Whats with the all the commies here?

Page 3 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

fredtam

Diamond Member
Jun 6, 2003
5,694
2
76
Originally posted by: brigden
Funny how brainwashed you Americans are with regards to Communism. I don't think the system works in reality, but you guys think it's like the Nazi party or something.

No it doesn't work. You for one wouldn't want it because you wouldn't get to where your ghey shirts. I would actually prefer the Nazi party to communism.
 

CVSiN

Diamond Member
Jul 19, 2004
9,289
1
0
Considering both the presidential canidates are the equevelant of voting for Beavis and Butthead... Im open for other alternitives..
 

Amused

Elite Member
Apr 14, 2001
57,390
19,708
146
Originally posted by: bradruth
I wonder if there will ever be a time when people stop confusing communism with authoritarian socialism. :confused:

They wont because any attempt at communism will quickly become authoritarian.

Why? Because there will always be a signifigant percentage of the people of any country who will be opposed to giving up their individuality and economic freedom. To control this, and the natural human urge to do better, the government will have to become wildly oppressive.

Communism is an abject failure because it goes against the most basic aspects of human nature. Humans are not, and cannot become mindless worker bees.
 

Cerb

Elite Member
Aug 26, 2000
17,484
33
86
Originally posted by: CVSiN
Considering both the presidential canidates are the equevelant of voting for Beavis and Butthead... Im open for other alternitives..
:thumbsup:
 

Cerb

Elite Member
Aug 26, 2000
17,484
33
86
Originally posted by: Amused
Originally posted by: bradruth
I wonder if there will ever be a time when people stop confusing communism with authoritarian socialism. :confused:

They wont because any attempt at communism will quickly become authoritarian.

Why? Because there will always be a signifigant percentage of the people of any country who will be opposed to giving up their individuality and economic freedom. To control this, and the natural human urge to do better, the government will have to become wildly oppressive.

Communism is an abject failure because it goes against the most basic aspects of human nature. Humans are not, and cannot become mindless worker bees.
Communist ideals don't work. Neither would full-on Libertarian ideals work (unless everyone was very well-read, and wanted to make *all* of their own decisions), but alternatives are good to have, just for the sake of change, and possibly meaningful reform.
 

gigapet

Lifer
Aug 9, 2001
10,005
0
76
democracy doesnt work either when corporations have more pull than the people.

so what other options are there.....corruption has found its way into every form of government.
 

Amused

Elite Member
Apr 14, 2001
57,390
19,708
146
Originally posted by: Cerb
Originally posted by: Amused
Originally posted by: bradruth
I wonder if there will ever be a time when people stop confusing communism with authoritarian socialism. :confused:

They wont because any attempt at communism will quickly become authoritarian.

Why? Because there will always be a signifigant percentage of the people of any country who will be opposed to giving up their individuality and economic freedom. To control this, and the natural human urge to do better, the government will have to become wildly oppressive.

Communism is an abject failure because it goes against the most basic aspects of human nature. Humans are not, and cannot become mindless worker bees.
Communist ideals don't work. Neither would full-on Libertarian ideals work (unless everyone was very well-read, and wanted to make *all* of their own decisions), but alternatives are good to have, just for the sake of change, and possibly meaningful reform.

While I do not support all of the libertarian party's ideas, ANY move in that direction would be a good one.
 

Amused

Elite Member
Apr 14, 2001
57,390
19,708
146
Originally posted by: gigapet
democracy doesnt work either when corporations have more pull than the people.

so what other options are there.....corruption has found its way into every form of government.

Which is why the US was founded as a Constitutional Republic with a democratically elected government.

The government was supposed to have strictly limited power. Thus seriously limiting how corruptible it would be. You see, the more the government regulates business, the more business will try to manipulate government in an effort to ensure the regulations are not so strict that they harm business.

The more the government treats business as seperate and quite unequal from individuals, the more it will be corrupted.

And it's not only business that has corrupted. Socialism has done the same. Ever since socialism was introduced to the US with The New Deal, citizens have found they can band together into powerful organizations to lobby the government for more social programs. These groups have every bit as much influence as the businesses.
 

Cerb

Elite Member
Aug 26, 2000
17,484
33
86
Originally posted by: BAMAVOO
Originally posted by: Cerb
Originally posted by: CVSiN
Considering both the presidential canidates are the equevelant of voting for Beavis and Butthead... Im open for other alternitives..
:thumbsup:

Then move to China.
My preferred alternative is much closer to anarchy than what China would offer, I'm afraid. See?
 

biostud

Lifer
Feb 27, 2003
19,948
7,045
136
THIS THREAD IS THE BEGINNING OF THE REVOLUTION, WE WILL TRANSFORM ALL THE FORUMS INTO P&N!!!!!!!
 

