there are other alternatives to communism with out the strong leader structure as it was in you country, Czechoslovakia... Anarchism!

I think its basic idea is good, but hardly workable, and communist countries mostly tryed to acomplish it wrong way, so today 90% of the are fucked up becouse of that. On of that countries is my contry, and all ex YU countries. And the whole problem with Kosovo draws back to communist thays, days of Tito's reign. But in those days everything seemed ideal, everyone just lived the day, without care for future. Its like i give you some 100 dolars and you spend it all today, and tomorrow you die from hunger.

And I hardly believe that anarchists can count as communists, at least in SSSR. I know that their view of anarchists was nowhere positive.

Written by Stalker on 08.03.2007 at 14:41

I think its basic idea is good, but hardly workable, and communist countries mostly tryed to acomplish it wrong way, so today 90% of the are fucked up becouse of that. On of that countries is my contry, and all ex YU countries. And the whole problem with Kosovo draws back to communist thays, days of Tito's reign. But in those days everything seemed ideal, everyone just lived the day, without care for future. Its like i give you some 100 dolars and you spend it all today, and tomorrow you die from hunger.

And I hardly believe that anarchists can count as communists, at least in SSSR. I know that their view of anarchists was nowhere positive.

But sure it startet off good, but wentet awfull wrong. But i think its very wrong just to trow communism in the thrash can of "failed systems" but maybe look back why did it go wrong, i think its because the new so called communist goverments where dictatorships, and tried to press down the goverments views on everyone. I think only a socialistic state can be achived if the working class dont let them self be rulled by anyone not even communist goverments...

The idea of communism is good, in fact its better than democracy (everyone is equal) however it just doesnt work in practice, maybe some day we will see a nation that will do good use of it. But why the hell it doesnt work?
I think its because government tries to "make" people do what ever the hell they want, to make people "equal" and I think thats not what people want. Sure everyone wants to be equal and have the same oportunities, but I dont think its going to happen if use force.

The Bitch about communism is it should work, it really should. And that is exactly what Karl Marx thought when he wrote it down on paper. But what no one ever takes into account is the fact that people are greedy, it is in most people's nature to be jealous of others even when everyone is equal.
back to the greed/jealousy issue. If we did not have any money all the resources of the world would quickly be depeleted as everyone man, woman, and child fights to the death for the last grain of rice, or the last drop of partially hydrogenated petroleum.
Then there is the fact that if everyone is equal in every way then how do we make laws, can't one person just as soon kill someone, like say the president of the communist movement, because everyone is equal. Tha also raises another interesting point, how would new laws come into effect, would they have a complete vote of all the people like a true democratic political system. and for that matter how does one come about being president, they wouldn't be able to vote a person in to power ecause then that would be giving a personmore power than everyone else.
The point I am getting at is that communism will never work, I in all fairness wish that it could work , because it truly would be a great political system, but unless we can make a society like in "Equilebrium" it never will work.

There is no such thing as human be predeterminated to be greedy, selfish and jealous. We are cultural beings, a part of our characteristics and points of view come from our culture, there is no such thing as human nature we can't generalize our specie in that way, because moral, ethics, all this stuff are connected to one culture and we have thousands of different cultures. So, what I'm trying to say is that our society creates greedy, jealous, selfish persons. But if a Communist Revolution suceed to create an equal society and a "socialist culture" (let's put that way), people will think more in their comrades because they will be raised with that idea. Anyone who study Anthropology will understand the strong bonds between culture and the way that we see the world.

So you are trying to say that a person living in communist china would not be jealous of Bill Gates, the worlds richest man. Even people who live in a society where they are taught not to be jealous of each other, people still act that way. Beyond every creature there is an instinct, one to defend, their territory and to want more. tell me, if greed does not exist then why are there still elite rich and extreme poor living in communist china. Why is it that Communist russia never worked. Cuba is a fascist country mascarading as a communist governement.
Here is a prime example, even a lion who is tamed, to never attack, will attack if they are endangered, or angered, you poke one in the eyes and they will attack you. All animals have things written into their base DNA, Instinct. To Breathe, to breed, to eat, and drink, to defend from danger. even before such things as jealosuy even had a name, it existed. How else did it come about, this is not something that can just come about out of nowehere.
Thus a true communist governement can never be achieved, one can't even make it close to true communism, because it is always overwritten by human greed.

