Thread: Your View Om Communism

Originally Posted by Intended

See, the fruit of anti-propaganda is that you think socialism=totalitarism, or that you think communism=socialism... but it isn't true! If you repeat these things, it means you don't understand them, you're merely repeating what you've heard.
How can one have a truthful opinion of things he's been misinformed about to such a point that he says absolutely incorrect things about them?

I already explained this. I guess I am going to have to snap you out of your "zombification" if I can. People generally don't want the government to rob the shit out of them, so generally in democracies there is capitalism. It takes a substantial degree of totalitarianism to hold a system of socialism. Socialism and democracy are not opposites, but they do come in opposite sets of factors.

And I can see that you and Imran aren't exactly spewing out passionate opinions about the specific mechanics of how socialism could possibly be a success. You must have your doubts because I have asked for that explanation a lot of times and still haven't gotten it. I am not here to debate Karl Marx. I am here to debate living socialists and communists on this web site. So for the hundred trillionth time... tell me about the mechanics of successful socialism. What would be the major fuel of such a machine that can't run on greed? Tell me about some examples of the extreme successes of socialism. Do you think you can do that? I keep having to ask.

Originally Posted by Moonbeam

I'm just going by things I've read comparing US universities to the free ones in European countries and China

I'm mostly thinking of quality of study books, of study process, of how exams get passed, what is learnt, etc. I read foreign study books of different coutries myself and they lose in comparison to some others. I compared how much time is put into studying per week, how much homework there is and how long holidays are. I heard how exams get passed from examinators, which questions are ok to ask and which people can't answer. Such comparisons seemed bad to me, especially when somebody in a good (not free!) university didn't know what I knew back in the 6th form of my free school.
I'm not saying that "free" is always better as far as it goes for quality, obviosly free European schools aren't best. There are many more things to take into account: starting from how much respect the job of a teacher has in a certain country and ending with the type and details of educational system. Mostly the latter is to blame for quality.

a lot of foreign students want to come to the US to study; there must be a reason for that.

As far as I know, all foreign students hope to stay and have good fees later It is also "cool" to have studied in the US, not because of educational system, but because of the current prestige of the country. Easier to find a job.

I know the grants and subsidized loans are a form of socialism; US is a socialist country.

What you describe is socially-oriented steps of capitalistic government, they have no direct relation to socialism. In socialism there's no private owners who live off all others and thanx to it money get distributed between people by the goverment in a fairer way, that's what it really is. If anything, education and medical care are completely free in pure socialism, no loans or grants, because schools, unis and hospitals belong to the state and are paid by the state.
Of course, the state takes this money from its people (by taxes and so on), so it's just a different system of money redistribution. It takes a fixed sum of money for doctors from everybody and gives this money to doctors, so doctors become free for everybody. As a result, everybody can visit doctors for free, instead of only those who're rich enough. There's actually no rich and poor in pure socialism, because of no private owners and money getting distributed in a way so that everybody could use its fruits.

Half\Dreaming

i fully understand Marx's theory. It means that Labor is the most important thing to a country, so they should be rewarded and cherished.

This shows that you don't understand what the theory is about... It's about how these people are unerpayed, i.e. robbed of a part of money that they do produce.

The people with labor jobs are generally uneducated. Just because we rely on them doesnt mean we should give equal pay to jobs that anybody can do. You dont have to be smart to stack bricks or flip a burger.

You don't get paid for being smart. You get for effectiveness of your work, whatever it is: whether you're working with your head or hands.

It makes capitalism a wealth magnet.

Please reread what made US a wealth magnet, I've written about it already. You in US get paid more per hour than in other countries not because you're smarter, but because you use the work of other countries. So in this case we have the global trade system, i.e. the whole country as a manager, and the whole other country as an underpayed worker (see the link Imran gave, but extrapolate what's written in it to a global trade system). As a result, the whole country gets dishonest money (the whole -- meaning that fees of your workers are included, too), and the whole other country gets underpayed. Got it?