Cerb

Elite Member
Aug 26, 2000
17,484
33
86
Originally posted by: Amused
Originally posted by: Cerb
Originally posted by: Amused
Originally posted by: bradruth
I wonder if there will ever be a time when people stop confusing communism with authoritarian socialism. :confused:

They wont because any attempt at communism will quickly become authoritarian.

Why? Because there will always be a signifigant percentage of the people of any country who will be opposed to giving up their individuality and economic freedom. To control this, and the natural human urge to do better, the government will have to become wildly oppressive.

Communism is an abject failure because it goes against the most basic aspects of human nature. Humans are not, and cannot become mindless worker bees.
Communist ideals don't work. Neither would full-on Libertarian ideals work (unless everyone was very well-read, and wanted to make *all* of their own decisions), but alternatives are good to have, just for the sake of change, and possibly meaningful reform.

While I do not support all of the libertarian party's ideas, ANY move in that direction would be a good one.
I don't support all of them, but unless they get a majority, that means little. The biggest boon getting several into offices could have would be to start trimming the scope of many agencies and laws. The full effect of the LP's goals would devolve into anarchy. However, getting most of the way there would be a good thing.
 

Amused

Elite Member
Apr 14, 2001
57,390
19,708
146
Originally posted by: Cerb
Q]I don't support all of them, but unless they get a majority, that means little. The biggest boon getting several into offices could have would be to start trimming the scope of many agencies and laws. The full effect of the LP's goals would devolve into anarchy. However, getting most of the way there would be a good thing.

I think you are mistaken. The Libertarian ideal is far from anarchy. Was the US in a state of anarchy in it's first 100 years?
 

Bumrush99

Diamond Member
Jun 14, 2004
3,334
194
106
Who cares what party someone is affiliated with it? In the USA you need a majority of the votes to win any election. You can finish with 49.9999999999 percent of the votes and wind up with nothing. Ralph Nader has a better chance at winning the presidency than the Communist Party does. In Europe they are able to get some votes and are involved in governement, albiet with little to no power.
And to those calling liberals commies, get your collective heads of out of your as*es. I am as moderate as they come and will probably vote for Bush, but I'm sick of conservatives constantly attacking liberals and making them look unpatriotic by associating them with facist/authoritatrian regimes.
 

misle

Diamond Member
Nov 30, 2000
3,371
0
76
Originally posted by: Amused
Originally posted by: gigapet
democracy doesnt work either when corporations have more pull than the people.

so what other options are there.....corruption has found its way into every form of government.

Which is why the US was founded as a Constitutional Republic with a democratically elected government.

The government was supposed to have strictly limited power. Thus seriously limiting how corruptible it would be. You see, the more the government regulates business, the more business will try to manipulate government in an effort to ensure the regulations are not so strict that they harm business.

The more the government treats business as seperate and quite unequal from individuals, the more it will be corrupted.

And it's not only business that has corrupted. Socialism has done the same. Ever since socialism was introduced to the US with The New Deal, citizens have found they can band together into powerful organizations to lobby the government for more social programs. These groups have every bit as much influence as the businesses.

Very well stated.
 

gigapet

Lifer
Aug 9, 2001
10,005
0
76
Originally posted by: Amused
Originally posted by: gigapet
democracy doesnt work either when corporations have more pull than the people.

so what other options are there.....corruption has found its way into every form of government.

Which is why the US was founded as a Constitutional Republic with a democratically elected government.

The government was supposed to have strictly limited power. Thus seriously limiting how corruptible it would be. You see, the more the government regulates business, the more business will try to manipulate government in an effort to ensure the regulations are not so strict that they harm business.

The more the government treats business as seperate and quite unequal from individuals, the more it will be corrupted.

And it's not only business that has corrupted. Socialism has done the same. Ever since socialism was introduced to the US with The New Deal, citizens have found they can band together into powerful organizations to lobby the government for more social programs. These groups have every bit as much influence as the businesses.

should the government not have stepped in regarding monopolies and child labor.....where is the line drawn and who decides?
 

TheAudit

Diamond Member
May 2, 2003
4,194
0
0
Originally posted by: Ornery
Originally posted by: brigden
Funny how brainwashed you Americans are with regards to Communism. I don't think the system works in reality, but you guys think it's like the Nazi party or something.
No kidding. Commies, Socialists, Democrats... same sh|t!

:D
 

Amused

Elite Member
Apr 14, 2001
57,390
19,708
146
Originally posted by: gigapet
Originally posted by: Amused
Originally posted by: gigapet
democracy doesnt work either when corporations have more pull than the people.

so what other options are there.....corruption has found its way into every form of government.

Which is why the US was founded as a Constitutional Republic with a democratically elected government.

The government was supposed to have strictly limited power. Thus seriously limiting how corruptible it would be. You see, the more the government regulates business, the more business will try to manipulate government in an effort to ensure the regulations are not so strict that they harm business.