Written by [user id=21954] on 09.04.2007 at 04:51

So you are trying to say that a person living in communist china would not be jealous of Bill Gates, the worlds richest man. Even people who live in a society where they are taught not to be jealous of each other, people still act that way. Beyond every creature there is an instinct, one to defend, their territory and to want more. tell me, if greed does not exist then why are there still elite rich and extreme poor living in communist china. Why is it that Communist russia never worked. Cuba is a fascist country mascarading as a communist governement.
Here is a prime example, even a lion who is tamed, to never attack, will attack if they are endangered, or angered, you poke one in the eyes and they will attack you. All animals have things written into their base DNA, Instinct. To Breathe, to breed, to eat, and drink, to defend from danger. even before such things as jealosuy even had a name, it existed. How else did it come about, this is not something that can just come about out of nowehere.
Thus a true communist governement can never be achieved, one can't even make it close to true communism, because it is always overwritten by human greed.

I don't think it's fair to say that greed is imprinted in DNA, because all that is in DNA is human nature. I don't believe greed is a natrual occurence, it is a concept concieved from society, and I fail to see the point in a communist society that will lend way to Greed. Of course it can come in a capitalist society, because there are always going to be those who have more, deserve more, and desire more in a capitalist society because there is always more to acquire some how.

Greed is not an admirable trait, in fact it's loathsome. It is Greed that will spawn crime and betrayal, because in the end Greed is what will use humanity as a means.

One concept that is most clear in Kant's moral philosophy is that it is immoral, that it is wrong to use humanity as a means. A sucessful communist society will need to build it's society around the belief that what is for the benefit is for the whole is what is most beneficial to all. A society where the worker works to benefit his craft, and he doesn't perform his craft merely for his own benefit.

A succesful communist society must work to find a means to use one's passion's as a source of craft. There is a role for everyone to play in society, being the unique individual's we are, we have to realize our different crafts and strive to perfect them.

but why is there any desire for a man to work on something, to truly put his sould into it, when he has the exact same things as the person next to him, no matter how much harder man A works, he will only be rewarded by the same thing that Man B gets, which is needless to say unfair.

All the things you said in your post are true, but I feel that it could never be achieved, history to date has yet to prove that there could exist a perfect communist nation, but maybe some day it can work.

Written by [user id=21954] on 13.04.2007 at 02:23

but why is there any desire for a man to work on something, to truly put his sould into it, when he has the exact same things as the person next to him, no matter how much harder man A works, he will only be rewarded by the same thing that Man B gets, which is needless to say unfair.

All the things you said in your post are true, but I feel that it could never be achieved, history to date has yet to prove that there could exist a perfect communist nation, but maybe some day it can work.

Where does this idea that any man deserves more than another man originate? What is custom now was at one time a controversial reform.

Let me ask you, why does any man deserve more than another man for what he does, are the two men not equally men?

Different people who do different jobs put different amounts of effort into them, but across all jobs, there are no jobs which are more necessary than other jobs. All jobs performed are essential.

Philosophies are to be judged by their success and proof in reality. A philosophy that quote"sounds good in theory" is not relevant to reality. Ideas are to be judged by the depth of their failures
not the height of thier asperations. We live in reality not a textbook. Communism has proven to be a failure everywhere on the globe. East West Germany - North south Korea - Chinaand Tiawan

Secondly the most obvious point is that men are created in thier inaliable rights, not thier effort. At A Loss, what makes one man MORE relevant than another is his effort. That is the key word.
A scientist who gets a doctrine and spends 12 years for his degree is deserved to earn more than a machinist who spent 6 months in a training program or a grocery bagger. Also "All jobs"
anr NOT essential. I can live without the grocery bagger or lawn cuter but I cannot live without the doctor when i need surgery. Will you let the grocery bagger perform surgery on you >
I should say not.

This same argument goes for 2 men who perform the same task. Say 2 widget makers. If one can make twice the output of the other is he not deserved to earn more or shall he just slow his
performance to the first man. You see this is what happened in comunnist Russia. production slowed due to equal reward for unequal results.

The fact that modern man has conquered space, healed the human body, split the atom designed a vehicle that could fly were all accomplishments of asperation and reward for results.

