on democratic principles, and I can't find any economic system that works better than a mix of capitalism and socialism. It took the United States a long time to get around to things like ending slavery, giving women and others the right to vote, social security, etc., and about the best I can hope for is that things will move in the right direction and be better in the future.

If I do get depressed about everything I don't like, what good is that going to do? Other than the fact that I will be living a depressed life, the problems will be exactly the same. If I give up that morning cup of coffee I enjoy so much, will that end the exploitation of workers in third world countries? Will it even make a dent? At the risk of being thought of as callous by some, I think I'm better off drinking my coffee, feeling better about myself and doing what I can, in my own small way, to be my version of a good human being. (One of the things I do is spend time at an all-volunteer charity that provides food, clothing and shelter to people).

If somebody actually knows of a better system than democractic principles and capitalist/socialist economics, warts and all, I'm willing to support that. I think it has been demonstrated by history that communism is not that system, and, despite all of the bullshit conspiracy theories, etc., it failed because it doesn't work very well. Once again, if somebody actually has some real ideas other than what I would call "bullshit coffeehouse political rhetoric," please let give us the opportunity to consider those ideas.

[sandinista]

Human society just isn't ready for "true" communism. Not for a while, if ever. Every communist government in history has had to force their policies down most of their citizens' throats.

It kinda makes me think of a parent giving their kids nothing but vegetables, saying "You'll get used to it! It's good for you! Sooner or later, I'm sure you'll learn to love it!" Maybe it is healthy, but is that the right thing to do?

Human society is ready for anything IMO. Sooner or later the kids usually do love it. Feeding you're kids whatever they want (mcshit every day) is a worse idea.

Which is why your opinion is unbalanced. You can eat a diet of nothing but veggies if you like. I like variety. And I don't like the idea of you being in charge and saying I can have absolutely nothing but what you tell me 'cause you know what's best.

Human society isn't "ready for anything". It's capable of anything - but "anything" often takes time. And in the meantime, I'm part of human society as much as you are, and I'd happily drop napalm on your kind for trying to force feed me your mushy vegetables. :twisted:

What the fuck are you talking about...No one...well, I never said "you can eat ONLY vegetables". Are you even reading? Take your napalm and shove it up your ass btw.

[Toontown]

Educate women more and you'll find population growth declines... there's plenty of research on this.

Thank you for that earth-shaking revelation. Do you really think it's that simple? Just get our Merkin asses out there and educate all them poor women? All two billion of them?

How about you Euros get your asses out there and educate them women. Their menfolk aren't going to like it, but...bring tanks. I advise parking a tank in front of each school during hours of operation. You will also need armored personnel carriers to serve as buses for the girls.

We've built plenty of schools in the last 10 years, in Iraq and Afghanistan. Had to force our way in, but we got in there and started building schools. We just don't have enough troops and tanks to guard all the schools and keep The Taliban from running in and throwing acid in the girls' faces. Do you Euros have any troops to spare? No?

We might have to cut back on our school-building activities in the future. Makes the natives restless. Especially the Euros.

And the capitalist system has hardly been trying its best to spread the riches, has it now? The US, being the model capitalist society, has the largest concentration of wealth in the western world, and has systematically been marginalising workers ever since its rise to prominence.

Stop trying to "frame the debate" in a way that you think is to your advantage. That might fool you, but it won't fool me. For starters, I'm not interested in debating your stubbornness. It's a waste of time. Secondly, communism can't win in your chosen frame of reference either.

Frame this: It is not the job of the "capitalist system" to spread riches. That's what communism purports to do, and has always failed to do. You can't spread what you don't create. For the most part, you can't have what you don't create.

It's the government's job to levy taxes and judiciously spread some of the wealth as needed. Whether the government is doing that to your satisfaction, or should do that to your satisfaction is not even the question. The question is, how much wealth can the government redistribute without choking off the economic engine. You may rest assured that the vote-grubbing politikers will siphon off as much of Richie Rich's wealth as they think they can get away with, in order to buy the votes of their constituents. There aren't enough rich people to form a voting base. But they have to be careful not to choke off the economic engine, or they will be choked off.

People generally don't even question why they're only given two alternatives in an election (unless they want to throw away their vote on a renegade), and why they seem so similar. They differ on certain contentious issues, played up by the media, so you'll have the population worried about their stances on gay rights, abortion, guns, etc. rather than how they systematically are aiding the priveleged classes. Home of the free, indeed.

And I can't believe you're even bringing this up. Is this another debate-framing attempt?

If so, it's another piss-poor one. How is two choices worse than the one choice any communist country has ever given anyone?

The manufactured hot-button issues are intended to capture the marginal social issue votes. Politikers fight for every scrap of votes they can suck up. They'll vacuum out every corner of a room for votes. They fight over marginal issues mostly because their fates are usually already sealed on the important bedrock issues. By the time election time rolls around, they've either been on the right side of the real issues, or the wrong side. They'd better have been on the right side of the bedrock issues, which is why you lament that they all seem so similar. There really aren't that many ways to go. Politickers can't just go running off in any direction. No one will follow, which is good. Frankly, we're lucky the freaking system even works at all. No use whining that it won't run sideways or backwards.

BTW, that was really clever the way you questioned MY FREEDOM!!!

[Animavore]

I think George Galloway is a legend. I admire his outspokenness and brazen attitude. The last time I saw him was on Channel 4 news when they had a report about Cuba and Castro and he pulled them up on their bias reporting, which I had to respect because that's exactly what they had done (I never actually watch that news show, are they right-wingers?).
I don't agree with everything he says but not agreeing with someone has never stopped me from liking them.