The more the government treats business as seperate and quite unequal from individuals, the more it will be corrupted.

And it's not only business that has corrupted. Socialism has done the same. Ever since socialism was introduced to the US with The New Deal, citizens have found they can band together into powerful organizations to lobby the government for more social programs. These groups have every bit as much influence as the businesses.

should the government not have stepped in regarding monopolies and child labor.....where is the line drawn and who decides?

There is a signifigant difference between extremely basic laws verses the miles of red tape and regulations a business faces today.

And if anything, government regulations have fostered more monopolies than it ever busted.
 

rudder

Lifer
Nov 9, 2000
19,441
86
91
Originally posted by: amdfanboy
Originally posted by: djheater
Originally spoken by: Winston Churchill
The inherent vice of capitalism is the unequal sharing of blessings; the inherent virtue of socialism is the equal sharing of miseries.

All point of view. I highly doubt Mr. Churchhill ever experienced adult life as a lower class factory worker.

I am good friends with a "lower class factory worker." He worked in a factory after high school for 17 years and one day realized that just because you work in a factory no one is forcing you. He then started his own dent repair business and is doing quite well for himself. Who are you to call this guy lower class?
 

Cerb

Elite Member
Aug 26, 2000
17,484
33
86
Originally posted by: Amused
Originally posted by: Cerb
Q]I don't support all of them, but unless they get a majority, that means little. The biggest boon getting several into offices could have would be to start trimming the scope of many agencies and laws. The full effect of the LP's goals would devolve into anarchy. However, getting most of the way there would be a good thing.
I think you are mistaken. The Libertarian ideal is far from anarchy. Was the US in a state of anarchy in it's first 100 years?
No, but it partly that level of freedom that led to the Civil War. With all the corporations and people with blinders on today, it won't work. I'm not saying it couldn't in 50 years (I desperately hope it can, as I'd like to see things get better before I croak!), and I think change needs to be done, but the way things are now, we would be in economic turmoil (I think it would be deserved, mind you, because of the corporate control allowed by the government). I'd welcome it--but the vast majority would rather be safe and sound, with a good Christian leader, rather than leaders who actually cared about the people for more than their future votes.

Realistically, it wouldn't work, however good it would be. You'd be taking people away from their safety nets. Moving the nation towards liberal ideals (look up liberal in a dictionary, for those of you who think mainstream Democrats are at all liberal) all but necessitates that those people with voting power become individualistic. That each person take full control of his or her life, with only enough strings attached to protect his neighbor from basic rights violations.
 

gigapet

Lifer
Aug 9, 2001
10,005
0
76
Originally posted by: Amused
Originally posted by: gigapet
Originally posted by: Amused
Originally posted by: gigapet
democracy doesnt work either when corporations have more pull than the people.

so what other options are there.....corruption has found its way into every form of government.

Which is why the US was founded as a Constitutional Republic with a democratically elected government.

The government was supposed to have strictly limited power. Thus seriously limiting how corruptible it would be. You see, the more the government regulates business, the more business will try to manipulate government in an effort to ensure the regulations are not so strict that they harm business.

The more the government treats business as seperate and quite unequal from individuals, the more it will be corrupted.

And it's not only business that has corrupted. Socialism has done the same. Ever since socialism was introduced to the US with The New Deal, citizens have found they can band together into powerful organizations to lobby the government for more social programs. These groups have every bit as much influence as the businesses.

should the government not have stepped in regarding monopolies and child labor.....where is the line drawn and who decides?

There is a signifigant difference between extremely basic laws verses the miles of red tape and regulations a business faces today.

And if anything, government regulations have fostered more monopolies than it ever busted.

i agree i just wanted to gauge how strict the hands off business policy should be
 

Amused

Elite Member
Apr 14, 2001
57,390
19,708
146
Originally posted by: Cerb
Originally posted by: Amused
Originally posted by: Cerb
Q]I don't support all of them, but unless they get a majority, that means little. The biggest boon getting several into offices could have would be to start trimming the scope of many agencies and laws. The full effect of the LP's goals would devolve into anarchy. However, getting most of the way there would be a good thing.
I think you are mistaken. The Libertarian ideal is far from anarchy. Was the US in a state of anarchy in it's first 100 years?
No, but it partly that level of freedom that led to the Civil War. With all the corporations and people with blinders on today, it won't work. I'm not saying it couldn't in 50 years (I desperately hope it can, as I'd like to see things get better before I croak!), and I think change needs to be done, but the way things are now, we would be in economic turmoil (I think it would be deserved, mind you, because of the corporate control allowed by the government). I'd welcome it--but the vast majority would rather be safe and sound, with a good Christian leader, rather than leaders who actually cared about the people for more than their future votes.