Thirdly there is the political aspects. All communist countries end up with ruthless dictators who use the system for the wrong reasons. People end up dead and starving. 20 million russians,
millions of chinese, North Koreans killed at the border every day, East Germans killed for trying to clime a wall.

My friends if that isa the system you want and hope for ........... It is the system you deserve!

Live free ro die!

Caomunism is a bullshit in practise because people never will heave enough money or power. They always want more an more.
Real Communism in any shape is fucking danger for society.

Here is a little antidote :

Here in America when the pilgrims first arrived in the 1600s, communism in its true sense was tried. All men were given certain duties and the small group of people
had a "communal" attitude. they all worked for one goal or purpose, To survive. After the first several years they nearly starved to death. It was not until men were granted
property rights that they began to prospur. give a man a chance to feel pride in his work and he shall gain. America owes itself to the fact it was NOT "communal".

Written by Anthem on 17.04.2007 at 17:22

Philosophies are to be judged by their success and proof in reality. A philosophy that quote"sounds good in theory" is not relevant to reality. Ideas are to be judged by the depth of their failures
not the height of thier asperations. We live in reality not a textbook. Communism has proven to be a failure everywhere on the globe. East West Germany - North south Korea - Chinaand Tiawan

Secondly the most obvious point is that men are created in thier inaliable rights, not thier effort. At A Loss, what makes one man MORE relevant than another is his effort. That is the key word.
A scientist who gets a doctrine and spends 12 years for his degree is deserved to earn more than a machinist who spent 6 months in a training program or a grocery bagger. Also "All jobs"
anr NOT essential. I can live without the grocery bagger or lawn cuter but I cannot live without the doctor when i need surgery. Will you let the grocery bagger perform surgery on you >
I should say not.

This same argument goes for 2 men who perform the same task. Say 2 widget makers. If one can make twice the output of the other is he not deserved to earn more or shall he just slow his
performance to the first man. You see this is what happened in comunnist Russia. production slowed due to equal reward for unequal results.

The fact that modern man has conquered space, healed the human body, split the atom designed a vehicle that could fly were all accomplishments of asperation and reward for results.

Thirdly there is the political aspects. All communist countries end up with ruthless dictators who use the system for the wrong reasons. People end up dead and starving. 20 million russians,
millions of chinese, North Koreans killed at the border every day, East Germans killed for trying to clime a wall.

My friends if that isa the system you want and hope for ........... It is the system you deserve!

Live free ro die!

I think it's quite difficult to judge the philosophy of communism based on its success in reality, because there has never been a true communist governemtn since the Manifesto was published.

The failueres of Russian production wasn't necessarily the worker's fault. Management made very poor decisions, especially those regarding a nuclear arms race and attempting to grow food in unfertile soil.

By the collapse of the Soviet Union, Russia had a world recognized best educational system. I wouldn't think that people lacking in effort could gain such an achievement.

the Russian Soviet Union was by no means a utopia, but I don't believe that the side of the story many heard accurately analyze the livining conditions of Russian citizens.

Written by AtLossForWords on 18.04.2007 at 09:58

Written by Anthem on 17.04.2007 at 17:22

Philosophies are to be judged by their success and proof in reality. A philosophy that quote"sounds good in theory" is not relevant to reality. Ideas are to be judged by the depth of their failures
not the height of thier asperations. We live in reality not a textbook. Communism has proven to be a failure everywhere on the globe. East West Germany - North south Korea - Chinaand Tiawan

Secondly the most obvious point is that men are created in thier inaliable rights, not thier effort. At A Loss, what makes one man MORE relevant than another is his effort. That is the key word.
A scientist who gets a doctrine and spends 12 years for his degree is deserved to earn more than a machinist who spent 6 months in a training program or a grocery bagger. Also "All jobs"
anr NOT essential. I can live without the grocery bagger or lawn cuter but I cannot live without the doctor when i need surgery. Will you let the grocery bagger perform surgery on you >
I should say not.

This same argument goes for 2 men who perform the same task. Say 2 widget makers. If one can make twice the output of the other is he not deserved to earn more or shall he just slow his
performance to the first man. You see this is what happened in comunnist Russia. production slowed due to equal reward for unequal results.