Universal Mind
I told you all you want and you keep ignoring it and asking again. I don't want to repeat myself.
All I can say is: if your goal is to study what socialism is, read about it or at least read my explanations with your eyes open . But if your primary goal is to distort my words and deny your ignorance about socialism, don't read about it and leave it alone. That's all.
Nobody is forcing you to do discuss what you don't care about.

Originally Posted by Intended

What you describe is socially-oriented steps of capitalistic government, they have no direct relation to socialism. In socialism there's no private owners who live off all others and thanx to it money get distributed between people by the goverment in a fairer way, that's what it really is. If anything, education and medical care are completely free in pure socialism, no loans or grants, because schools, unis and hospitals belong to the state and are paid by the state.

But there's no purely socialist state that's not corrupt and oppressive. Is there? (I say purely because I think the US is way too socialist.) There may be some small countries with a homogenous population that can make it work for a while, but in a large country with a diverse population, it just can't happen. Some people at the top are going to work the system to their advantage, and other people are never going to receive what they should.

Originally Posted by Intended

Of course, the state takes this money from its people (by taxes and so on), so it's just a different system of money redistribution. It takes a fixed sum of money for doctors from everybody and gives this money to doctors, so doctors become free for everybody. As a result, everybody can visit doctors for free, instead of only those who're rich enough. There's actually no rich and poor in pure socialism, because of no private owners and money getting distributed in a way so that everybody could use its fruits.

If there's no rich and no poor, there's no reason for anyone to try harder, there's no reason to work hard, there's no competition, and there's no reason for anyone to really care about the quality of their work. I wouldn't want to live in a country where the doctors and engineers didn't expect to be paid more for their years of school and stressful jobs. That would not be good.

Originally Posted by Intended

Social mobility is fully working in socialism.

What does that even mean? What is "social mobility" in a country where there are no rich and no poor?

Originally Posted by Intended

Please reread what made US a wealth magnet, I've written about it already. You in US get paid more per hour than in other countries not because you're smarter, but because you use the work of other countries. So in this case we have the global trade system, i.e. the whole country as a manager, and the whole other country as an underpayed worker (see the link Imran gave, but extrapolate what's written in it to a global trade system). As a result, the whole country gets dishonest money (the whole -- meaning that fees of your workers are included, too), and the whole other country gets underpayed. Got it?

I think this is true.

You are speaking entirely hypothetically for a system that is appealing to your emotions. Everyone can see how nice it be if the animals did take over the farm, but this has been proven not to work again and again by those who ignored human nature and actually attempted it. You cannot artificially seperate the economics system of a country from the way the government works.

Intended, i really dont understand your logic. Who cares who "creates" the wealth. Construction workers by themselves are WORTHLESS. There has to be a college-man to come before him to make the plans for the building. They get screwed when the paycheck comes because they do what anybody else can do, and there is no shortage of employees. Educated people are more valuable. Educated people are the ones who make everything possible.

It is impossible to "create" wealth when there is no product. Who gives a rats ass who put your computer together? It is worthless, and probably wouldnt even exist without software, created by Bill Gates. Whoever creates the product or knows the science behind it is valuable. Those who put it together, even though they are necessary as a whole, are individually trivial. There is no bee's nest or worker bee population without the queen. Do you deny this? It sounds to me like you're using the "its just not fair!!" excuse.

Life isnt fair, and those who dont get college degrees are not as valuable as those who do. Using your logic, a private should have the same rank and ability to give orders as a captain on the battlefield. I mean, grunts are the one's who win the battles, right? There's a reason why educated people are in charge.

Originally Posted by Intended

Universal Mind
I told you all you want and you keep ignoring it and asking again. I don't want to repeat myself.
All I can say is: if your goal is to study what socialism is, read about it or at least read my explanations with your eyes open . But if your primary goal is to distort my words and deny your ignorance about socialism, don't read about it and leave it alone. That's all.
Nobody is forcing you to do discuss what you don't care about.

That is so weak. You never did answer the two questions I keep asking over and over. You don't have good answers to those questions, so you keep dodging them. If you didn't, prove it by quoting what you said. In case you have forgotten, the two questions are...

