So what form does the resistance take?

[dudalb]

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.

Seems to me that no government at all is the definition of Anarchy.
Russia has not been Marxist since 1991.
But if you look at the record of the Soviet Union, it is one of ecomomic failure, which is what destroyed it in the end.
I don't know why you are so defesnive about a failed philosoply.
As someone once said of Communism: "Beautiful Idea, Wrong Species".

 

[Trausti]

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and fidelity of transmitting information up and down the hierarchy - the people at the Top learn inaccurate and out-of-date information about required adjustments to their Plans, and transmit back new orders that reach those who are supposed to implement them too late and with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.

No, that's the problem with communism. What made this people be at the "top." It wasn't skill or business acumen. It was terror and coercion. People have little or no freedom to engage in voluntary economic activity; the self-anointed know-it-alls micromanage everything.

 

[The Great Zaganza]

That's a problem for all major organizations.

 

[AmyStrange]

Seems to me that no government at all is the definition of Anarchy.

I totally agree.

I don't know why you are so defensive about a failed philosohly.

Not defensive at all. I just know what hard-core marxism is. As a matter of fact, I took a class on it in college, and it might've made sense to Marx, Engel, and Lenin, but it's a flawed philosophy.

For example, Marx and Engel hypothesized that change only comes about through violence, and one of their proofs was a chick breaking out of their eggshell.

Anyone who has half a brain knows that hypothesis is full of crap, but then again, that's just my opinion.

Your mileage may vary of course.

 

[The Great Zaganza]

I think that in any larger group, too large for everyone to know everyone, change requires at least the threat of violence.
Every change will make things worse for some, so a level of coercion is required.

 

[I Am The Scum]

The resistance does not take the form of arguing over the definition of communism. That's a losing strategy through and through.

The right hates communism because it's something Reagan told them to be afraid of. That's it. No explanation about communism will change that, nor do you need to change it. Right-wing pundits throw the word around when something might happen that they don't like, to trigger the fear of the useful idiots.

 

[theprestige]

The resistance does not take the form of arguing over the definition of communism. That's a losing strategy through and through.

The right hates communism because it's something Reagan told them to be afraid of. That's it. No explanation about communism will change that, nor do you need to change it. Right-wing pundits throw the word around when something might happen that they don't like, to trigger the fear of the useful idiots.

Can you explain what there is to like about communism?

Obviously Regan and everyone else who hated Soviet communism was right about that. Everyone who hated Leninism and Maoism was right about those things. No explanation of those things can erase that they were self-evidently hateable ideologies. NATO wasn't formed because Ronald Regan lied to Europe about the hateableness of Soviet Communism.

You say you're a communist, I assume you're either a revolutionary Marxist, which has no redeeming qualities, or an idealistic Marxist, which has no real-world relevance.

 

[I Am The Scum]

Can you explain what there is to like about communism?

No.

You say you're a communist...

No.

 

[theprestige]

No.

QED.

No.

It was the rhetorical you.

But it seems that not even the people white knighting communism don't see any reason to espouse it.

 

[I Am The Scum]

QED.


It was the rhetorical you.

But it seems that not even the people white knighting communism don't see any reason to espouse it.

I still don't see what this has to with me.

 

[theprestige]

I Am The Scum: I have an opinion about communism.

Also I Am The Scum: I don't see what discussion of my opinion about communism has to do with me.

 

[I Am The Scum]

I Am The Scum: I have an opinion about communism.

Also I Am The Scum: I don't see what discussion of my opinion about communism has to do with me.

Are you feeling okay? Maybe your reading comprehension will get above a 5th-grade level after a nap (I promise there are no communists hiding under your bed).

My comment had nothing to do with the value of communism. It was about the irrelevance of communism.

 

[theprestige]

Are you feeling okay? Maybe your reading comprehension will get above a 5th-grade level after a nap (I promise there are no communists hiding under your bed).

My comment had nothing to do with the value of communism. It was about the irrelevance of communism.

Communism is extremely relevant. Always has been. Revolutionary communism stands as one of the greatest scourges on modern civilization. Revolutionary communists still exist, and still dream of revolution. That will always be relevant. If the question is, what form will the resistance take, one obvious, and necessary answer is, "let's make sure it doesn't take the form of revolutionary communism."

