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

[bowlinggreen]

Originally Posted by Enrico32

But you said that - OUR mushrooms and nuts! I wonder was it a simple byword or do you still admit that the food for apemen was "common" within a tribe? You didn't use that word for the British King and Zulu.

Because in current society, those who 1) make decisions, 2) execute orders, 3) rip profits are entirely different people!! And they constantly highlight their difference. They can, and do, oppress each other. Nothing is common. Then why a society is still there?

Why managers rule firms in the name of absentee owners faithfully instead of just usurping the firms? Military is another matter. Just think of it - the army holds all the weapons...yet exhibits no political voice!! It is fully, totally obedient to a bunch of "community leaders" many of whom cannot even use a handgun. This is beyond comprehending.

I've said this before, obviously, I have to say it again: humans are hierarchy-oriented animals.

Even amongst the ape-men, the apes favored by the chief got to eat the better food, and they got to eat it first. You know, just like the higher up party members in the Soviet Union got more goodies than the working proles.

Like all pseudo-intellectual sympathizers of socialism and communism, you secretly believe yourself to be more evolved than your fellow man, and therefore naturally disposed to rule over him and tell him how to live. Therein lies the attraction, the ideological rush, so to speak.

But just like the heroin and crack addicts, you are simply living in a dream world.

And for communists, maintaining the high does not come from dumping more dope into the bloodstream, but from the cracks of the pistols firing bullets into the heads of those "wreckers and saboteurs" who threaten your poisoned dream.

[crinolynne]

Originally Posted by bowlinggreen

I've said this before, obviously, I have to say it again: humans are hierarchy-oriented animals.

And you're wrong every time you say it.

Replace hierarchy with structure, and then recognize the structures are fluid and the model becomes more practical.

[Estreeter]

Originally Posted by palo5

You can call them worse than that.

Umm, just one thing
China and India ... yep thats 2 countries,
That said I wonder what the statistics would be if you'd have used other countries why pick only those 2

Wanna compare, dunno Australia and say Russia for the same time frame, would be too different I'm guessing but know which would be higher,

The comment you replied to had nothing to do with my comment, all I pointed out was yet another of xyzde's hypocrisies. I also notice he didn't reply to your comment .... see he's all about having a smaller world population ..... what a good way to have one and have people die young or just not let people have any, your post went on about higher population..... yet he didn't post a word and your, almost, on the same team


Now watch him attack me, once again that I didn't understand him, or some other twist of twisted logic ...... from the person who still has not said we do not need money to be happy in one thread but in this one wants people to be paid more And he'll side step it saying I don't understand and blah blah blah

[Enrico32]

Originally Posted by bowlinggreen

I've said this before, obviously, I have to say it again: humans are hierarchy-oriented animals.

Even amongst the ape-men, the apes favored by the chief got to eat the better food, and they got to eat it first. You know, just like the higher up party members in the Soviet Union got more goodies than the working proles.

Like all pseudo-intellectual sympathizers of socialism and communism, you secretly believe yourself to be more evolved than your fellow man, and therefore naturally disposed to rule over him and tell him how to live. Therein lies the attraction, the ideological rush, so to speak.

Ok, let's shorten the dilemma which besets me.

A chief starts to abuse the tribe. What should be the reaction of other apes, especially if most of them equal the chief in strength, and some even exceed?

[bowlinggreen]

Originally Posted by Enrico32

Ok, let's shorten the dilemma which besets me.

A chief starts to abuse the tribe. What should be the reaction of other apes, especially if most of them equal the chief in strength, and some even exceed?

Obviously, they get together and kill the chief, and appoint someone else in his stead.

Happens with tribes and nations.

The Russians killed their chief (Tsar Nicholas II), but most of their new chiefs proved unsatisfactory too, so they ditched the whole system that was enabling communist chiefs in 1991.

Now they have an oligarchic chief, and a lot of Russians seem to be happy with him.

[diamelsx]

Originally Posted by bowlinggreen

Now they have an oligarchic chief, and a lot of Russians seem to be happy with him.

I say that emphasis should be put on the word "seem". It's not like the leader doesn't have basically total control of the country's media in any of the dissenting voices have ended up dead.

[Roubignol]

Originally Posted by bowlinggreen

There were no communist cavemen. Only modern humans have the brainpower to think up such a fantastical fantasy as communism.

Cavemen were communist.
You must read the link I forwarded to you about the anthrophologist syntesis written by Mr Graeber : "Debt 5000 years"

Still today there are natural communist tribes as it was depicted in Amazona or Papouasia with still existing primary tribes.

To summarize the case, it's written like this:

"The chief of the tribe comes back from the hunt with best hunters of the tribes. They come back with food and share with the other members of the tribe. They don't say: "Hey, you have to work for us if you want to eat.
They share it." End of the story. That's pure Communism by definition.

Logically in a classical family it's the same.
Parents come back home after work and feed their children.
Apart in some strange families, you will never listen between members of the same family:
"Hey I worked more to feed you. So if you don't work for me, I'll let you starve to death."

If you see a father or a mother speaking like this, you probably will think: "This person is insane."

Now... we have to push this exercise a little bit further.
If you trust geneticians, you probably know that about 6 millions years ago, all homo sapiens living today share the same common ancester.

It seems we are all members of the same family.

So we have to come back to our roots and live in a Communist way.
The exploitation of the man by the man was an short but horrible mistake developped by dangerous psychopaths.
These pyschopaths developped stupid notions like nations, debts, wars, sexism, colonialism, etc...

Those notions have to be destroyed.

[crinolynne]

Originally Posted by xyzde69

Cavemen were communist.

"The chief of the tribe comes back from the hunt with best hunters of the tribes. They come back with food and share with the other members of the tribe. They don't say: "Hey, you have to work for us if you want to eat.
They share it." End of the story. That's pure Communism by definition.

Those notions have to be destroyed.

Well... not having grown up in a cave, I'm prepared to yield to your possible inside knowledge and experience. However, I have my doubts.

Here's what is more likely to have happened - the hunters returned, the meat was cooked - the hunters had their fill, in strict order of who could fight off another., the hunters wives had their fill in strict order of who's hunter could fight off the other., the hunters children fought over what was left, in strict order of which child could fight off another child. Now, the strongest male, he didn't go hunting, he of course eat first. Now, it's likely he didn't like the noise of all that fighting, so he told each person when they could eat so that he could nap properly having eaten his fill. Meanwhile, a timetraveller is consulting his handy dandy hunger meter and noting that it is a Poisson distribution, he/she gathers more data to confirm the result and gets their PhD in due course under the title Communism and the Poisson distribution.

[Roubignol]

Originally Posted by crinolynne

Well... not having grown up in a cave, I'm prepared to yield to your possible inside knowledge and experience. However, I have my doubts.

In fact... according to scientists... there weren't cavemen, as Bowling learned at school, but tribes.

Cavemen are like nations or primitive economies based on barter: myths.

[Wendigo]

Will someone wake me up when this current anthropology 101 nonsense is all over.



Our ancestors could not be communists as they could think for themselves and painted without a central committee telling them what they could draw.