The fact that modern man has conquered space, healed the human body, split the atom designed a vehicle that could fly were all accomplishments of asperation and reward for results.

Thirdly there is the political aspects. All communist countries end up with ruthless dictators who use the system for the wrong reasons. People end up dead and starving. 20 million russians,
millions of chinese, North Koreans killed at the border every day, East Germans killed for trying to clime a wall.

My friends if that isa the system you want and hope for ........... It is the system you deserve!

Live free ro die!

I think it's quite difficult to judge the philosophy of communism based on its success in reality, because there has never been a true communist governemtn since the Manifesto was published.

The failueres of Russian production wasn't necessarily the worker's fault. Management made very poor decisions, especially those regarding a nuclear arms race and attempting to grow food in unfertile soil.

By the collapse of the Soviet Union, Russia had a world recognized best educational system. I wouldn't think that people lacking in effort could gain such an achievement.

the Russian Soviet Union was by no means a utopia, but I don't believe that the side of the story many heard accurately analyze the livining conditions of Russian citizens.

you know all of this just brings back to what I was originally saying, it has never worked because of humans, and it will never work, every time it will break down, there is no avoiding it.

In the society we live in we can not judge something just because it sounds good, we have to wait to see how it works. This is why everything is tested before it is put into the market, this way they can see any potential problems that the thing will cause. Thus, the things tested most excruciatingly is medicine, as their side effects can often be painful and on rare occasions, fatal.

Therefore we test everything to make sure it will work the way it is supposed to, if it does it is sent out to the market and sold, if not it is either reworked or scrapped. The moral of this story is we can not judge something by the idea that it holds, or the "good" intentions that it had, we must test it by the reliability it has shown in it's history.

Here is a little antidote from FDR I like with regaurd to govt programs, it might just apply here!


"A program must be seen not from the heights of its aspirations but from the depths of its failures."
FDR

Written by [user id=21954] on 20.04.2007 at 19:29

Written by AtLossForWords on 18.04.2007 at 09:58

Written by Anthem on 17.04.2007 at 17:22

Philosophies are to be judged by their success and proof in reality. A philosophy that quote"sounds good in theory" is not relevant to reality. Ideas are to be judged by the depth of their failures
not the height of thier asperations. We live in reality not a textbook. Communism has proven to be a failure everywhere on the globe. East West Germany - North south Korea - Chinaand Tiawan

Secondly the most obvious point is that men are created in thier inaliable rights, not thier effort. At A Loss, what makes one man MORE relevant than another is his effort. That is the key word.
A scientist who gets a doctrine and spends 12 years for his degree is deserved to earn more than a machinist who spent 6 months in a training program or a grocery bagger. Also "All jobs"
anr NOT essential. I can live without the grocery bagger or lawn cuter but I cannot live without the doctor when i need surgery. Will you let the grocery bagger perform surgery on you >
I should say not.

This same argument goes for 2 men who perform the same task. Say 2 widget makers. If one can make twice the output of the other is he not deserved to earn more or shall he just slow his
performance to the first man. You see this is what happened in comunnist Russia. production slowed due to equal reward for unequal results.

The fact that modern man has conquered space, healed the human body, split the atom designed a vehicle that could fly were all accomplishments of asperation and reward for results.

Thirdly there is the political aspects. All communist countries end up with ruthless dictators who use the system for the wrong reasons. People end up dead and starving. 20 million russians,
millions of chinese, North Koreans killed at the border every day, East Germans killed for trying to clime a wall.

My friends if that isa the system you want and hope for ........... It is the system you deserve!

Live free ro die!

I think it's quite difficult to judge the philosophy of communism based on its success in reality, because there has never been a true communist governemtn since the Manifesto was published.

The failueres of Russian production wasn't necessarily the worker's fault. Management made very poor decisions, especially those regarding a nuclear arms race and attempting to grow food in unfertile soil.

By the collapse of the Soviet Union, Russia had a world recognized best educational system. I wouldn't think that people lacking in effort could gain such an achievement.

the Russian Soviet Union was by no means a utopia, but I don't believe that the side of the story many heard accurately analyze the livining conditions of Russian citizens.

you know all of this just brings back to what I was originally saying, it has never worked because of humans, and it will never work, every time it will break down, there is no avoiding it.

