Total Posts:173|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

Communism Is Dangerous *

inferno
Posts: 10,689
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/19/2012 9:14:40 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
There is no need for a nation to involved itself in a manic depressive regime state of mind. But as we have learned, this system is unmerciful and relentless.
It shows us that each and every human being is nothing more than a commodity and a slave. The service is like a mandate, and there is not enough social
leverage for the class of people below the Elites to create an adequate number
of wealth and small businesses. Therefore, the purpose of this is to only
stagnate and put a systematic stronghold on the masses. This is a militant and corrosive way of life and is vaguely unproductive in the long run.
I decline. Communism is dangerous. Do you agree. See site below.

http://www.allaboutphilosophy.org...
royalpaladin
Posts: 22,357
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/19/2012 9:19:30 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
First, in Communism, the state withers away. There is no government, and nobody is a slave. People choose to mutually cooperate in order to benefit humanity.

Second, Communism advocates the absolute liberation of humans by eradicating all forms of pseudo-collectivism, such as class consciousness, ties only to the family (ties still exist to family members because everyone is tied, but there are no special ties), race identity, gender roles, etc. This allows the individual to flourish and select his own identity rather than being forced to select an identity that is imposed upon him by society.

Third, there is an "escape valve" in Communism. If you do not wish to contribute to society, you are free to leave at any point. Service is voluntary, not forced. However, you cannot gain anything from the community in return.
inferno
Posts: 10,689
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/19/2012 9:23:43 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 6/19/2012 9:19:30 AM, royalpaladin wrote:
First, in Communism, the state withers away. There is no government, and nobody is a slave. People choose to mutually cooperate in order to benefit humanity.

Second, Communism advocates the absolute liberation of humans by eradicating all forms of pseudo-collectivism, such as class consciousness, ties only to the family (ties still exist to family members because everyone is tied, but there are no special ties), race identity, gender roles, etc. This allows the individual to flourish and select his own identity rather than being forced to select an identity that is imposed upon him by society.

Third, there is an "escape valve" in Communism. If you do not wish to contribute to society, you are free to leave at any point. Service is voluntary, not forced. However, you cannot gain anything from the community in return.

This is only a technical definition. But we see how countries such as North Korea, China, Russia, and other parts of Europe is now perpetuating a White Nationalist war towards the Jews of Israel. Communism has very much to do with the
oppposition towards God.
royalpaladin
Posts: 22,357
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/19/2012 9:25:20 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 6/19/2012 9:23:43 AM, inferno wrote:
At 6/19/2012 9:19:30 AM, royalpaladin wrote:
First, in Communism, the state withers away. There is no government, and nobody is a slave. People choose to mutually cooperate in order to benefit humanity.

Second, Communism advocates the absolute liberation of humans by eradicating all forms of pseudo-collectivism, such as class consciousness, ties only to the family (ties still exist to family members because everyone is tied, but there are no special ties), race identity, gender roles, etc. This allows the individual to flourish and select his own identity rather than being forced to select an identity that is imposed upon him by society.

Third, there is an "escape valve" in Communism. If you do not wish to contribute to society, you are free to leave at any point. Service is voluntary, not forced. However, you cannot gain anything from the community in return.

This is only a technical definition. But we see how countries such as North Korea, China, Russia, and other parts of Europe is now perpetuating a White Nationalist war towards the Jews of Israel. Communism has very much to do with the
oppposition towards God.

None of that is Communism.

Does Communism oppose religion? Yes, because religion has been a tool of repression (especially of women) and because it breeds complacency in the masses. People are less likely to revolt if they believe that ultimately their oppressors will be granted just dessert by a higher power.
inferno
Posts: 10,689
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/19/2012 9:26:38 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 6/19/2012 9:25:20 AM, royalpaladin wrote:
At 6/19/2012 9:23:43 AM, inferno wrote:
At 6/19/2012 9:19:30 AM, royalpaladin wrote:
First, in Communism, the state withers away. There is no government, and nobody is a slave. People choose to mutually cooperate in order to benefit humanity.

Second, Communism advocates the absolute liberation of humans by eradicating all forms of pseudo-collectivism, such as class consciousness, ties only to the family (ties still exist to family members because everyone is tied, but there are no special ties), race identity, gender roles, etc. This allows the individual to flourish and select his own identity rather than being forced to select an identity that is imposed upon him by society.