1. What do you think would be the driving forces in communism and socialism? (In capitalism it is greed. What would you say it would be in communism and socialism?)

2. What are some examples of really successful socialist countries (You said communism has never existed, to the disagreement of many governments and historians, so let's concentrate on socialism here. You can start by telling me about some very specific examples of socialist nations that have a poverty class that is better off than ours.)

You know you kept dodging those two questions, but you deny it, so go ahead and set the record straight with two short answers. You can make them long if you want to, however. If you don't feel like answering them, just quote where you supposedly already did. Thanks.

Originally Posted by Universal Mind

That is so weak. You never did answer the two questions I keep asking over and over. You don't have good answers to those questions, so you keep dodging them. If you didn't, prove it by quoting what you said. In case you have forgotten, the two questions are...

1. What do you think would be the driving forces in communism and socialism? (In capitalism it is greed. What would you say it would be in communism and socialism?)

2. What are some examples of really successful socialist countries (You said communism has never existed, to the disagreement of many governments and historians, so let's concentrate on socialism here. You can start by telling me about some very specific examples of socialist nations that have a poverty class that is better off than ours.)

You know you kept dodging those two questions, but you deny it, so go ahead and set the record straight with two short answers. You can make them long if you want to, however. If you don't feel like answering them, just quote where you supposedly already did. Thanks.

I know, its ridiculous, right? I may have to answer for them.

The only possible driving force for socialism would be knowing that your hard work is for the better of society. If EVERYBODY trusted in that, and if EVERYBODY busted their ass, a socialist society could potentially become great.

But, the inevitable weak links (probably the majority of people) would never allow this to happen, as people are, in fact, greedy. A socialist society would collapse to quickly to become great because of this "majority of people".

Awesome, i summed up everything i have been trying to say.

Originally Posted by Half/Dreaming

If EVERYBODY trusted in that, and if EVERYBODY busted their ass, a socialist society could potentially become great.

Unfortunately there are always pigs at a farm.

I think that Communism in Marxists views works in some ways but theres just too much that doesn't work with Communism, you've got to consider freedom of speech. After seeing the way Communism is going in China i am glad the UK is not under a Communist leader. Though i like the idea of equality i do believe that the current society is the best we've had so far, however there are many things i disagree with such as poverty and those lower down in the social hierarchy. You can easily say that those in lower classes have life chances but alot of them don't, nowadays its incredibly difficult to achieve social mobility to move up this current social hierarchy. I think we have yet to experience a good way of ordering society, there are so many bad points of the current societys.

Originally Posted by Lucid Seeker

I think that Communism in Marxists views works in some ways but theres just too much that doesn't work with Communism, you've got to consider freedom of speech. After seeing the way Communism is going in China i am glad the UK is not under a Communist leader. Though i like the idea of equality i do believe that the current society is the best we've had so far, however there are many things i disagree with such as poverty and those lower down in the social hierarchy. You can easily say that those in lower classes have life chances but alot of them don't, nowadays its incredibly difficult to achieve social mobility to move up this current social hierarchy. I think we have yet to experience a good way of ordering society, there are so many bad points of the current societys.

Good point! Lets talk for a minute about civil liberties involved with a socialist or communist society. We have been too focused on economics.

Most of the freedoms we enjoy would have to be scraped. As you said, freedom of speech. If a group of people were not content with the system, they would have to be silenced.

That's what I figured their answer to the first question would be if they ever dared to answer. The answer is probably something to the effect of, "The driving force would be the will to give money to everybody else, no matter how hard they work." That doesn't cut it, never has cut it, and never possibly could cut it. What people go to work and say, "I'm going to work really hard today because I want to spread my wealth to all of the lazy asses who don't feel like working too hard."? Very few. This is illustrated by the fact that socialism has never produced a wealthy nation. It is impossible. Greed is the great generator of wealth.

Intended and Imran, you are still welcome to give your own answers, if you have answers you are proud enough of to give.