 

[I Am The Scum]

Communism is extremely relevant. Always has been. Revolutionary communism stands as one of the greatest scourges on modern civilization. Revolutionary communists still exist, and still dream of revolution. That will always be relevant. If the question is, what form will the resistance take, one obvious, and necessary answer is, "let's make sure it doesn't take the form of revolutionary communism."

When communism on the left becomes half as relevant as nazism on the right, let me know.

 

[bruto]

I've met a few revolutionary Communists over the years. They were largely idiots who spent most of their energy making noise, printing stuff, and purging their own ranks. Some were hypocrites, others fuzzy thinkers. One thing I never thought they were was relevant. And none of the people the right wing likes to call Communist resembled them in any meaningful way, even if occasional resemblances can be found. If an actual Communist were to appear I suspect the current fashion of calling everyone to the left of Atilla the Hun a Communist will be partly to blame for nobody bothering to notice if a real one comes along.

 

[Emily's Cat]

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.

And if you somehow imagine that all those hoops will be put back in place when the Dems take power in the future, I would ask what you're smoking.

Opining that these guys are the end of the world because they're weakening safeguards that you think should be kept... but those guys over there are hunky dory even though they want to completely eradicate the foundation of those safeguards... is an interesting approach.

 

[bruto]

And if you somehow imagine that all those hoops will be put back in place when the Dems take power in the future, I would ask what you're smoking.

Opining that these guys are the end of the world because they're weakening safeguards that you think should be kept... but those guys over there are hunky dory even though they want to completely eradicate the foundation of those safeguards... is an interesting approach.

That first statement seems a good argument against what is happening now, and a statement that it is, indeed the end, if not of the world, of the safeguards some of us value. I'm not sure who, at this point, you realistically believe wants to completely eradicate the foundation of those safeguards, but saying that because you fear that, we might as well toss them out now anyway seems premature.

 

[Trausti]

Communism is extremely relevant. Always has been. Revolutionary communism stands as one of the greatest scourges on modern civilization. Revolutionary communists still exist, and still dream of revolution. That will always be relevant. If the question is, what form will the resistance take, one obvious, and necessary answer is, "let's make sure it doesn't take the form of revolutionary communism."

I think communism is extremely relevant because the socialist countries of the 20th Century did a lot of experimenting at scale. There's a lot to learn from their failures. And that why there's often opposition when folks today want to redo some of those experiments.

 

[Emily's Cat]

That first statement seems a good argument against what is happening now, and a statement that it is, indeed the end, if not of the world, of the safeguards some of us value. I'm not sure who, at this point, you realistically believe wants to completely eradicate the foundation of those safeguards, but saying that because you fear that, we might as well toss them out now anyway seems premature.

Right now, I'm pretty sure BOTH parties want to destroy those foundations. I don't want to toss out any of the foundations.

Youse guys always assume that my lack of ◊◊◊◊-talking a sitting politicians indicates support. It doesn't. I don't ◊◊◊◊-talk ANY politicians. At best I'll opine that I don't care for them, or that I don't care for some of their policies. The worst I think I've ever said is that I people whose opinions I trust said that Hillary Clinton is nasty to staff.

FFS, I think I even defended Biden with their weird sniffing the heads of young girls thing. It's weird, but it's the kind of weird ◊◊◊◊ grandparents do, and I don't think it was indicative of inappropriate behavior or motivations on their part.

 

[bruto]

Right now, I'm pretty sure BOTH parties want to destroy those foundations. I don't want to toss out any of the foundations.

Youse guys always assume that my lack of ◊◊◊◊-talking a sitting politicians indicates support. It doesn't. I don't ◊◊◊◊-talk ANY politicians. At best I'll opine that I don't care for them, or that I don't care for some of their policies. The worst I think I've ever said is that I people whose opinions I trust said that Hillary Clinton is nasty to staff.

FFS, I think I even defended Biden with their weird sniffing the heads of young girls thing. It's weird, but it's the kind of weird ◊◊◊◊ grandparents do, and I don't think it was indicative of inappropriate behavior or motivations on their part.

Yeah yeah but what your previous post amounted to was a suggestion that it's wrong to criticize what you seem to agree is evil because you don't trust its vocal opponents.