In the society we live in we can not judge something just because it sounds good, we have to wait to see how it works. This is why everything is tested before it is put into the market, this way they can see any potential problems that the thing will cause. Thus, the things tested most excruciatingly is medicine, as their side effects can often be painful and on rare occasions, fatal.

Therefore we test everything to make sure it will work the way it is supposed to, if it does it is sent out to the market and sold, if not it is either reworked or scrapped. The moral of this story is we can not judge something by the idea that it holds, or the "good" intentions that it had, we must test it by the reliability it has shown in it's history.

i think some someone need to read the 2 first points of the topic

1) There has never been a communist society existing on a national level. None have ever claimed to be communist. Of the very few that call themselves socialist, hardly any are truly socialist in the actual literal definition of the word. Referring to china, north korea or russia in this thread is pointless, as none of those are connected in any meaningful manner to Communism.

2) Communism is the STATELESS society achieved after an international proletarian revolution, which abolishes the oppressive capitalist system in all it's forms, and to it's deepest roots. I'm talking total and complete wiping of the board and remaking it all. No more money, no more companies, no more countries, no more employment, no more religion (negotiable according to some communists), an entire life change. This comes to be after a lengthy and natural transition period known as socialism, where an organization of workers coordinates the activities the proletariat for it's own benefit.

so russia wasnot communistic... they where ruled by a dictator not the proletariat.

and a second thing... not every shoul have equel of all things everyone should have acording to their needs as well... your labour is not a product in a communist country

you say that, example af docter is very important when you need to have a surgery... sure thing... but! think about who made the surgery tools who build the hospital? workers! so why is their work not important?

@necronomicon
Even if these countries are socialists, they started out being communists, they based their ideas around Karl Marx's ideas. And if a single true communist government hasn't existed in the 100+ years the idea of communism has been around, I hate to tell you but there will never be a succesful communist government. And truthfully what he is describing is nothing more than ordinary anarchy, except that anarchists do not want to slip into communism after their revolution. they want to stay in an ungoverned country where there are no laws, no police system, and only chaos rules.

Capitalism may have it's faults but all of the most succesful governemnts have always been capitalist, all others just don't work as well. And I am sick and tired of lazy people complaining about the capitalist governemnt because they are poor. That is exactly the only reason they complain, if they were to come onto a large sum of money their views would completely change, and suddenly they would be completely for capitalism. You know what, do something about it, instead of complaining about how capitalism opresses you perhaps you should try to make some money, get up into the upper class of citizenship and see how your views will change.

I am poor myself but I realize that some things are necessary for a governemnt to floursih. And even though I am poor I am never opressed by my government. The blaming of capitalism on the opression of people worldwide is as BS as the hippies always blaming the man, all it is, is a made up figure that people can take all of their self centered rage out on because of their failures.

Well actually I think you should know that what makes the tools that doctors use are not people, but machines. Sure there are foremans who make sure the machine is functioning but in the technological age one man can survey 20 machines and do the work it would take 1,000 men a week to do, in one day. So are these said foreman important, of course they are, but we won't need laborers for this.
Musicians, actors, oil diggers, gold miners, jewelers, all of these things are unimportant, and are only wanted. Another important job class would be the farmers of the world, they should receive as much as doctors seeing as they are more important than most people.

Written by [user id=21954] on 10.05.2007 at 19:25

@necronomicon
Even if these countries are socialists, they started out being communists, they based their ideas around Karl Marx's ideas. And if a single true communist government hasn't existed in the 100+ years the idea of communism has been around, I hate to tell you but there will never be a succesful communist government. And truthfully what he is describing is nothing more than ordinary anarchy, except that anarchists do not want to slip into communism after their revolution. they want to stay in an ungoverned country where there are no laws, no police system, and only chaos rules.

Capitalism may have it's faults but all of the most succesful governemnts have always been capitalist, all others just don't work as well. And I am sick and tired of lazy people complaining about the capitalist governemnt because they are poor. That is exactly the only reason they complain, if they were to come onto a large sum of money their views would completely change, and suddenly they would be completely for capitalism. You know what, do something about it, instead of complaining about how capitalism opresses you perhaps you should try to make some money, get up into the upper class of citizenship and see how your views will change.