Third, there is an "escape valve" in Communism. If you do not wish to contribute to society, you are free to leave at any point. Service is voluntary, not forced. However, you cannot gain anything from the community in return.

This is only a technical definition. But we see how countries such as North Korea, China, Russia, and other parts of Europe is now perpetuating a White Nationalist war towards the Jews of Israel. Communism has very much to do with the
oppposition towards God.

None of that is Communism.

Does Communism oppose religion? Yes, because religion has been a tool of repression (especially of women) and because it breeds complacency in the masses. People are less likely to revolt if they believe that ultimately their oppressors will be granted just dessert by a higher power.

Yes it is. You are unaware of the regimes true intentions. Ill be back in a minute.
royalpaladin
Posts: 22,357
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/19/2012 9:26:40 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
However, I would posit that Communism better fulfills most of the goals of major religions that our current society does. Judaism and Hinduism are probably exceptions since there are no chosen people with license to do as they please in Communism and rape and murder with blind idol worship are also not permitted under Communism.
inferno
Posts: 10,689
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/19/2012 9:29:17 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 6/19/2012 9:26:40 AM, royalpaladin wrote:
However, I would posit that Communism better fulfills most of the goals of major religions that our current society does. Judaism and Hinduism are probably exceptions since there are no chosen people with license to do as they please in Communism and rape and murder with blind idol worship are also not permitted under Communism.

There is a rise in the number of Christians being persecuted and executed
overseas in Communist countries. And there is also a rise in Nationalism and anti-multiculturalism, too.
Lordknukle
Posts: 12,788
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/19/2012 9:30:44 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 6/19/2012 9:19:30 AM, royalpaladin wrote:
First, in Communism, the state withers away. There is no government, and nobody is a slave. People choose to mutually cooperate in order to benefit humanity.

Second, Communism advocates the absolute liberation of humans by eradicating all forms of pseudo-collectivism, such as class consciousness, ties only to the family (ties still exist to family members because everyone is tied, but there are no special ties), race identity, gender roles, etc. This allows the individual to flourish and select his own identity rather than being forced to select an identity that is imposed upon him by society.

Third, there is an "escape valve" in Communism. If you do not wish to contribute to society, you are free to leave at any point. Service is voluntary, not forced. However, you cannot gain anything from the community in return.

LOL. How naive are you? Do you seriously think that people will be able to live peacefully beside each other without power usurping and taking advantage of others? Apparently, you are more of an idiot than I thought.
"Easy is the descent to Avernus, for the door to the Underworld lies upon both day and night. But to retrace your steps and return to the breezes above- that's the task, that's the toil."
royalpaladin
Posts: 22,357
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/19/2012 9:31:16 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 6/19/2012 9:29:17 AM, inferno wrote:
At 6/19/2012 9:26:40 AM, royalpaladin wrote:
However, I would posit that Communism better fulfills most of the goals of major religions that our current society does. Judaism and Hinduism are probably exceptions since there are no chosen people with license to do as they please in Communism and rape and murder with blind idol worship are also not permitted under Communism.

There is a rise in the number of Christians being persecuted and executed
overseas in Communist countries.
None of those nations are Communist.
And there is also a rise in Nationalism and anti-multiculturalism, too.
Communism is anti-Nationalism. Nationalism is a form of pseudo-collectivism that gives people moral obligations to serve others based on which lump of rock they were born on.
royalpaladin
Posts: 22,357
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/19/2012 9:31:35 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 6/19/2012 9:26:38 AM, inferno wrote:
At 6/19/2012 9:25:20 AM, royalpaladin wrote:
At 6/19/2012 9:23:43 AM, inferno wrote:
At 6/19/2012 9:19:30 AM, royalpaladin wrote:
First, in Communism, the state withers away. There is no government, and nobody is a slave. People choose to mutually cooperate in order to benefit humanity.

Second, Communism advocates the absolute liberation of humans by eradicating all forms of pseudo-collectivism, such as class consciousness, ties only to the family (ties still exist to family members because everyone is tied, but there are no special ties), race identity, gender roles, etc. This allows the individual to flourish and select his own identity rather than being forced to select an identity that is imposed upon him by society.

Third, there is an "escape valve" in Communism. If you do not wish to contribute to society, you are free to leave at any point. Service is voluntary, not forced. However, you cannot gain anything from the community in return.

