Unit 420- are you kidding? We LOVE political discussions (ask your parents, it's Polish national pastime and then search this forum ). I specifically love blackmercedes! Let's see, where is he wrong this time? so many ways ....
Ok, first, Poland was NEVER communist. Polish system was called Socialism, and Poland even had an alternative to PZPR (Polska Zjednoczona Partia Robotnicza, or Polish United Worker's Party- synonymous with all the evil that happened in Poland since 1945). It was a Polish Social-Democratic Party. It was widely belived that the internal PZPR lottery decided which comrads would become socialists.
Lets see, you claim that Communism in Poland was a tyranny and had nothing to do with "the real deal." Well, since the system was based on the Soviet system which is assumed to be the first and the "purest" communism form, what do you consider "true communism"?? if a hypothetical system does not work in the real life (name ONE "true" communist country in the history of human kind-i.e. the one that was not a tyranny), wouldn't you agree that the hypothesis is flawed??? I urge you to research "Utopia" on internet- where it came from and where did it get it's current meaning.
Oh, and I'm sorry to dissapoint you, but Canada, by definition (as per Marx-Lenin-Engels works) could never be a communist or socialist, since the capitalist system (again, by the definition of the same trio) exists solely by and for exploitation of the working masses. Therefore, by it's nature, the capitalism is antithesis of communism/socialism and, therefore, the two cannot coexist. that why I was so amused when people were telling me in the '80 that the US and USSR could coexist peacefully-they could not since the goal of communism was to dominate the world

__________________
1985 190D 2.2l Sold-to Brother-in-law
1996 Mustang 3.8l -"thinks it's a sports car"
1988 Grand Wagoneer - Sold (good home)
1995 Grand Cherokee Ltd -"What was I thinking??!!"

You're talking in theory. Communism was begun after the Russian Revolution, and initially the doctrine was followed. But, Communism cannot exist thanks to human nature. It collapsed into a totalitarian government system that expanded into an imperial spiral of control that reached many nations.

You're right about complete socialism not being able to exist with capitalism. You keep pointing to systems on the extremes and noting that they won't work. Seems like I've said that about a thousand times. Communism won't work. Pure socialism won't. Pure capitalism won't either. So, Poland was not a "communist" nation, as it falls apart shortly after creation.

The success of the West has been to stay away from extreme positions and meld a NEW system that takes away from each of the systems. Take Canada. We have a system that melds some socialist policy into a capitalist economic system, combined with a democratic political system. We use capitalism to drive economic prosperity and the taxation system to redirect income and create infrastructure. It's a complex web of intertangled stuff, but it works out pretty well in the wash.

The US does the SAME thing, but the mix is different. The most prosperous, successful nations all do it, but just balance things a little different.

__________________
John Shellenberg
1998 C230 "Black Betty" 240K

http://img31.exs.cx/img31/4050/tophat6.gif

wow... I feel like a true politician. I made a little mess and now I am stepping away from it as if has never existed.:p

OK, let's see....I'll compile a list of countries that have been overtaken by communist rule and have been successful.

Here goes:










































































OK, that's about it. That's all of them. Yup, quite a list there.

EVERY communist government (in any of the many "flavors" mentioned in an earlier post) in the HISTORY OF MANKIND has failed, or is in the process of failing, or is reforming slowly (as is hopefully the case in China, but I won't hold my breath).

Mike

__________________
_____
1979 300 SD
350,000 miles
_____
1982 300D-gone---sold to a buddy
_____
1985 300TD
270,000 miles
_____
1994 E320
not my favorite, but the wife wanted it

www.myspace.com/mikemover
www.myspace.com/openskystudio
www.myspace.com/speedxband
www.myspace.com/openskyseparators
www.myspace.com/doubledrivemusic

now i no why they eat dog in china. They tweet birds as pets cause there's 1 chinaman per square meeter and no room for dog. kinda like no room for cows in yer livinroom. if i had a real big livinroom, i would have cows as pets cause when im tired of em crappin on da floor, i can just milk em and eat em. yu now sposed eat poodle thou!!and thats a problem when the poodle going wewe all over yur house dammit!!!DAm french!!

