Nearly 1 In 5 Millennials Consider Joseph Stalin And Kim Jong Un ‘Heroes’

[Pishy]

1 minute ago, DieselDaisy said:

I'll explain why.

Communists invent -isms, -its and -ites that are then labelled betrayers of 'true' communism, also an -ism, -it or an -ite!  The one constant in communism is its ability to procreate constantly feuding substrata: thus Trotskyites claim to be antithetical to Stalinists and they are both rather different from Leninism/Bolshevism which in turn was different from Menshevism. Later, Maoism separated itself from Russian communism when Russia sought rapprochement with the west, and then you have Juche communism which is sort of communism with a weird Confucius monarchical cult attached - and the history of communism proceeds thus.

On and on it goes, constantly producing quarreling offspring. 

They all of course claim to be Marxists, but obviously there can be only one (to quote a low budget action-adventure film) as communist is rather like religion in that aspect. And some Marxists state Marxism has never occurred in the proper manner and all these -isms are bastard offspring. 

Now you must submit to @Oldest Goat 's demand 

[Ace Nova]

4 minutes ago, Pishy said:

National review? Come on now .

i go by facts . Well documented ones. 

Apology accepted, I felt maimed by the slight.

Try reading the article instead of making things up as you go along, to fit within your delusional Communistic paradigm.  Plenty of facts there.  And as I stated earlier, the average working class Cuban makes $25 per month.  That's extreme poverty. 

Not sure how anyone can actually claim Cuba as an example of a Communism success story....it's the complete and utter opposite...it's a failed state like the rest of Communistic societies throughout history.

 

[DieselDaisy]

18 minutes ago, Oldest Goat said:

Please explain how that isn't the case because to me it clearly is.

Well pretty much everything Marx predicted was wrong so it is rather hard to envision an ideal Marxism.

Also I should point out that Marx was rather vague on certain key aspects so inherently left a vacuum for all of these bastard offsprings of his (i.e., the -isms). 

Edited November 8, 2017 by DieselDaisy

[Ace Nova]

Just now, Oldest Goat said:

I don't know enough about Cuba to claim it's a failure or success. But you must admit the unjust oppression of the United States wouldn't have exactly helped things along.

That's way overblown.  Cuba has been trading with other Western countries for years.  Actually, the U.S. is the only Western power that doesn't trade with Cuba.  That's the major reason the U.S. embargo doesn't even work.   

I'm actually a proponent of lifting the Cuban Embargo.  I thought Obama was on the right track with Cuba.  With the embargo lifted and Castro gone, I think it will be only a matter of time before they go to a free market.

[Pishy]

2 minutes ago, Kasanova King said:

That's way overblown.  Cuba has been trading with other Western countries for years.  Actually, the U.S. is the only Western power that doesn't trade with Cuba.  That's the major reason the U.S. embargo doesn't even work.   

I'm actually a proponent of lifting the Cuban Embargo.  I thought Obama was on the right track with Cuba.  With the embargo lifted and Castro gone, I think it will be only a matter of time before they go to a free market.

Flabbergasted 

3 minutes ago, DieselDaisy said:

Well pretty much everything Marx predicted was wrong so it is rather hard to envision an ideal Marxism.

Deeply flabbergasted 

 

[DieselDaisy]

Just now, Oldest Goat said:

Like what?

I'm not speaking to a commie, am I? It is about as entertaining being trapped in a lift with Alan Shearer, speaking to commies!

Like what? Well you can immediately start with just where this workers' revolution would take place. It wasn't Britain as Marx predicted. 

[SoulMonster]

Can't talk about socialism or communism with the average American  For decades they've been indoctrinated to consider it Evil. Capitalinism. 

[Ace Nova]

5 minutes ago, SoulMonster said:

Can't talk about socialism or communism with the average American  For decades they've been indoctrinated to consider it Evil. Capitalinism. 

That's not true.  I think that some socialism with free markets can work...like it works now in Scandinavian countries. 

 Communism, with a planned economy, with a market controlled entirely by the state...does not work...as proven over and over again throughout history. 

[DieselDaisy]

5 minutes ago, Oldest Goat said:

Ideals tend to be ever-changing and are ethereal so I don't adhere to any. I can't think of even one I 100% agree with anyway. I think women should be able to vote, but I'm not a feminist. I think people who actually do the work should have the power and not some pencil pusher with no talent and a management degree. But no, I'm not a commie either.