Realistically, it wouldn't work, however good it would be. You'd be taking people away from their safety nets. Moving the nation towards liberal ideals (look up liberal in a dictionary, for those of you who think mainstream Democrats are at all liberal) all but necessitates that those people with voting power become individualistic. That each person take full control of his or her life, with only enough strings attached to protect his neighbor from basic rights violations.

Well, nothing is possible overnight, so worrying about such a sudeden change is rather moot here.
 

Ausm

Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
25,213
14
81
This might help clarify things

Politics

Anarchism
Keep cows. Shoot government. Steal another cow.

Communism
You have two cows. Give them both to the Government. Government gives you milk.

Pure Communism
You have two cows. Your neighbors help you take care of them. You all share the milk.

Applied Communism
You have two cows. You have to take care of them. Government takes all the milk.

Conservatism
Freeze milk. Nuke cows.

Democracy

Singaporean Democracy
You have two cows. The government fines you for keeping two unlicensed farm animals in an apartment.

Pure Democracy
You have two cows. Your neighbors decide who gets the milk.

Representative Democracy
You have two cows. Your neighbors pick someone to tell you who gets the milk.

American Democracy
Government promises to give you two cows if you vote for it. After election, president impeached for speculating in cow futures. Press dubs the affair "Cowgate."

British Democracy
You have two cows. You feed them sheep brains and they go mad. Government doesn't do anything.

Dictatorship
You have two cows. Government takes both and shoots you.

Fascism
You have two cows. Give milk to Government. Government sells milk.

You have two cows. Government takes both, hires you to take care of them and sells you the milk.

Liberalism
Give milk back to cows. Let them escape.

Militarism
You have two cows. The government takes both and drafts you.

Nazism
Government shoots you and takes cows.

New Dealism
Government shoots one cow, milks the other, and pours milk down the drain.

Socialism
You have two cows. Give one to your neighbour.

Totalinarianism
You have two cows. The government takes them and denies they ever existed. Milk is banned.

Economics

Bureaucracy
You have two cows. At first the government regulates what you can feed them and when you can milk them. Then it pays you not to milk them. After that it takes both, shoots one, milks the other and pours the milk down the drain. Then it requires you to fill out forms accounting for the missing cows.

Capitalism
Slaughter cow. Compete with McDonalds.

You have two cows. You sell one and buy a bull.

Hong Kong Capitalism
You have two cows. You sell three of them to your publicly-listed company, using letters of credit opened by your brother-in-law at the bank, then execute a debt/equity swap with associated general offer so that you get all four cows back, with a tax deduction for keeping five cows. The milk rights of six cows are transferred via a Panamanian intermediary to a Cayman Islands company secretly owned by the majority shareholder, who sells the right to all seven cows' milk back to the listed company. The annual report says that the company owns eight cows, with an option on one more. Meanwhile, you kill the two cows because of bad fung shui.

Feudalism

Modern Feudalism
Let two cows live in field. Take milk. Allow to ride in big truck with lots of other cows.

Medieval Feudalism
You have two cows. Your lord takes some of the milk.

Religion

Baptism
You are the mother of two cows. You catch them dancing and shoot them both.

Catholicism
You are the mother of two cows. You tell one to go ahead and eat the last few bites of feed. You'll scrounge through the dirt for a couple of crumbs. That's all a mother needs. You tell the other that the first will rot in Hell.

Hinduism
Worship cows. Screw the government. What did it ever do for me anyhow?

Judaism
You are the mother of two cows. You give them your share of the grain. You make it clear to them that you are starving but wouldn't have it any other way. You repeat, "I'm dying! I'm dying!" in a very loud mooing voice so that all the other cows can hear. Later, your children become comedian cows.

New Ageism
Milk cows, but only according to astrology charts. Take their bells off. Give them crystals instead.

Presbyterianism
You are the mother of two cows. You send them off to boarding school and never see them again.

Unitarianism
You are the mother of two cows. One decides to become a pig. The other a turnip. You say nothing and leave for the summerhouse.

Other Belief Systems

Barbarism
Throwing a barbeque? First, borrow a cow from your neighbour...

Cannibalism
Pave over all the grass. Cows eat cows, people eat people; fair is fair.

Counter Culture
Wow, dude, there's like...these two cows, man. You have *got* to have some of this milk.

Deja-Moo:
The feeling that you've heard this bullshit before.

Feminism
You have two cows. They get married and adopt a veal calf.

Political Correctness
You are associated with (the concept of "ownership" is a symbol of the phallocentric, warmongering, intolerant past) two differently aged (but no less valuable to society) bovines of nonspecified gender.

Surrealism
Cowhenge.

You have two giraffes. The government requires you to take harmonica lessons.

Survivalism
Camouflage cows. Arm them to the teeth. Exercise extreme caution crossing pastures.

Ausm