Umm...I think that the point that John's trying to make is that a nation that uses communism as a economic system doesn't necessarily need to be a totalitarian dictatorship. It's true that just about every government that has attempted to make communism work thus far has been a totalitarian dictatorship (USSR, China, Cuba, etc), but what if there was a nation that used communism instead of capitalism as an economic system? Just because it hasn't happened doesn't mean that it's an impossibility. Or, better yet, a mix of communism and capitalism that would allow people who want to work and succeed to "make it big" yet wouldn't leave people who are in a bad way out in the cold to fend for themselves (regardless of whether or not they're capable of doing so). My single biggest complaint with pure capitalism (and why the Libertarian mind-set truly frightens me) is that, from what I can tell, it's a brutally Darwinian system in that the strongest survive and those who aren't quite strong enough are completely on their own, have nowhere whatsoever to go, and thus die out. I suppose that, as long as you're one of the strong, it doesn't affect you, but I don't think I could live with that on my conscience, particularly since I know people who are physically incapable of fending for themselves and would probably die if the Libertarian/pure capatilist mind-set were ever implemented in full in this nation. BTW, I'm not talking about lazy couch potatoes here, I'm talking about people who are physically disabled to the point of being unable to work and having nowhere else to go. IMHO the biggest problem with the government assistance system is the couch potatoes who are abusing it. They need to be removed without negatively impacting the people who actually need it...so far, the only solutions I've seen are simplistic ones like "abolish it completely" or "let it continue exactly as it is". I wish I could offer a more feasible solution...

Sorry for going off-topic...OTOH, this whole thread has been off-topic Nothing personal meant, and keep on dieselin'

{on edit} I thought I had said this; just realized that I didn't. Mike, of course you're right that every government that has used communism as an economic basis has failed. However, does that mean that any form of communism is pure evil? I would venture to guess that the failures of the "communist" governments were due to the fact that they were run as dictatorships more than anything else. Any dictatorship will fail; it's just a question of when. I think that the USSR lasted as long as it did solely due to luck in that they had a series of powerful leaders (Stalin and Khrushchev come to mind). I'll bet that Cuba falls as soon as Castro dies. I have no idea why China hasn't fallen yet

Regarding someone saying that communism's goal is to become global, where did that come from? I can't remember if Marx himself said that, but if he didn't, I'd guess that that's Stalin's influence...and that goes back to the totalitarian dictatorship factor, and sounds to me more like a power-hungry individual than a collective mindset.

Also, lastly, before I get accused of being called an extremist liberal, I think the liberals are just as nuts as the conservatives. I'm not registered with any party, and vote for the person who I think can do the best job. I actually voted for a Republican in the last state governor election (no I did NOT vote for the buffoon that got nominated; IMHO he's just as dangerous as Grey Davis I did a write-in vote for one of the two that lost the Republican nomination, but that's for another thread)...

The main issue I have with Capitalism is that, as it's been said before, it's everybody for themselves. The rich stay in power and the poor die off. Now that I've been thinking about it and reading your posts, I have to admit that the political and social structures in Canada and the US are working out fairly well. The only problem with it in all the other countries is that they aren't as prosperous as Canada and the US. The rich still stay in power and the poor still die off, but it happens a lot faster and more defined than in western countries.

That ain't communism, that's just poor customer service.
Have you been to the mall during chriistmas/grocery store Friday afternoon or Home Depo anyday any time or tried to get an apartment, in say, lower Manhattan.....Or how about RedSkins Tickets?...Talk about you long lines.... It'll take you about the same amount of time to get those things from stores here in the Good 'ol US of A. For Redskins Tickets I hear Grandfathers have to put their Grandsons on the list the day they are born to qualify them for tickets by the time they get 30

__________________
Regards,

Albert
[email protected]

Huh? Communism has nothing to do with the system that punishes dissent. You're equating the theory of communism or socialism with the Eastern Bloc states that used the label, but were indeed totalitarian states.