I am poor myself but I realize that some things are necessary for a governemnt to floursih. And even though I am poor I am never opressed by my government. The blaming of capitalism on the opression of people worldwide is as BS as the hippies always blaming the man, all it is, is a made up figure that people can take all of their self centered rage out on because of their failures.

Well actually I think you should know that what makes the tools that doctors use are not people, but machines. Sure there are foremans who make sure the machine is functioning but in the technological age one man can survey 20 machines and do the work it would take 1,000 men a week to do, in one day. So are these said foreman important, of course they are, but we won't need laborers for this.
Musicians, actors, oil diggers, gold miners, jewelers, all of these things are unimportant, and are only wanted. Another important job class would be the farmers of the world, they should receive as much as doctors seeing as they are more important than most people.

Even if these countries are socialists, they started out being communists, they based their ideas around Karl Marx's ideas. And if a single true communist government hasn't existed in the 100+ years the idea of communism has been around, I hate to tell you but there will never be a succesful communist government. And truthfully what he is describing is nothing more than ordinary anarchy, except that anarchists do not want to slip into communism after their revolution. they want to stay in an ungoverned country where there are no laws, no police system, and only chaos rules.

arg come on dude... you even have you teory right.. what do you base these you statement on? have read the communist manifest by engels and karl marx. And no the countries DINDT start out with being communistic...
lets take a look on point 2 again

2) Communism is the STATELESS society achieved after an international proletarian revolution, which abolishes the oppressive capitalist system in all it's forms, and to it's deepest roots. I'm talking total and complete wiping of the board and remaking it all. No more money, no more companies, no more countries, no more employment, no more religion (negotiable according to some communists), an entire life change. This comes to be after a lengthy and natural transition period known as socialism, where an organization of workers coordinates the activities the proletariat for it's own benefit.

And truthfully what he is describing is nothing more than ordinary anarchy, except that anarchists do not want to slip into communism after their revolution. they want to stay in an ungoverned country where there are no laws, no police system, and only chaos rules.

what you say about anarchy is simple complety incorrect anchirst DONT want chaos.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anarchism try read some about it here...
and communist dont just want to slip into communism the acknowledge it is process that takes time! just like the process who made the world go from feudualism to capitalism...

"Capitalism may have it's faults"
It has it faults? you bet... destoying nature (rainforests being chopped down to make funiture), exploting 3-world countries so the rich capitalists countries can get Nike shoes. You cant control capitalism it will allways do anything to make money.


"And I am sick and tired of lazy people complaining about the capitalist governemnt because they are poor. That is exactly the only reason they complain, if they were to come onto a large sum of money their views would completely change, and suddenly they would be completely for capitalism."

I dont get you point at all? if a lazy person finds alot of money? or does the lazy person work hard to get alot of money? Then the lazy man have become a capitalist and fights for his interest on the top of socity just like the rest of the cappies...

"Well actually I think you should know that what makes the tools that doctors use are not people, but machines. Sure there are foremans who make sure the machine is functioning but in the technological age one man can survey 20 machines and do the work it would take 1,000 men a week to do, in one day."
Who builds the machines, the warehouses, wo deliver and pack the tools, WORKERS so why the fuck is their labour not important?


"Another important job class would be the farmers of the world, they should receive as much as doctors seeing as they are more important than most people."
but do you want to pay 10 times the price for 1kg rice?? you say that farmes should recive as much as docters... but peasants outside the western world get really badly exploited. They recieve abselut minium wages.

Im not really back to debate in the thread, just small opinion that indeed in outside of western world, farmers are poor, but thats not worst. The total stupidest thing in "Socialist" countries like Vietnam, farmers/peasants class are disregarded/underestimated, what I mean is that the motto: "Everyone are equal" havent come true.

I myself always agree that everyone are equal: the doctors/intelletual and peasant class make no different, both are related to lean on each other to live, then creating the equalitarian. Of course, to make that, we have many things to do/find out... And as regard to some Communistic/Socialist countries, I dont know about Soviet Union and each states in Europe, but I guess in China, Vietnam, they are "fake" communist.

One example about Equalitarian country, Israel, not sure if its communistic, but their model of economy is something like communal society, and it works...

