Communism. Good or bad. What do you really know about Communism?

[deepsepia]

Originally Posted by xyzde69

Y
Hmmm. Politically speaking, we almost are like Soviets. We have our commissars too.

Um, no, Switzerland is not. You've got private property, multi party democracy, rule of law . . . nothing at all "like the Soviets"

But other than that, sure.

The Swiss are famous for their borscht & gulags. The long winter nights, the balalaika, the Cossacks grazing their horses on the wide open Swiss plains.

[Roubignol]

Originally Posted by deepsepia

Um, no, Switzerland is not. You've got private property, multi party democracy, rule of law . . . nothing at all "like the Soviets"

But other than that, sure.

The Swiss are famous for their borscht & gulags. The long winter nights, the balalaika, the Cossacks grazing their horses on the wide open Swiss plains.

In a single party, you can get several ways of thought and suddenly decide to be Capitalist friendly.
Just watch the evolution of the French Socialist Party. They even became extremely liberals with the time.
Just watch how Chinese Communist party decided to follow the Capitalist economy to transit to a REAL Communist state.

Marx is a philosoph of freedom. Even today liberal economists read him. They often prefer Schumpeter, but they agree that Marx was correct on a lot of points.

[Roubignol]

Originally Posted by deepsepia

Um, no, Switzerland is not. You've got private property, multi party democracy, rule of law . . . nothing at all "like the Soviets"

But other than that, sure.

The Swiss are famous for their borscht & gulags. The long winter nights, the balalaika, the Cossacks grazing their horses on the wide open Swiss plains.

In a single party, you can get several ways of thought and suddenly decide to be Capitalist friendly.
Just watch the evolution of the French Socialist Party. They even became extremely liberals with the time.
Just watch how Chinese Communist party decided to follow the Capitalist economy to transit to a REAL Communist state.

Marx is a philosoph of freedom. Even today liberal economists read him. They often prefer Schumpeter, but they agree that Marx was correct on a lot of points.

Originally Posted by Estreeter

Sarcasm look it up.

Between 1991 and today there are more people on the planet
The problem is not Capitalism, it's educating the idiots that pollute and waste, but idiots are always going to be idiots.

There are more people on the planet because of social INEQUALITIES.
Nothing else.

[Roubignol]

Yesterday I've read the book of a French writter, called André Gide. "Retour de l'U.R.S.S"
He was interested by Communism since the early 30's and travelled in 1936 in USSR with foreign friends who already travelled there before him.

He came back and wrote a book about his experience and feelings.

What were his points:

Good

• Russian people are extremely friendly.
• No misery anymore and very quick improvement of the infrastructures. According to his friends who already travelled there in the past.

No Good to bad

• People becoming intellectually, culturally extremely conformist.
• Fear of Russian people to say what they think personnaly.
• Still too much poverty.
• Potential creation of a new form of bourgeoisie.
• Not a real solidarity between Kolkhozes.
• Horrible design, lack of choices, quantity and quality of the commodities. (What happened to the beautiful design of Russian artisans ?)
• Cult and fear of Stalin personality.

He wrote at the end of his book, that he thought and hoped that it was due because of the transition of a society that was on the way to be better.

An interesting fact was mentionned in his book. Stalin he had to reinstate salary classes, because the slackers were pulling the movement down.

[Estreeter]

Originally Posted by xyzde69

There are more people on the planet because of social INEQUALITIES.
Nothing else.

Hang on,
2 people, in most cases, form a relationship and start a family, now in the last century especially people tend to live longer than say 300 years ago, so naturally there will be more people on the planet ....... How exactly does that relate to inequality ???

Good Lord, I can't wait for answer to that

[Roubignol]

Originally Posted by Estreeter

Hang on,
2 people, in most cases, form a relationship and start a family, now in the last century especially people tend to live longer than say 300 years ago, so naturally there will be more people on the planet ....... How exactly does that relate to inequality ???

Good Lord, I can't wait for answer to that

Where are centers of overpopulation?
Where women have not the same rights as men.
Where men and women are poor and not correctly educated.
Where there is poverty and inequalities.

That correspond to what our ancesters lived in a recent past.

I fell on the family tree of the side of my father.
Four generations ago, they were at least 6 by family.
Ten generations ago, they sometimes had 14 children and 8 died before to be 2 years old.
Some of my friends had grandparents who were 14 at home.
If they had first female children, men were used to have more children until their first male.
This stupid behaviour still exists in Southern and Eastern European countries.
Hopefully the parity between genders is almost equal.

Life of a European woman was nothing else to be a breeder.
That's still what happens in the poorest countries in the world exploited by rich and brutal countries promoting corruption and inequalities.

[Estreeter]

Originally Posted by xyzde69

...............................
...............................
...............................
...............................
Life of a European woman was nothing else to be a breeder.
That's still what happens in the poorest countries in the world exploited by rich and brutal countries promoting corruption and inequalities.

Me, reading this thread

[Roubignol]

Originally Posted by Estreeter

Me, reading this thread

You know as well as I, that our governments often helped (and still help) leaders that contribute first to feed our economies.
They dislike people like Chavez or Castro who thought "my people first. Get out settlers". They want their oil, their minerals very cheap, because lobbies pay their election campaings.

That's the reality.

[judy84]

There are different points of view, eg poverty


Since 1990, extreme poverty, defined by the World Bank as earning less than $1.90 a day (adjusted for purchasing power), has declined from around 40 percent to 10 percent of the world population.


https://fee.org/articles/everything-...lobal-poverty/


Compared to: Many economists have argued that a poverty line of $5 a day would be much closer to the real level of people’s basic needs.


https://www.marxist.com/world-povert...t-humanity.htm


I think their should be a realignment of politics today


socialism (communism)--populism---globalism (elitism)


extreme left-------------centre------extreme right


Taking present politics away from the centre and replacing it with modern day populism. Populism could lead to more welfare for the less advantaged in society?

[Estreeter]

Originally Posted by xyzde69

You know as well as I,

We don't think alike and never will, that's why your global commie community will fail.

Picture of me reading this thread, again

Originally Posted by xyzde69

That's the reality.

Originally Posted by judy84

Populism could lead to more welfare for the less advantaged in society?

Which I despise except for those that actually need it, unlike here where the left are great at winning votes with promising more welfare and taxing those that work to get the funds for it.

If you're on unemployment benefits here, the dole, it's possible to get more than the average worker if you have a few kids, leftie politics brought that crap in.