This is only a technical definition. But we see how countries such as North Korea, China, Russia, and other parts of Europe is now perpetuating a White Nationalist war towards the Jews of Israel. Communism has very much to do with the
oppposition towards God.

None of that is Communism.

Does Communism oppose religion? Yes, because religion has been a tool of repression (especially of women) and because it breeds complacency in the masses. People are less likely to revolt if they believe that ultimately their oppressors will be granted just dessert by a higher power.

Yes it is. You are unaware of the regimes true intentions. Ill be back in a minute.

No, they are not Communist regimes. Statist regimes by definition are not Communist. Moreover, just because they used the language of egalitarianism to attract the indigent does not mean that they are communist.
Lordknukle
Posts: 12,788
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/19/2012 9:32:26 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
Even though Russia and North Korea might not fit the technical definitions of communism proposed in Karl Marx's pseudo-intelleuctual book, definitions change over time and world wide consensus is that these countries were communistic. Definitions aren't static for ever and ever, and change as society evolves.
"Easy is the descent to Avernus, for the door to the Underworld lies upon both day and night. But to retrace your steps and return to the breezes above- that's the task, that's the toil."
royalpaladin
Posts: 22,357
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/19/2012 9:34:44 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 6/19/2012 9:32:26 AM, Lordknukle wrote:
Even though Russia and North Korea might not fit the technical definitions of communism proposed in Karl Marx's pseudo-intelleuctual book, definitions change over time and world wide consensus is that these countries were communistic. Definitions aren't static for ever and ever, and change as society evolves.

LOL, do you really want me to hold you that argument about definitions being able to change? I seem to recall that you hate that idea when whenever we discuss homosexual marriage.

Anyways, all you are doing now is committing an ad populum logical fallacy. Just because consensus says something does not mean it is true or correct.
darkkermit
Posts: 11,204
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/19/2012 9:35:24 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
I'm just curious on how this whole "state withering away" is going to work. People dependent on the state will fight diligently to keep it in place.
Open borders debate:
http://www.debate.org...
Lordknukle
Posts: 12,788
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/19/2012 9:37:06 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 6/19/2012 9:34:44 AM, royalpaladin wrote:
At 6/19/2012 9:32:26 AM, Lordknukle wrote:
Even though Russia and North Korea might not fit the technical definitions of communism proposed in Karl Marx's pseudo-intelleuctual book, definitions change over time and world wide consensus is that these countries were communistic. Definitions aren't static for ever and ever, and change as society evolves.

LOL, do you really want me to hold you that argument about definitions being able to change? I seem to recall that you hate that idea when whenever we discuss homosexual marriage.

Irrelevant to the current discussion.

Anyways, all you are doing now is committing an ad populum logical fallacy. Just because consensus says something does not mean it is true or correct.

Consensus and cultural evolution reflects the morals, views, and beliefs held by that culture. Otherwise, there would be no way to objectively justify different cultures having different morals at different periods in society.
"Easy is the descent to Avernus, for the door to the Underworld lies upon both day and night. But to retrace your steps and return to the breezes above- that's the task, that's the toil."
royalpaladin
Posts: 22,357
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/19/2012 9:37:17 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 6/19/2012 9:35:24 AM, darkkermit wrote:
I'm just curious on how this whole "state withering away" is going to work. People dependent on the state will fight diligently to keep it in place.

The idea is that you are not dependent on the state but rather are dependent on the community.
royalpaladin
Posts: 22,357
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/19/2012 9:38:25 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 6/19/2012 9:37:06 AM, Lordknukle wrote:
At 6/19/2012 9:34:44 AM, royalpaladin wrote:
At 6/19/2012 9:32:26 AM, Lordknukle wrote:
Even though Russia and North Korea might not fit the technical definitions of communism proposed in Karl Marx's pseudo-intelleuctual book, definitions change over time and world wide consensus is that these countries were communistic. Definitions aren't static for ever and ever, and change as society evolves.

LOL, do you really want me to hold you that argument about definitions being able to change? I seem to recall that you hate that idea when whenever we discuss homosexual marriage.

Irrelevant to the current discussion.

Very true, but I was just reminding you that you should be consistent in your arguments. I'll be sure to quote you next time you bring up this nonsense in other discussions.
Anyways, all you are doing now is committing an ad populum logical fallacy. Just because consensus says something does not mean it is true or correct.

