• Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more

So what form does the resistance take?

Why does the US need these levels of Police and Prisons?
The US used to have far fewer prisons and spent a small fraction of what it does today on Law Enforcement.
 
SO we are going to play that game.
I would say the Soviet union, Mao's CHina,CUba are examples; where the government had complete control of the economy, trtied to subsitute government order and directions for basic Market forces, and failed miserably.
But you are proving my point there are many here who just refuse to admit that extremism or evil can exist on the left wing of the political spectrum.

Sorry, but what Russia had after the revolution of 1917 was not Marxism. It was called Leninism. Marx advocated for no government at all:

 
Sorry, but what Russia had after the revolution of 1917 was not Marxism. It was called Leninism. Marx advocated for no government at all:

Actually the term was Marxism-Leninism, and it was pretty much the same old garbage.
As for Marx advocating for no government, yes, he did believe that, but also felt it would take a fairly long time where you needed government, but it would reach a point where the state would "Wither Away".Still, imho a silly idea. Anarchism is simply ridiculous.
 
Actually the term was Marxism-Leninism, and it was pretty much the same old garbage.
As for Marx advocating for no government, yes, he did believe that, but also felt it would take a fairly long time where you needed government, but it would reach a point where the state would "Wither Away".Still, imho a silly idea. Anarchism is simply ridiculous.

Karl Marx advocated for no government at all, and that's what hard-core Marxism really is, which is a far cry from what we see in Russia today.

Nice try though.
 
Last edited:
Okay, we can argue about what communism WAS for as long we stay awake. But right now, let's talk about what communism IS. You, know, using the present tense.
 
Could you explain, in detail, how the extreme positions of the DSA could actually be enacted? Frankly, the hoops they would have to go through seem extremely tiny in the modern legal and governmental systems we have today, imho.
🤷‍♀️ So do the hoops that republicans would need to go through in the modern legal and governmental systems we have today... but a lot of youse seem quite certain that they're actively installing a fascist regime.
 
🤷‍♀️ So do the hoops that republicans would need to go through in the modern legal and governmental systems we have today... but a lot of youse seem quite certain that they're actively installing a fascist regime.
Republicans have control of the house, senate, the SC, all with Donald Trump in charge. They are all letting him get away basically criminal activity almost every day. The hoops have been almost completely removed for Trump.

If you cannot see that, all I can say is that willful blindness is not an attractive trait.
 
Last edited:
Karl Marx advocated for no government at all, and that's what hard-core Marxism really is, which is a far cry from what we see in Russia today.Nice try though.
Sorry, but no he didn't, no it isn't, and it's a far cry from what Russia ever was.
You make Marx sound like a (anarcho)-libertarian or a conservative ideologue.

However, if what you mean when you say "no government" is no authoritarian state using its power apparatus to impose its will on the people, then we're on the right track: Marx wanted to do away with the state, i.e. the body or the agency imposing the will of the capitalist class on the rest of the population (and sometimes on individual capitalists or fractions or segments of the capitalist class that were unwilling to 'get with the program'. And he didn't want an alternative non-capitalist state to replace it except for during the transitional period when the proletariat imposed its will to do away with capitalism, i.e. class society.

Engel's (fairly short) essay On Authority gives you an idea of what he and Marx meant, but some of his real-world analogies are imperfect, e.g. the captain of a ship: a ship is often a miniature version of class society with an awful lot of proletarians doing the unpleasant and dirty work and the captain on the bridge in his crisp white uniform ruling them.
The point is that it is always necessary to have people of authority in the sense of knowledge and insight based on studies and experience to plan what to do. It is not necessary to have somebody to impose the purpose of the shipping company on its employees who never had a way to influence that purpose and are there to simply obey orders without any insight in what that purpose is or how it's accomplished. Their willingness to 'get with the program' should be based on the sharing of that knowledge held by the people in authority, i.e. it should not be authoritarian.