Rally against dictoratorships and totalitarian states! Build a democratic state that won't allow itself to be torn apart and the power concentrated in the hands of one or a few people. That's why democracy is important to some of us. Who the hell wants to end up like Poland? Not me. They traded the Nazi tanks for Soviet tanks. The Soviet system began under the guise of communism, but evolved quickly into totalitarianism. The Nazi/Facist system was no different. Stalin and Hilter had lots in common, including the use of labels to promote the idolotry of ideology. Genocide, too.

Now, you're saying that people in our nations are not "locked in a basement and tortured?" Huh? Maybe I wasn't locked in a basement, but I was standing on a piece of grass a half a kilometer from a voilent protest, protesting in a peaceful manner. Police roared up in a van, hopped out in riot gear and began beating us with batons. They gassed us, "arrested" some, held them without charge, and beat those of us remaining on the grass. A public park. We're labelled as "terrorists" and the gov't can do as they wish? You would cry foul if these were Iraqi people being beaten by Saddam's police force, but somehow it's fine and dandy when performed in the name of "social order" in our society? Hypocrites.

Without the ability to dissent, we're heading towards an extreme state position that will result in nothing more than all the power and wealth concentrated in the hands of a very few, and the oppression of the "regular" people will come. Use whatever label you like, but it can happen. EVEN in a "capitalist" society. Capitalism is not a magic bullet that defeats totalitarianism.

__________________
John Shellenberg
1998 C230 "Black Betty" 240K

http://img31.exs.cx/img31/4050/tophat6.gif

That statement, my green blooded friend, is in and of itself an over generalization. Can you say that all in America have a choice? Have you seen some of the more poverty stricken areas of this land of ours? Its sometimes easier said(If you don't like something/somewhere move/change it) than done. As for having a chance, those people unlucky enough to live in poverty have something akin to but that not quite be categorized as "a chance". we are all blessed immensley to have the wherewithall to have the luxuries that we on this forum enjoy. A/C , Internet, MB's or other fine toys, etc. We need to realize how blessed we are and stop looking at the world through our own ignorant, naive , rose colored, arrogant perspectives.

disclaimer:These are my own thoughts written by me as a means to express my self and are not / were not intended as an attack on anyones thoughts ideas or expressions. Any reprint of these thoughts ideas is expressly PERMITTED

__________________
Regards,

Albert
[email protected]

The US is not in fact much of a democracy: we have just two parties, and you might as well call them the Plutocratic Party and the Semi-Plutocratic Party, since all the Republicans and many of the Democrats are on sale to the highest bidders in the form of campaign contributions.

As I rule I find the Republicans are always unfit to rule in the name of the average guy, because they are entirely sold out to the fatcats. Observe how John McCain, the best candidate the Republicans ever had a chance to nominate since Eisenhower was passed over for the bumbling doltish plutocrat we currently have the misfortune of being our leader.

It is obvious why McCain didn't get the nomination: he speaks his mind and thinks for himself, whereas Juniorbush is only a sockpuppet for the ruling class.

What the US needs is some form of proportional representation by which 20% of the vote gets 20% of the representation: as it is all we get is smothered by the majority and many serious issues are never addressed.

I expect that at some point in the future the Canadian system, with its multiple parties and more populist trends will be recognized by all but the most entrenched of crypto fascists as superior in nearly every way.

__________________
Semibodacious Transmogrifications a Specialty

1990 300D 2.5 Turbo sedan 171K (Rudolf)
1985 300D Turbo TD Wagon 219K (Remuda)

"Time flies like and arrow, yet fruit flies like a banana"
---Marx (Groucho)

Huey P Long.s appeal was definitely populist, but he was more than a little corrupt.

Why should one man have three houses when there are hard-working folks who have none? It is still a good question for Americans.

However, it is possible that he could have gotten the democratic nomination in 1932 had he not been assassinated.

Earl Long, his brother, was the better of the two, in my opinion.

__________________
Semibodacious Transmogrifications a Specialty

1990 300D 2.5 Turbo sedan 171K (Rudolf)
1985 300D Turbo TD Wagon 219K (Remuda)

"Time flies like and arrow, yet fruit flies like a banana"
---Marx (Groucho)

Mike, of course every Communist nation has failed....