Consensus and cultural evolution reflects the morals, views, and beliefs held by that culture. Otherwise, there would be no way to objectively justify different cultures having different morals at different periods in society.

Consensus does not change the definition of an idea or a theory. All you have done now is presented a nonresponsive red herring.
darkkermit
Posts: 11,204
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/19/2012 9:39:42 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 6/19/2012 9:34:44 AM, royalpaladin wrote:
At 6/19/2012 9:32:26 AM, Lordknukle wrote:
Even though Russia and North Korea might not fit the technical definitions of communism proposed in Karl Marx's pseudo-intelleuctual book, definitions change over time and world wide consensus is that these countries were communistic. Definitions aren't static for ever and ever, and change as society evolves.

LOL, do you really want me to hold you that argument about definitions being able to change? I seem to recall that you hate that idea when whenever we discuss homosexual marriage.

Anyways, all you are doing now is committing an ad populum logical fallacy. Just because consensus says something does not mean it is true or correct.

You think definitions have objective meanings? They're just based on the intersubjective consensus of the population. If everyone believes a system is communist, it therefore becomes communist. You might believe in a different form of communism. Just like ancaps and libertarians would call for a different form of capitalism in America. Words can have different meanings to different. But that doesn't change the intersubjective consensus of the definitions.
Open borders debate:
http://www.debate.org...
inferno
Posts: 10,689
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/19/2012 9:41:35 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 6/19/2012 9:31:35 AM, royalpaladin wrote:
At 6/19/2012 9:26:38 AM, inferno wrote:
At 6/19/2012 9:25:20 AM, royalpaladin wrote:
At 6/19/2012 9:23:43 AM, inferno wrote:
At 6/19/2012 9:19:30 AM, royalpaladin wrote:
First, in Communism, the state withers away. There is no government, and nobody is a slave. People choose to mutually cooperate in order to benefit humanity.

Second, Communism advocates the absolute liberation of humans by eradicating all forms of pseudo-collectivism, such as class consciousness, ties only to the family (ties still exist to family members because everyone is tied, but there are no special ties), race identity, gender roles, etc. This allows the individual to flourish and select his own identity rather than being forced to select an identity that is imposed upon him by society.

Third, there is an "escape valve" in Communism. If you do not wish to contribute to society, you are free to leave at any point. Service is voluntary, not forced. However, you cannot gain anything from the community in return.

This is only a technical definition. But we see how countries such as North Korea, China, Russia, and other parts of Europe is now perpetuating a White Nationalist war towards the Jews of Israel. Communism has very much to do with the
oppposition towards God.

None of that is Communism.

Does Communism oppose religion? Yes, because religion has been a tool of repression (especially of women) and because it breeds complacency in the masses. People are less likely to revolt if they believe that ultimately their oppressors will be granted just dessert by a higher power.

Yes it is. You are unaware of the regimes true intentions. Ill be back in a minute.

No, they are not Communist regimes. Statist regimes by definition are not Communist. Moreover, just because they used the language of egalitarianism to attract the indigent does not mean that they are communist.

Here are a few countries that persecute Christians daily.
1)North Korea
2)Saudi Arabia
3)Iran
4)Somalia
5)Maldives
6)Bhutan
7)Yemen
8)Vietnam
9)Laos
10) China *
royalpaladin
Posts: 22,357
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/19/2012 9:42:06 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 6/19/2012 9:39:42 AM, darkkermit wrote:
At 6/19/2012 9:34:44 AM, royalpaladin wrote:
At 6/19/2012 9:32:26 AM, Lordknukle wrote:
Even though Russia and North Korea might not fit the technical definitions of communism proposed in Karl Marx's pseudo-intelleuctual book, definitions change over time and world wide consensus is that these countries were communistic. Definitions aren't static for ever and ever, and change as society evolves.

LOL, do you really want me to hold you that argument about definitions being able to change? I seem to recall that you hate that idea when whenever we discuss homosexual marriage.

Anyways, all you are doing now is committing an ad populum logical fallacy. Just because consensus says something does not mean it is true or correct.

You think definitions have objective meanings? They're just based on the intersubjective consensus of the population. If everyone believes a system is communist, it therefore becomes communist. You might believe in a different form of communism. Just like ancaps and libertarians would call for a different form of capitalism in America. Words can have different meanings to different. But that doesn't change the intersubjective consensus of the definitions.