What we really need is a social structure in which there is equality but with freedom of speech and everyone has equal opportunities, the only problem is that when you put that equality into action you get disagreements and arguements over it being unfair, people have gotten too used to the stratification we are currently in. Those in lower classes i am sure would be in favour of an equal society but those in a higher class would probably not like the idea because they have put in effort to earn their status and for all that effort to be flushed away would show many disagreements in those of higher class. No matter what way we have of ordering society its always going to have problems as long as people have freedom of speech because after all we are all entitled to our opinions are we not.

and question #2 is unanswerable.

Only if, lucid seeker, only if. Mixing freedom with socialism is impossible by nature. Even if that were possible, i still think it would suck.

Moonbeam,

I think the US is way too socialist

No, socialism is the absence of private owners. The US is capitalistic. Why don't you want to understand that I'm not making anything up? Whatever I said about socialism in a previous post wasn't made up, it was not just my opinion, those were objective facts. And you behave just like others in this thread, who argue with objective facts.
Take the link Imran gave. It got proved that Marx wrote the truth, bosses actually do rob workers of big amount of their pay, no capitalist would deny that. And people here behave as if it wasn't truth.

Some people at the top are going to work the system to their advantage, and other people are never going to receive what they should.

If you mean that there can be no free education and medical care, it already did happen and disproved such opinions.

If there's no rich and no poor, there's no reason for anyone to try harder, there's no reason to work hard, there's no competition, and there's no reason for anyone to really care about the quality of their work.

That's a widespread misconception. No rich and poor means there's no people who're 100000 richer than you, but maybe 10 times richer than you. Again, this isn't my opinion, that's how socialism actually works. Also quality of education proved that at least quality of education doesn't depend on how much teachers get paid.

What does that even mean? What is "social mobility" in a country where there are no rich and no poor?

Social mobility means you get born anywhere, e.g. in a countryside, and you aren't stuck. You can become anyone at all, if you're fit for it. In most of countries there's a limit for you, though in some cases a miracle happens.

You are speaking entirely hypothetically for a system that is appealing to your emotions.

It isn't a hypothesis, I'm just explaining how this system actually works. You keep thinking that I'm stating my own opinions while I'm stating the facts.

You cannot artificially seperate the economics system of a country from the way the government works.

If you're talking of corruption, it exists in any system and any state. They are certain measures to fight it. E.g. in China you can't get money out of the country, you can only get out products they've produced. Which means the country doesn't lose money, and if somebody decides to get out products they're actually helping. Such measures are taken in capitalistic countries, too.

Universal Mind
Why do you keep wanting to talk to me if you don't care for the subject of discussion?

What do you think would be the driving forces in communism and socialism?

Half\Dreaming had a part of answer.
I can remind you that in Japan they have this type of system at work: your company is considered to be your family, and however much you succeed in your career you won't be paid more. Now, don't tell me Japan is not a successful country...
But I already said that in socialism you do get more pay than others, it's just not as unequal as 1 to 100000, so there is a motivation in this sense, too.
But... It's ridiculous to ask such a question, since it got proven that whatever driving force was present, it worked. You're just searching to argue something minor.

What are some examples of really successful socialist countries

I already talked about USSR. Look at previous posts.

You said communism has never existed, to the disagreement of many governments and historians

They call it communism for crowd, because the goal is communism. It's a name of the ideology in this case, not for an economical system. But we're talking of economical system.

Intended and Imran, you are still welcome to give your own answers

And this is said by a person who lost the argument on previous pages? Don't make me laugh.

Half\Dreaming

Most of the freedoms we enjoy would have to be scraped. As you said, freedom of speech. If a group of people were not content with the system, they would have to be silenced

A widespread misconception. Economical system is about redistribution of money, it has nothing in common with human rights. These things aren't even parrallel, they have nothing to do together at all. You're just remembering how people on TV kept bashing China (or another country) for the lack of liberties. They tried to make you think that the country is very bad, and the effective way to do it would be making you think of liberties. If they just told you how money get distributed there you'd compare with yours and be jealous instead. You'd know that if you got rid of dishonest ways to create enormous wealth, you yourself would become much much richer. That's a fact. But of course, nobody can talk like that, because you don't really have a complete freedom of speech and thought, however much you're getting hypnotized in believing that you do.
Let me remind you that some capitalistic countries lack liberties. Saying "socialism = no freedom of speech" or "capitalism = freedom of speech" is absurd. Again, that's a fact, not just my opinion.