It's a thing called interdependency between nations: providing things that you don't have.

Marx said for Communism to work, it would have to be world wide. This indeed was Lenin's goal: world wide Communism. When Lenin died, Stalin figured it was infeasible to promote worldwide Communism, so he practiced it only in the USSR. The USSR has many more resources than lets say Cuba or North Korea does though, so they sort of stood alone for a long time.

How is Cuba supposed to be successful? They are an island. They have no stock market, no free market economy. How are they supposed to trade with nations that do have stock markets and free market economies?

And you say that pure Communism has never been practiced in any country...true, but it has been practiced in monasteries for thousands of years. Marx just gave it a name, and wanted to take it to a larger scale.

If we were all like monks, it would work.

And the Sociallly Darwinistic views of the Libertarian's are great for people like you who are "rock stars" :p (literally and metaphorically) and are financially set. You are going to tell me that because a man is physically incapacitated, or because a man was too poor to receive an education he is bound to the lower level?

Luckily in the US we have some Communist things called "Social Security" and "Public Education" Hell, who cares about all those poor kids! They don't have money, why should we subsidize their education? Let them only be manual laborers. That's how they were born.

I guess when Hitler exterminated all the mentally handicapped people he was practicing Social Darwinism, maybe even compassionate by not letting them fail in society because of the faults that they obviously created themselves.

Communism isn't totaliterian. It's a good way for someone to get the minds of the people in his/her hands. It sounds good. And once you are in power, you keep the plaque on the door, but change what you do. It's only been practice in Monasteries, REAL communism. I think totaliterians use Communism as an enticement.

Ever read the Communist Manifesto? Or Das Kapital? Both good books, althought Das Kapital is a long read.

For the record, some of my ancestors lived under the "Socialist" rule of Salazar in Portugal. That regime crumbled like all other "Communist" regimes.

It hasn't ever been tried, so how can it fail?

Immensely. My own country is unrivaled in it's standard of living, low crime rates, tolerance, and economic future. I feel strongly it's the finest balance of systems, including the ability for someone to succeed and fail, as well as the fair treatment of those unable to fend for themselves. The welfare-state compromise has worked well in Canada, with tremendous post war prosperity and much smoother boom/bust cycles.

This is true, and that is why I feel that we must not seek to create that society. Those states are created/managed/held in frameworks that have little compromise or adaptation. They are mired in ideology and not practical usage of ideas. When I see us adopting the techniques of totalitarian police states (as in oppression of dissent) I hope that we might recognize the error, and stop it before we drive down the wrong path. It's not right to say "they oppress dissent MORE than we do, so we're right." It's better to say "they oppress dissent, and we should not."

Study, yes, daydream, no. We must study to understand and work to make our own society better. I have never professed to liking or wanting to be like any society than the one I live in. I merely wish to preserve my own, and even improve it if possible.

My opinions are not negative. I love my own nation, and cherish our high standard of living. My personal position on the Gulf War II has nothing to do with it. As an aside, I debated both sides in an attempt to better seek my own position, but remained pretty much in the middle throughout. I realized the need for the war and the want to gain control, but understood the want for a peaceful solution at the same time. The true problem was of course the insane dictator in charge. Saddam created his own demise.

I won't wait for that. Why? I realize you're being sarcastic, but you don't think that increasing the wealth gap to an extreme point in Western culture might create a "revolution" consisting mostly of crime? Look to Peru as an example. They have a capitalist society with little welfare-state. They have rich and poor and little in between. The wealthy live in armed camps and fear being in public. Violent crime is the norm, not the exception. Shouldn't we be diligent in ensuring we don't adopt policies that would end us up there?

This is where we agree completely. Action! Deeds not words. Though academia is my chosen profession, I do not wear a tweed jacket, I don't pontificate uselessly, or smoke a pipe. I roll up my sleeves and jump in. Glad to hear you do too.

__________________
John Shellenberg
1998 C230 "Black Betty" 240K

http://img31.exs.cx/img31/4050/tophat6.gif

Off topic, but what field within academia? Just wondering