I feel like that's a fairly superficial example, are there better ones, you tax dodging scallywag?

A brief description of Marxism,

A inevitable - 'inevitable' is the key word - industrial revolution, the proletariat overthrowing the bourgeoisie and establishing a society based on common ownership. This would likely occur in the most industrially advanced societies (e.g. Britain).

Fair enough?

Where and when has the above came to pass?

I repeat, pretty much everything Marx predicted was wrong.

[Len Cnut]

Bullshit, i dont believe that that many millenials could even accurately describe what socialism is.  Or Gen Exers or Baby Boomer when they were at a comparable age.

6 minutes ago, DieselDaisy said:

A brief description of Marxism,

A inevitable - 'inevitable' is the key word - industrial revolution, the proletariat overthrowing the bourgeoisie and establishing a society based on common ownership. This would likely occur in the most industrially advanced societies (e.g. Britain).

Fair enough?

Where and when has the above came to pass?

I repeat, pretty much everything Marx predicted was wrong.

Never, all of what Marx said never came to pass, in any society in terms of then establishing a firm on-going commitment to the principles of Marxist common ownership, hes respected more in terms of ideas that he laid down as a theologian than the accuracy of his crystal ball.

[DieselDaisy]

2 minutes ago, Oldest Goat said:

That doesn't sound like a prediction at all. But even if it was, you are throwing out the baby with the bathwater.

Marxism has an inevitability about it. The industrial workers will overthrow the bourgeois and possess the means of production. This would inherently occur in industrial societies - I perhaps should have said 'i.e'. but Marx also speculated that north German could witness the first workers' revolution.

I repeat, when and where has Marx's revolution occurred?

[Len Cnut]

32 minutes ago, DieselDaisy said:

I'm not speaking to a commie, am I? It is about as entertaining being trapped in a lift with Alan Shearer, speaking to commies!

Like what? Well you can immediately start with just where this workers' revolution would take place. It wasn't Britain as Marx predicted. 

1920s, General strike, thats when it should’ve happened, but we fucked it up like it was a cup final   I say we, I weren’t there

[Ace Nova]

I just recently read this somewhere and I find it to be humorously true.  

Communism seems great in theory...but is a disaster that leads to ruthless regimes and cruel living conditions for its people, in real-world scenarios.    Capitalism seems ruthless and cruel in theory but has had great results in real-world scenarios. 

[DieselDaisy]

5 minutes ago, Len Cnut said:

Bullshit, i dont believe that that many millenials could even accurately describe what socialism is.  Or Gen Exers or Baby Boomer when they were at a comparable age.

Never, all of what Marx said never came to pass, in any society in terms of then establishing a firm on-going commitment to the principles of Marxist common ownership, hes respected more in terms of ideas that he laid down as a theologian than the accuracy of his crystal ball.

No, we are discussing undiluted Marxism (minus the subsequent twentieth century -isms). Undiluted Marxism claimed a workers' revolution would occur in an industrial state. This did not occur, thus Marx was completely erroneous in his entire premise.

(That is why it has become necessary/preferential to alter Marxism with a multitude of -isms).

[Len Cnut]

4 minutes ago, DieselDaisy said:

No, we are discussing undiluted Marxism (minus the subsequent twentieth century -isms). Undiluted Marxism claimed a workers' revolution would occur in an industrial state. This did not occur, thus Marx was completely erroneous in his entire premise.

(That is why it has become necessary/preferential to alter Marxism with a multitude of -isms).

It has not and nor will it.  The precepts of it were quite case specific to a certain day and time.  Now while I do think there is a great deal of value to extract from it, difficult not to really, its come to form some of the language we use when discussing economics and politics, its not a functional or workable theory because it doesn't account for greed, and thats the defining characteristic of the human race.  Greed, wanting to get ahead, no one really wants equality, not like that, it's not natural.

[DieselDaisy]

Just now, Oldest Goat said:

Does Marxism state "all of this is inevitable by 2017, if this aspect is not fulfilled, please throw everything out."?

Can you think of better examples?

''Better examples''? That is the fundamentals of the whole ideology!! If the basic premises of the workers' revolution was untrue, everything else basically collapses as well.

It has only been circa 130 years since Das Kapital. 2018 perhaps? 

What will happen first, Marx's revolution or England winning the world cup?

[Ace Nova]

11 minutes ago, Len Cnut said:

Bullshit, i dont believe that that many millenials could even accurately describe what socialism is.  Or Gen Exers or Baby Boomer when they were at a comparable age.