Definitions cannot be changed by consensus. In order to have a basis for discussion, we need to have a set guideline of ideas that are considered to have objective meaning. I don't care what people think communism is-their conception of it is nonsense.
royalpaladin
Posts: 22,357
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/19/2012 9:44:20 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 6/19/2012 9:41:35 AM, inferno wrote:
At 6/19/2012 9:31:35 AM, royalpaladin wrote:
At 6/19/2012 9:26:38 AM, inferno wrote:
At 6/19/2012 9:25:20 AM, royalpaladin wrote:
At 6/19/2012 9:23:43 AM, inferno wrote:
At 6/19/2012 9:19:30 AM, royalpaladin wrote:
First, in Communism, the state withers away. There is no government, and nobody is a slave. People choose to mutually cooperate in order to benefit humanity.

Second, Communism advocates the absolute liberation of humans by eradicating all forms of pseudo-collectivism, such as class consciousness, ties only to the family (ties still exist to family members because everyone is tied, but there are no special ties), race identity, gender roles, etc. This allows the individual to flourish and select his own identity rather than being forced to select an identity that is imposed upon him by society.

Third, there is an "escape valve" in Communism. If you do not wish to contribute to society, you are free to leave at any point. Service is voluntary, not forced. However, you cannot gain anything from the community in return.

This is only a technical definition. But we see how countries such as North Korea, China, Russia, and other parts of Europe is now perpetuating a White Nationalist war towards the Jews of Israel. Communism has very much to do with the
oppposition towards God.

None of that is Communism.

Does Communism oppose religion? Yes, because religion has been a tool of repression (especially of women) and because it breeds complacency in the masses. People are less likely to revolt if they believe that ultimately their oppressors will be granted just dessert by a higher power.

Yes it is. You are unaware of the regimes true intentions. Ill be back in a minute.

No, they are not Communist regimes. Statist regimes by definition are not Communist. Moreover, just because they used the language of egalitarianism to attract the indigent does not mean that they are communist.

Here are a few countries that persecute Christians daily.
1)North Korea
Fascist state
2)Saudi Arabia
Islamist Monarchy
3)Iran
Islamist Dictatorship
4)Somalia
Um, Christians are not persecuted systematically by the Somalian government. That's because Somalia is in Anarchy. Furthermore, the Xeer system of governance permits religious toleration, so this is not true.
5)Maldives
6)Bhutan
7)Yemen
Islamic state
8)Vietnam
Fascist
9)Laos
10) China *
China is also Nationalist. It is not communist.

I'll have to look up the rest.
darkkermit
Posts: 11,204
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/19/2012 9:44:31 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 6/19/2012 9:37:17 AM, royalpaladin wrote:
At 6/19/2012 9:35:24 AM, darkkermit wrote:
I'm just curious on how this whole "state withering away" is going to work. People dependent on the state will fight diligently to keep it in place.

The idea is that you are not dependent on the state but rather are dependent on the community.

If a state exists, then people are dependent on it. That doesn't mean they have to be dependent on it, it just means that they are. They will fight to keep the system in place. Like what makes it more likely for communist states to wither away more than any other state. Under what precedent? Soviet Union technically "withered away" but to a capitalist system not some ancommunist system. The fact that the "dictatorship of the proliants" will have control of all the resources gives them a really nice incentive to keep the state around.
Open borders debate:
http://www.debate.org...
inferno
Posts: 10,689
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/19/2012 9:44:44 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 6/19/2012 9:42:06 AM, royalpaladin wrote:
At 6/19/2012 9:39:42 AM, darkkermit wrote:
At 6/19/2012 9:34:44 AM, royalpaladin wrote:
At 6/19/2012 9:32:26 AM, Lordknukle wrote:
Even though Russia and North Korea might not fit the technical definitions of communism proposed in Karl Marx's pseudo-intelleuctual book, definitions change over time and world wide consensus is that these countries were communistic. Definitions aren't static for ever and ever, and change as society evolves.

LOL, do you really want me to hold you that argument about definitions being able to change? I seem to recall that you hate that idea when whenever we discuss homosexual marriage.

Anyways, all you are doing now is committing an ad populum logical fallacy. Just because consensus says something does not mean it is true or correct.

You think definitions have objective meanings? They're just based on the intersubjective consensus of the population. If everyone believes a system is communist, it therefore becomes communist. You might believe in a different form of communism. Just like ancaps and libertarians would call for a different form of capitalism in America. Words can have different meanings to different. But that doesn't change the intersubjective consensus of the definitions.