Dudalb's claim that Cuba after the revolution is an example of a country "where the government had complete control of the economy, trtied to subsitute government order and directions for basic Market forces" is a lie. In no other country (that I know of!) are common people, workers more involved in decision-making than in Cuba. I've visited many Cuban institutions and factories, and what I found astonishing is being introduced to not only management but also menial workers. When I was with a group of teachers visiting schools and other educational institutions, we met not only management and teachers but also janitors and cleaners. Unfortunately, our group didn't include any of the latter, and it would never have occurred to our organizers to include them. (It also didn't occur to me or the (now former) chairman of the Danish-Cuban Friendship Associations also a high-school teacher, and unlike the others we weren't ignorant of this aspect of Cuban society!)

This is how important decisions at state level are made in Cuba: 2019 Constitution of Cuba (Wikipedia).
 
Sorry, but no he didn't, no it isn't, and it's a far cry from what Russia ever was.
You make Marx sound like a (anarcho)-libertarian or a conservative ideologue.

Sorry, but you're wrong. Lenin tried to turn Russia into a state and classless country (it's why his attempt was called Leninism-Marxism), but he didn't succeed, and that's why Russia still has a government.

ETA: FROM https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karl_Marx

...For Marx, class antagonisms under capitalism—owing in part to its instability and crisis-prone nature—would eventuate the working class's development of class consciousness, leading to their conquest of political power and the establishment of a classless, stateless, moneyless society constituted by a free association of producers...
 
Last edited:
It really doesn't matter at this point what Marx or Engel's utopia was supposed to be. Every experiment in the 20th Century under their banner was a disaster. Best learn that lesson and not repeat it.
 
Last edited:
Sorry, but you're wrong. Lenin tried to turn Russia into a state and classless country (it's why his attempt was called Leninism-Marxism), but he didn't succeed, and that's why Russia still has a government.

ETA: FROM https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karl_Marx
...For Marx, class antagonisms under capitalism—owing in part to its instability and crisis-prone nature—would eventuate the working class's development of class consciousness, leading to their conquest of political power and the establishment of a classless, stateless, moneyless ociety constituted by a free association of producers...

No you're still wrong. You're confusing stateless with what you said in the post I objected to: "no government at all," which is why I referred you to the Engels article On Authority, in which he criticized the anarchist idea of no government, no steering of the ship.

It's why he distinguishes between the two meanings of the word authority: 1) somebody who knows stuff, like e.g. a scientist. 2) And somebody who (like the one who's is currently in charge of the USA and the one who's in charge of public health) may be some of the dumbest and most ignorant adults on the planet but who now have the power to rule while getting rid of and attempting to punish everybody who has actual knowledge of how the world works, e.g. Fauci.
As Google sums up the two extremely different meanings of the word (referencing the Oxford and Cambridge dictionaries):
Authority means the legal or moral right to give orders, make decisions, and demand respect or obedience. It also refers to an expert in a specific field or an official government agency.

Or as Engels put it in On Authority:
A number of Socialists have latterly launched a regular crusade against what they call the principle of authority. It suffices to tell them that this or that act is authoritarian for it to be condemned. This summary mode of procedure is being abused to such an extent that it has become necessary to look into the matter somewhat more closely.
Authority, in the sense in which the word is used here, means: the imposition of the will of another upon ours; on the other hand, authority presupposes subordination. Now, since these two words sound bad, and the relationship which they represent is disagreeable to the subordinated party, the question is to ascertain whether there is any way of dispensing with it, whether — given the conditions of present-day society — we could not create another social system, in which this authority would be given no scope any longer, and would consequently have to disappear.
(...)
Why do the anti-authoritarians not confine themselves to crying out against political authority, the state? All Socialists are agreed that the political state, and with it political authority, will disappear as a result of the coming social revolution, that is, that public functions will lose their political character and will be transformed into the simple administrative functions of watching over the true interests of society. But the anti-authoritarians demand that the political state be abolished at one stroke, even before the social conditions that gave birth to it have been destroyed. They demand that the first act of the social revolution shall be the abolition of authority.