Construction workers by themselves are WORTHLESS.

This is a misconception which exists due to artificial dishonesties. Think about the "intellectual property" idea.
See, if you've created something physical, it's very hard to multiply it, it costs a lot. As a result, workers are paid for copying physical things (although they're underpayed a lot actually, as Marx had proved and capitalists DID agree). But we only care that it costs a lot to recreate, a lot of materials, a lot of physical effort, a lot of money to get materials.
But if you created something like an idea, it's very easy to multiply it in unlimited numbers (think MsWindows) with no effort. That's how dishonest wealth is created, since you can recreate the same thing an unlimited amount of times without sweat. But if it didn't cost you to recreate it, so the value of the copy should be zero! (The price of the product is calculated by the amount of work it costed). Of course, dishonest people didn't want to comply, so they created ways to get unearned wealth by an artificial idea of intellectual property.
There are other artificial dishonesties, e.g. monopolies. If you got monopoly, you can set any dishonest price you want. Think MsWindows again, that's a fine example of how two dishonesties are combined.

For one thing, i dont watch the news. China does suck. You talk about how I would be jealous of their distribution of wealth. No I wouldnt!! The average chinese is DIRT POOR. But it doesnt matter because everbody is dirt poor. Dude, i am not jealous of that.

I never said the economics and civil liberties of a socialist society walk hand in hand. In order for socialism to work, everybody has to be on board. Weak links bring the entire system down. The government would never allow those people to have their rights. And i know that capitalism doesnt equal free speech. Where is the logic behind that? BUT, since capitalism runs off the idea that you control your own life, more freedoms are retained. Now answer me this. How can you have any freedom if you are not in control of your own life? Socialism is a form of fascism (by its definition). Almost literally, tying all twigs together to make a strong stick. Fascism and freedom dont mix.

As to the second part of your post, ideas are worth more than physical objects. Physical objects come from ideas.

My final question. You think that the inventors should not get paid more than the workers who build their product. Tell me, where is the incentive to invent? We have already proven that "for the good of the country" is something people just wont do.

Originally Posted by Half/Dreaming

For one thing, i dont watch the news.

And don't read books about these subjects? About history, politics, economy? Then what are you talking about? You can't talk of such things if you know nothing, not even what's on the news.

China does suck.

Who are you to say it? How can you say the whole country sucks? Do you realize you've just insulted ALL people who live there?
Only complete morons can say such moronic things.
See, you're misrepresenting your nation. You're the second American here who said this moronic sentence... Are you ALL morons?

You talk about how I would be jealous of their distribution of wealth. No I wouldnt!!

Your country is rich, right? So if your richest superclass didn't steal from you, people on average would be richer: YOU'd be richer.

I never said the economics and civil liberties of a socialist society walk hand in hand.

Good! But why lie that you've never said it...

In order for socialism to work, everybody has to be on board. Weak links bring the entire system down. The government would never allow those people to have their rights.

You do realize that you know nothing about socialism, right? Why do you keep saying how you've been taught to think it works? You think you can know the truth, if you know nothing about the subject of discussion?
These were rhetoric questions.

And i know that capitalism doesnt equal free speech. Where is the logic behind that?

You said it on your own. Ask yourself where your logic was.

BUT, since capitalism runs off the idea that you control your own life, more freedoms are retained.

Socialism runs with the same idea. That's one of zombification tricks: two things that aren't related get connected to another and you begin to think that both of them are bad, not just one. You still keep thinking that you must be awfully oppressed and have no rights in socialism.

Socialism is a form of fascism (by its definition). Almost literally, tying all twigs together to make a strong stick. Fascism and freedom dont mix.

Who are you to say these moronic things? Learn what fascism is, before trying to compare. Then learn about socialism. I know what your problem is: zombies don't learn on their own, they're disinformed and taught to have only one train of thought.

As to the second part of your post, ideas are worth more than physical objects. Physical objects come from ideas.

Well, ok. I tried to explain. And I decided that I don't talk to stupid people.
FYI stupid=someone who can't understand basic things (which I tried to explain about physical vs. intellectual property).
I don't really feel I should apologize, because: 1) it's true; 2) you behaved much worse.

Intended, you spin more than a Michael Moore frisbee.

I said i dont watch the news. I never said i dont read books. And since when are books an infallable source?

China doesnt suck? I suppose you like a country that kills its young because it cant support its population. Communism at its best. I mean it, its BEST.

I consider myself lower middle class. I dont care about the "super duper rich". I know i probably wouldnt have my job if it werent for these people. I leave them alone because i know they are the brains of my awesome economy.

Read my post about civil liberties and socialism again. You said yourself that socialism has never really existed, yet you say socialists could have as many rights as we do. It really isnt possible.

Fine, i may not have a monopoly on the truth of socialism like you, but you definately dont know anything about human nature. Your ideologies say so. Still, all i see coming from you is "its just not fair!!!" You propose no plausible alternate system, and all you can do is insult capitalism.

"Whatever" is right. You are ideolistic. Thats it! Your idea looks good on paper, but it has no basis for what you say. All you have is "what ifs". You say i have been brainwashed into believing only in capitalism? Ha!! Maybe so, but can you deny that greed is the perfect driving force? Why not use it to the country's advantage?

Alright i'll take your little challenge. Dont even respond to this post, and just explain socialism. Every inch of it!! You tell me i dont understand it, but you havent explained it. I leave it to you

who here has read Das Kapital and The Communist Manifesto?

"I consider myself lower middle class. I dont care about the "super duper rich". I know i probably wouldnt have my job if it werent for these people. I leave them alone because i know they are the brains of my awesome economy."

you sound like a modern day peasant! is it really that great a thing that they give you? a job the keeps you lower middle class? Arn't you just being used? And I can't seem to understand how being lower-middle-class and working for someone else is really "freedom"?

I won't even discuss the same misconceptions you wrote that you keep repeating over and over again ignoring the fact that I've disproved them.
You ignore my disproves and keep repeating your own thoughts, as if merely repeating them could make them true. Bad news, what you want isn't always true. I got sick of it already.

Look only at this:

Originally Posted by Half/Dreaming

You said yourself that socialism has never really existed, yet you say socialists could have as many rights as we do. It really isnt possible.

Indeed, because it's communism that I said never existed... Man, you're hopeless.

Alright i'll take your little challenge. Dont even respond to this post, and just explain socialism. Every inch of it!! You tell me i dont understand it, but you havent explained it. I leave it to you

I tried to explain how socialism works many times, but you kept arguing, as if I was making these things up. You even called it "an utopia" once, meaning it can't be possible, although I just described what fruits socialism actually had (in that particular case in USSR), i.e. it was all real.
Now why would I care to waste time and explain this system as a whole to someone who can't understand basic things? It's hopeless.
You've lost the argument. Reason: inability to understand the subject of discussion.

P.S. Read something on your own if you sincerely want to. Or just learn to talk normally to people, without this arrogant voice, and they'll talk to you.

Originally Posted by shark!

who here has read Das Kapital and The Communist Manifesto?

Das Kapital, in German?

is it really that great a thing that they give you? a job the keeps you lower middle class? Arn't you just being used? And I can't seem to understand how being lower-middle-class and working for someone else is really "freedom"?

Unfortunately, zombies always defend the "super-duper" elite, not themselves. I kept talking to that person, and he kept answering as if he was one of the elite. Zombies can't switch back to their point of view, because the elite has eliminated it via the unofficialy controlled mass-media.
He glorifies greed, but doesn't want to be richer, he agrees that the elite can have everything... That's their point of view, not his.

Originally Posted by shark!

who here has read Das Kapital and The Communist Manifesto?

"I consider myself lower middle class. I dont care about the "super duper rich". I know i probably wouldnt have my job if it werent for these people. I leave them alone because i know they are the brains of my awesome economy."

you sound like a modern day peasant! is it really that great a thing that they give you? a job the keeps you lower middle class? Arn't you just being used? And I can't seem to understand how being lower-middle-class and working for someone else is really "freedom"?

I work for me and what i want. How do you know my job keeps me in lower middle class? You dont even know how old i am or my current situation. How do you know i dont work for myself? Btw lower middle class is a subsection of middle class, not a space between lower and middle. Middle class is actually petty wealthy.

Intended, YOU are hopeless! You have yet to explain your system. Period. And dont talk about me like you fucking know me. I dont want to make more money? Great assumption, jackass. I am an American, right? The thought of a pile of money gets me sexually excited. But NO!!! I have been BRAINWASHED into slavery for the rich!!! HA!!!! Comedic!!! America kicks ass while your ideology fails. Thats all the "brainwashing" i need.

It really makes me mad when you call me an American brainwashed zombie supremist. I could just as easily call you a disgruntled European who has been brainwashed by the leaders of his country into believing that everything American is bad because they are INFERIOR, but that doesnt make it true. I'd watch the stereotypes.

Are you going to explain your system, or not?

Originally Posted by Intended

Universal Mind
Why do you keep wanting to talk to me if you don't care for the subject of discussion?

How is asking the same unanswered questions over and over not caring about the subject of discussion? I keep asking two extremely relevant questions, and you keep dodging them because you don't have good answers. You say that socialism is a great system, yet you repeatedly avoid telling me what the driving force in it would be AND when in the Hell it has ever worked. Go figure. If you really believed in socialism, you would be telling me all about those things even without my asking. You are doing the opposite. But maybe insulting people personally will make up for your lack of ability to discuss the subject. Let me know when you've come up with answers to my two big questions, not that you actually ever will.

I'll try this another way too. I'll make two points that you can't counter.

1. Socialism has no major economic driving force because it does not encourage people to work hard or to be inventive or entrepreneurial.

2. No wealthy socialist nation has ever existed.

I challenge you to counter those points. Don't lie by saying that they are not relevant to the subject. They ARE the subject.

I work for me and what i want. How do you know my job keeps me in lower middle class? You dont even know how old i am or my current situation. How do you know i dont work for myself? Btw lower middle class is a subsection of middle class, not a space between lower and middle. Middle class is actually petty wealthy.

your job must keep you in lowermiddleclass if you are working and still in lowermiddleclass. You're right I dont know you or much about your situation. Do you work for yourself? And yes middle class is quite wealthy, probably the wealthiest group of that size in history. In fact even lower middle class is wealthy compared to the rest of history. (even the "lower classes" are comparitivly rich,just look how fat the average southern wal-mart shopper is!)

Clearly capitalism has created fucking amazing amounts of wealth. At what cost? boredom? on the back of hardworking people wasting their lives? Who is to say what the price of progress should be, and who is to say if its worth it, not me. Personally I think capitalism is amazing, but I also think that "capitalism is cannabalism", At least it seems to be "working" better than a lot of other things. On the other hand just because its better that say, feudalism or "flawed USSR Stalinist "communism" " doesn't mean we can't still come up with something better. (I don't know, maybe something like a post-anarchist Ludic society built around "playing" all day might be nice )

you sound like a modern day peasant! is it really that great a thing that they give you? a job the keeps you lower middle class? Arn't you just being used? And I can't seem to understand how being lower-middle-class and working for someone else is really "freedom"?

my point was more of a john lennon song reference than anything else that I hoped someone would see : D

...and I guess a marxist point too that Intdended repeated in his own words, slightly less tactfully..with words like zombies



But I'm still wondering, is "freedom" the ability to choose which fastfood joint or factory you get to work at?