Definitions cannot be changed by consensus. In order to have a basis for discussion, we need to have a set guideline of ideas that are considered to have objective meaning. I don't care what people think communism is-their conception of it is nonsense.

Your speaking of a very post-modern form of Communism. But this is mediocre at best. The underlying issue still remains. The definition has not changed.
The agenda is as clear as it was 100 years ago and people are still dying under that brand today.
royalpaladin
Posts: 22,357
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/19/2012 9:45:30 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
Only two Anarchist Communist societies have ever existed (barring the pre-tribal societies):

1. The Free Territories in the Ukraine during the Russian Revolution

2. Catalonia during the Spanish Revolution
inferno
Posts: 10,689
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/19/2012 9:45:37 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 6/19/2012 9:44:20 AM, royalpaladin wrote:
At 6/19/2012 9:41:35 AM, inferno wrote:
At 6/19/2012 9:31:35 AM, royalpaladin wrote:
At 6/19/2012 9:26:38 AM, inferno wrote:
At 6/19/2012 9:25:20 AM, royalpaladin wrote:
At 6/19/2012 9:23:43 AM, inferno wrote:
At 6/19/2012 9:19:30 AM, royalpaladin wrote:
First, in Communism, the state withers away. There is no government, and nobody is a slave. People choose to mutually cooperate in order to benefit humanity.

Second, Communism advocates the absolute liberation of humans by eradicating all forms of pseudo-collectivism, such as class consciousness, ties only to the family (ties still exist to family members because everyone is tied, but there are no special ties), race identity, gender roles, etc. This allows the individual to flourish and select his own identity rather than being forced to select an identity that is imposed upon him by society.

Third, there is an "escape valve" in Communism. If you do not wish to contribute to society, you are free to leave at any point. Service is voluntary, not forced. However, you cannot gain anything from the community in return.

This is only a technical definition. But we see how countries such as North Korea, China, Russia, and other parts of Europe is now perpetuating a White Nationalist war towards the Jews of Israel. Communism has very much to do with the
oppposition towards God.

None of that is Communism.

Does Communism oppose religion? Yes, because religion has been a tool of repression (especially of women) and because it breeds complacency in the masses. People are less likely to revolt if they believe that ultimately their oppressors will be granted just dessert by a higher power.

Yes it is. You are unaware of the regimes true intentions. Ill be back in a minute.

No, they are not Communist regimes. Statist regimes by definition are not Communist. Moreover, just because they used the language of egalitarianism to attract the indigent does not mean that they are communist.

Here are a few countries that persecute Christians daily.
1)North Korea
Fascist state
2)Saudi Arabia
Islamist Monarchy
3)Iran
Islamist Dictatorship
4)Somalia
Um, Christians are not persecuted systematically by the Somalian government. That's because Somalia is in Anarchy. Furthermore, the Xeer system of governance permits religious toleration, so this is not true.
5)Maldives
6)Bhutan
7)Yemen
Islamic state
8)Vietnam
Fascist
9)Laos
10) China *
China is also Nationalist. It is not communist.

I'll have to look up the rest.

China is still very much Communist. Nationalist is under that branch.
Ren
Posts: 7,102
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/19/2012 9:47:20 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 6/19/2012 9:23:43 AM, inferno wrote:
Communism has very much to do with the
oppposition towards God.

This is one of the most nebulous Christian perspectives. If there's anything about religion, it's how self-important it makes humans out to be. If we really believe that God is so enormous and fantastic, that He is incomprehensible by microcosmic standard, and is only perceptible by cosmic standards (in the way that we're only comprehensible by microcosmic standards, but not microscopic), then what makes us think that we can initiate any sort of "opposition" merely by the ideologies we entertain?

Ultimately, it shows how distastefully political Christianity tends to be. It really looks like it's meant to maintain some balance of power when it's presented that way.

You should be sensible enough to realize that your political perspectives should have political reasonings, now religious ones. That's like trying to do math by wishing for each answer upon a star.
darkkermit
Posts: 11,204
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/19/2012 9:47:57 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 6/19/2012 9:42:06 AM, royalpaladin wrote:
At 6/19/2012 9:39:42 AM, darkkermit wrote:
At 6/19/2012 9:34:44 AM, royalpaladin wrote:
At 6/19/2012 9:32:26 AM, Lordknukle wrote:
Even though Russia and North Korea might not fit the technical definitions of communism proposed in Karl Marx's pseudo-intelleuctual book, definitions change over time and world wide consensus is that these countries were communistic. Definitions aren't static for ever and ever, and change as society evolves.