By the way, it's interesting that the MAGA revolution was and still is all about "the abolition of authority," i.e. the Fauci kind of authority, the knowledgeable guy, while leaving all decision-making to the utterly ignorant ruler who has managed to acquire the "right to give orders, make decisions, and demand respect or obedience."[/I]
 
Last edited:
Fox News exposes the horrible regime that Radical Left Communist Hasan Piker will impose upon America:
Are Fox News Producers Secret Hasan Fans? (The Majority Report on YouTube, Aug 8, 2026 – 4 min.)
1:01–>Live from Texas, [music] this is the Will Kane Show.
Will Cain: Democrats have a new kingmaker. He's the visionary of the left. He's the visionary of Democratic [music] SocialistS. And it's his party, Piker's party. And that party has an invite list. And he has a vision [music] not just as who should be elected to office, but as to the future of the Democratic Socialist of America. When asked a very interesting question about what he would add to the platform, here's what he said about the future of the DSA:
Hasan Piker: Arrest and prosecute and bring about corruption charges for every prominent member of this administration that is engaged in corruption. Prosecute and arrest ICE agents that have also done crimes as well on the job.
Will Cain: Bring out the secret police.


Emma and Sam are just laughing when told about this rabid dog wanting to prosecute criminals engaged in corruption!!!
What is the world coming to?!
 
No you're still wrong. You're confusing stateless with what you said in the post I objected to: "no government at all," which is why I referred you to the Engels article On Authority, in which he criticized the anarchist idea of no government, no steering of the ship.

It's why he distinguishes between the two meanings of the word authority: 1) somebody who knows stuff, like e.g. a scientist. 2) And somebody who (like the one who's is currently in charge of the USA and the one who's in charge of public health) may be some of the dumbest and most ignorant adults on the planet but who now have the power to rule while getting rid of and attempting to punish everybody who has actual knowledge of how the world works, e.g. Fauci.
As Google sums up the two extremely different meanings of the word (referencing the Oxford and Cambridge dictionaries):


Or as Engels put it in On Authority:


By the way, it's interesting that the MAGA revolution was and still is all about "the abolition of authority," i.e. the Fauci kind of authority, the knowledgeable guy, while leaving all decision-making to the utterly ignorant ruler who has managed to acquire the "right to give orders, make decisions, and demand respect or obedience."[/I]

Saying something is marxism doesn't make it a fact any more than the fat clown and his maga weirdoes saying, "dumocrats [sic] are communist."

Good luck with that.

BTW, when did Russia become a cashless society? I guess I missed that memo.
 
Last edited:
It really doesn't matter at this point what Marx or Engel's utopia was supposed to be. Every experiment in the 20th Century under their banner was a disaster. Best learn that lesson and not repeat it.
People do.
The obvious problem with Communism is the lack of bandwidth and fidelity of transmitting information up and down the hierarchy - the people at the Top learn inaccurate and out-of-date information about required adjustments to their Plans, and transmit back new orders that reach those who are supposed to implement them too late and with little applicability.

This is the same problem Big Militaries and Corporations have, they they have learned a lot on how solve problems at the lowest level of hierarchy and accelerate information transfer.
Well, Militaries have - Corporations have given up and decided to replace everyone with programs and/or robots.

I don't think that makes Communism feasible today, but it has a much better shot than at the time of telegrams.
 
Why does the US need these levels of Police and Prisons?
The US used to have far fewer prisons and spent a small fraction of what it does today on Law Enforcement.
A lot of it was Reagan shutting down the mental hospitals to save money and sending a lot or mentally ill people onto the streets, followed by a bunch of states implementing three-strikes laws, filling our prisons with lifers had who committed petty offenses. Various policies reducing the value of actual work in favor of making stockholders happy did not help matters.
 
Saying something is marxism doesn't make it a fact any more than the fat clown and his maga weirdoes saying, "dumocrats [sic] are communist."

Good luck with that.

BTW, when did Russia become a cashless society? I guess I missed that memo.
They attempted it for a VERY short while, just after they defeated the Whites in the civil war if my memory is correct.
It was not a success.
 
Saying something is marxism doesn't make it a fact any more than the fat clown and his maga weirdoes saying, "dumocrats [sic] are communist."
Good luck with that.
True. That's why I didn't just say something. Unlike you!
BTW, when did Russia become a cashless society? I guess I missed that memo.
It didn't. Did anybody claim it did???
 

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom