Communists?

The same way they gave us a helping shoulder, but NK and China remained communist, NK even are extremist in it, but that's my opinion.

 

lol I would be considered something between a DeLeonist, Left Communist, or a Council Communist and I'm guessing that you know what that means.

I mean that Communism is a stateless, moneyless society that does not produce for the sake of production and accumulation of things but for the collective need of society.

The USSR was not actually Communist despite their propaganda. If you accept their definitions then you are basically accepting Stalin and his successors as being honest as to the very definition of Communism.

 

Yeah, like that ever happened

 

Yay!

^This.
Defining the DPRK and China as communist is a big mistake.
The fact that they both are using communist simbology ( Hammer and Sickle etc.) doesn't mean that they are communist.
In fact, i consider them to be two of the most reactionary regimes on Earth as we speak. In fact, China had a socialist-like period, but it was based on the support of peasants, who for social condition and education are uncapable of handling and defending communism/socialism. It didn't take long for the Chinese Socialism to become a puppet of the bureaucrats of the Party, which managed to turn the Revolution into an ultracapitalist and oppressive regime.

Same story for the DPRK, which actually has always had just a veil of vague communism/socialism to their regime. It could be defined as a Militarist, Nationalist, Xenophobic Economy-planned Military-ruled State, led by a dinastic Dictatorship.
Actually, they erased any referrence to communism/socialism from their constitution in the mid-90s.

 

You misunderstood me. It's not like i don't believe people are inbornly good/altruistic. I just think that this is what modern society teaches us.
But yes, i do see only greed in Capitalism/capitalists and i do think that it/they can do nothing good for Humankind, and are instead corrupting and damagind our world.

 

Ok, let's clarify some things:

1 - Communism has never existed. Primitive Communism has, and humanity has lived 9/10 of it's existence under that system.

2 - Communism is Socialism. Left-Anarchism is Socialism.

3 - Capitalism and Socialism are opposites, there is no such thing as a "mix". A Socialist society is one wherein the means of production (Factories, Land, and any other wealth creating apparatus) are held in Common, and production is for use, not profit. A Capitalist society in one wherein the means of production are held in Private, and production is held for profit, not use. There can be Socialistic organs under Capitalism, such as State run business, but it is still Capitalism.

4 - For there to be Communism, there cannot be a State. The State is a tool of class domination. It passes the laws, commands the army and controls the police that protect the interests of a given class. The Marxist-Leninist current of Marxism takes the position that the workers must take over the State, and start the Dictatorship of the Proletariat (Dictatorship of the Workers). This has nothing to do with dictatorship in the bourgeois sense of the word, but instead the dictatorship of the working class over the capitalist class, in other words, power of society is reversed.

5 - Communists don't believe in faith, because communists are Humanists and Scientific. We believe in evidence, not assumptions. We hold that morals of society change as society changes, and we don't look at people as "good" or "bad", instead we say "this person has a flawed concept of something" or "this person made many mistakes" or "this person held views that are not compatible with a scientific analysis".

6 - Most communists are Atheists, because we are Humanists and Materialists. We believe it's the struggle between classes that changes society, not God's intervention or "Human Nature".

 

So you're saying that a state cannot be communistic? That actually makes some sense, but- A state can implement a lot of communistic practises.

 

A State can not be communistic because under communism there is no state. The organisation of society is structured around communes: democratic organs of decision. The State is inherently authoritarian.

The idea that we live in a democracy is completely bogus. We elect a new puppet every 4 years, that's it. We don't choose who is put forward as president or prime-minister, that's chosen for us, we just tick a box.

Now the closest thing the capitalist State can do to Socialism is owning industry, because this industry is held in common (although not completely because private investors can buy shares). Common ownership makes business accountable to the people, and benefits everyone.

Just look at the Soviet Union and how much it accomplished. It was borderline 3rd world country before the Revolution, and evolved into one of the most powerful nations in the world. The economy was centered around use, so everything was put to the benefit of society, not to private entities. I remember reading that just after the 1st World War, Russia had only 1 tractor, a captured British Tank that plowed the fields. In just 25 years it became a superpower.

 

and look at it now

 

Your point being?

 

1) Putin
2) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Purge
3) FSB-KGB
4) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NKVD_prisoner_massacres

Wow great job (Clap) (Clap)

 

Considering the OVERWHELMING amounts of natural resources availible to the russians, the HUGE amounts of arable land and the pool of well-educated people, the Russian government isn't utilizing their resources very well at the moment. For all I know, USSR wasn't exactly a Utopia, although the West tend to make it look worse than it was. Fact is, there was a lot of corruption, little free press and their farming was ineffective, so there was not that much food (not that starvation was overly common).
EDIT: TotalAaron, if you want people to take you seriously and for this to not turn into a flamewar, you should stop those sarcastic comments.

 

Still, I fail to see your point.

We were talking about the function of the State and how fast Socialism develops a country, and you come in and post Wikipedia links to completely off-topic subjects.

 

Me start a flame war

but really i just dont like peoples blind love of the soviets/Russian federation when they where as bad as that, now dont get me wrong the russian's are a 'hard' people brought up in the brutal winters they have never been taken over by a outside millitary force.

there land-mass is absurd along with there natural resources.

as you said their whole United soviet socialist republic thing was not that great really with the whole purges thing that started it not to mentien breshnev and stalin.

 

Actually Russia (and of course the Soviet Union at the time), doesn't have much arable land. Only about 10% is suitable for agriculture.

Also, the Soviet Union was one of the leading producers of cereals, even with only 10% of arable land to farm on (which is never used completely by the way).

Russia was also plagued by famines for hundreds of years, in fact the lack of food was one of the reasons that the revolution took place. The Soviet Union was plagued by droughts and bad weather that caused severe food shortages , it was still a developing country, and after it industrialized and recovered from the massive damage from the 2nd World War, it managed to take care of this problem and stabilize it's agriculture.

 

Are you referring to me? I don't have blind love for any country, I make a scientific analysis of the Soviet Union and take my conclusions.

 

not you sir just the general public

 

You literally have not even the slightest idea of what you are talking about.
You once again confirm the unfathomable ignorance in which most people that identify as fascists/convervatives etc. lie.