LOL, do you really want me to hold you that argument about definitions being able to change? I seem to recall that you hate that idea when whenever we discuss homosexual marriage.

Anyways, all you are doing now is committing an ad populum logical fallacy. Just because consensus says something does not mean it is true or correct.

You think definitions have objective meanings? They're just based on the intersubjective consensus of the population. If everyone believes a system is communist, it therefore becomes communist. You might believe in a different form of communism. Just like ancaps and libertarians would call for a different form of capitalism in America. Words can have different meanings to different. But that doesn't change the intersubjective consensus of the definitions.

Definitions cannot be changed by consensus. In order to have a basis for discussion, we need to have a set guideline of ideas that are considered to have objective meaning. I don't care what people think communism is-their conception of it is nonsense.

Are you seriously going to say that definitions can not be changed over time?

http://writinghood.com...

In that case are you arguing that whenever you call someone "nice" you mean they don't know anything?
Open borders debate:
http://www.debate.org...
royalpaladin
Posts: 22,357
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/19/2012 9:48:18 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 6/19/2012 9:44:31 AM, darkkermit wrote:
At 6/19/2012 9:37:17 AM, royalpaladin wrote:
At 6/19/2012 9:35:24 AM, darkkermit wrote:
I'm just curious on how this whole "state withering away" is going to work. People dependent on the state will fight diligently to keep it in place.

The idea is that you are not dependent on the state but rather are dependent on the community.

If a state exists, then people are dependent on it.
Somalia begs to differ :)
That doesn't mean they have to be dependent on it, it just means that they are. They will fight to keep the system in place. Like what makes it more likely for communist states to wither away more than any other state.
The state becomes redundant. There is no reason to support it, so it dies.
Under what precedent?
The Free Territories during the Russian Revolution and Catalonia during the Spanish Revolution.
Soviet Union technically "withered away" but to a capitalist system not some ancommunist system.
How did the Soviet Union "wither away"? They established a new state.
The fact that the "dictatorship of the proliants" will have control of all the resources gives them a really nice incentive to keep the state around.
Marx used dictatorship in the sense of "rule of in a democratic system". Essentially, socialism would be like American democracy except the corporations would no control the nation: the workers would.
royalpaladin
Posts: 22,357
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/19/2012 9:48:45 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 6/19/2012 9:44:44 AM, inferno wrote:
At 6/19/2012 9:42:06 AM, royalpaladin wrote:
At 6/19/2012 9:39:42 AM, darkkermit wrote:
At 6/19/2012 9:34:44 AM, royalpaladin wrote:
At 6/19/2012 9:32:26 AM, Lordknukle wrote:
Even though Russia and North Korea might not fit the technical definitions of communism proposed in Karl Marx's pseudo-intelleuctual book, definitions change over time and world wide consensus is that these countries were communistic. Definitions aren't static for ever and ever, and change as society evolves.

LOL, do you really want me to hold you that argument about definitions being able to change? I seem to recall that you hate that idea when whenever we discuss homosexual marriage.

Anyways, all you are doing now is committing an ad populum logical fallacy. Just because consensus says something does not mean it is true or correct.

You think definitions have objective meanings? They're just based on the intersubjective consensus of the population. If everyone believes a system is communist, it therefore becomes communist. You might believe in a different form of communism. Just like ancaps and libertarians would call for a different form of capitalism in America. Words can have different meanings to different. But that doesn't change the intersubjective consensus of the definitions.

Definitions cannot be changed by consensus. In order to have a basis for discussion, we need to have a set guideline of ideas that are considered to have objective meaning. I don't care what people think communism is-their conception of it is nonsense.

Your speaking of a very post-modern form of Communism. But this is mediocre at best. The underlying issue still remains. The definition has not changed.
The agenda is as clear as it was 100 years ago and people are still dying under that brand today.

No, I'm speaking of Communism as conceived by Marx.
inferno
Posts: 10,689
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/19/2012 9:49:00 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
Dont forget Cuba. Even though there are only 5 Communist countries left today, the goal is the same. The name may have been altered, but the basic premise still holds on to those old traditions from days past.