3

The majority of Millenials are in their 20's now.  

[Len Cnut]

4 minutes ago, DieselDaisy said:

''Better examples''? That is the fundamentals of the whole ideology!! If the basic premises of the workers' revolution was untrue, everything else basically collapses as well.

It has only been circa 130 years since Das Kapital. 2018 perhaps? 

What will happen first, Marx's revolution or England winning the world cup?

Probably the fuckin' revolution in terms of likelihood

[Ace Nova]

3 minutes ago, Oldest Goat said:

Do you think the banks should have been bailed out like they were?

On the surface, it seemed hypocritical to do so at the time.  But in hindsight, it worked and possibly prevented the next great depression. 

Edited November 8, 2017 by Kasanova King

[Len Cnut]

The sad truth about economics is as long as the rich are doing well it don't matter how the poor are.  Thats economics for you.  Its only when you bring morality into it that the workers begin to matter and thats where communism is weird, because its kinda moral in terms of where it's coming from but the 'equality' that is proposes is just a well cloaked form of oppression.  if Economics really is God then Gods a cruel blind bastard.

Edited November 8, 2017 by Len Cnut

[DieselDaisy]

1 minute ago, Len Cnut said:

It has not and nor will it.  The precepts of it were quite case specific to a certain day and time.  Now while I do think there is a great deal of value to extract from it, difficult not to really, its come to form some of the language we use when discussing economics and politics, its not a functional or workable theory because it doesn't account for greed, and thats the defining characteristic of the human race.  Greed, wanting to get ahead, no one really wants equality, not like that, it's not natural.

Marx did not really want to be thought of as ''useful for economic historians'' (which is true by the way). He actually predicted a class war would occur which would overthrow the bourgeois and establish a proletarian co-operative state. He was wrong in the fundamental premise of his ideology.

Britain embraced Fabian socialism and later the (constitutional) Labour Party instead. 

The whole backdrop of his ideology, of the tides of history being decided solely by class warfare is absolute bollocks. It is as erroneous a belief as Hitler's history being decided by racial warfare. 

 

[Len Cnut]

4 minutes ago, DieselDaisy said:

Marx did not really want to be thought of as ''useful for economic historians'' (which is true by the way). He actually predicted a class war would occur which would overthrow the bourgeois and establish a proletarian co-operative state. He was wrong in the fundamental premise of his ideology.

Britain embraced Fabian socialism and later the (constitutional) Labour Party instead. 

The whole backdrop of his ideology, of the tides of history being decided solely by class warfare is absolute bollocks. It is as erroneous a belief as Hitler's history being decided by racial warfare. 

 

Exactly, all these big theories failure is that they are essentially reductive in nature and I don't think, for whatever my thinking is worth, that its as easy as all that.

Edited November 8, 2017 by Len Cnut

[DieselDaisy]

5 minutes ago, Oldest Goat said:

No. I completely disagree. A revolution happening in England by 2017 is not the fundamentals of the whole ideology.

I was being facetious with the 2017 comment.

Clearly Marx thought his workers' revolution was imminent, occurring sometime in his own lifetime or soon after. 

[Len Cnut]

4 minutes ago, DieselDaisy said:

I was being facetious with the 2017 comment.

Clearly Marx thought his workers' revolution was imminent, occurring sometime in his own lifetime or soon after. 

Again, exactly right, it was speaking of the industrial world in which Das Kapital was written, which has essentially gone for a toss, at least in the way that it is described by Marx.  The very very broad stuff about means of production etc I suppose is applicable but it is speaking of a pretty imminent thing and it was written in the light of contemporary happenings, this is why a lot of people in the next 30 or 40 years following it were so gee'd up on the idea, it was supposed to be going on now.

[DieselDaisy]

2 minutes ago, Len Cnut said:

Again, exactly right, it was speaking of the industrial world in which Das Kapital was written, which has essentially gone for a toss, at least in the way that it is described by Marx.  The very very broad stuff about means of production etc I suppose is applicable but it is speaking of a pretty imminent thing and it was written in the light of contemporary happenings, this is why a lot of people in the next 30 or 40 years following it were so gee'd up on the idea, it was supposed to be going on now.

He was influenced by the 1848 Revolutions. The 1848 Revolutions added an imminence to his predictions.

When the Russians and Chinese implemented Marxism, or their interpretation of Marxism, they faced a big problem: they were both overwhelmingly agrarian societies!!