@Necronomicon
Perhaps you should realize that ins situation such as these wikipedia is not the best source to be sighting, it does have it's uses but to use it as a dependable source of information is not in the least bit wise, as it is a community based website because of this, alot of the information can be faulty or one sided. http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/anarchy Here is a better website if you want to check the definition of a word.
And though an Anarchist may think that they do not want chaos; deep dow that is all they want and all they will get. They feel they have been wronged by the government in some way, and therefore feel that the government has to fall. When a government falls and there is nothing to create rules Humans fall back to their primal states.
For some this is compassion beyond all understanding, but for others, and for far more than the latter is greed, anger, rage, destruction. If you doubt this let's look at Japan. In December 1937, Japan took over the Chinese city Nanking. in 4 months the japanese soldiers killed over 300,000 citizens, and raped more than 80,000 women and children, many of the rape victims were mutillated afterwards. Why did they do this, because there were no rules against this, they were allowed to. Not every soldier commmitted these atrocious acts but a large number of them did. People love to not have rules when there aren't is when a man's true character will come out.
@Jet
Israel is a theocracy where their religion is the ruling government.

Written by EddieGunner on 03.03.2007 at 00:49

@Avenant
in YUgoslavia worked normaly

Yugoslavia was in fact a half-communist/half-capitalist state....these circumstances lead to not-so-friendly relations with USSR...but of course....I don't deny....Yugoslavia was in fact a more open country...with higher standards than USSR....

Written by Ernis on 15.05.2007 at 13:10

Written by EddieGunner on 03.03.2007 at 00:49

@Avenant
in YUgoslavia worked normaly

Yugoslavia was in fact a half-communist/half-capitalist state....these circumstances lead to not-so-friendly relations with USSR...but of course....I don't deny....Yugoslavia was in fact a more open country...with higher standards than USSR....

I agree about it man Yugo(ex-yugo) was diferent, are diferent and will be diferent

@legend destroyer: What I mean is the model of economy, its indeed communal like it was in Socialist countries,or at most, few difference but above all for one purpose: everyone are equal.

Theocracy also is part of Israel structure of goverment, they also are democratic...

Vietnam after reform to be free market ortiented to Socialist...If you get what I mean, like half communist/ half capitalist, its GDP grew, but the gap between poor and rich indeed increases.

Now after the collaspe of USSR, Russia still havent reach higher their GDP of USSR. I dont know if in western or USA, they also calculate GDP based on inside region or not... But as far as I know, almost capitalist countries in Asia besides Japan, majority of GDP focus on the parts like capital, big city. And the low rest from rural, such as Thailand, Malaysia,...

Written by Ernis on 15.05.2007 at 13:10

Written by EddieGunner on 03.03.2007 at 00:49

@Avenant
in YUgoslavia worked normaly

Yugoslavia was in fact a half-communist/half-capitalist state....these circumstances lead to not-so-friendly relations with USSR...but of course....I don't deny....Yugoslavia was in fact a more open country...with higher standards than USSR....

capitalistic no, more opend YES
but Yugoslavia didn'd have good relationship with either USA or USSR we didn't took any side we stayed betwen those two silly nations and their pacts so thats why we worked here normaly as country and haved better standard then USSR and lower then USA
we rocked Dude

I know that very well....that's why it is so sad that your country fell to pieces and war....

About US and USSR....there are extreme poverty in both in fact...but for example in USSR there were almost no bums nor homeless people nor drug addicts....people weren't rich...I agree....the communist party and it's minions were the only ones who had luxurious life....but at the same time....it was possible to survive....in US there are places where mafia controls life, where people have to eat garbage to survive....places with high crime rate(things that didn't exist in USSR for the militia had so enormous control....a good and a bad thing at the same time)...

After the collapse of USSR, Russia has become exactly like US, sharing its negative social aspects....

communism in Yuoslavia was different than USSR's communism in million of things, but still, if you were against communist party you would be sentenced on poor life and/or prison, that sucked. My family never been in any party, my mom is from Bosnia from mixed marriage and dad is Serb, and they didn;t want to join party, myu dad lost job and mom couldn't find any, because they were metalheads if you want, or hippyes in mom's case. We were poor, but after this bloody war, they got jobs and now I am rich man (if you watch money ofcause), so I can's say that my family had any benefit from Yugoslavian Communism/capitalism or whatever. Of cause that Yugoslavian communism worked well, especially comparing USSR, Cambodgia, Indonesia... even China, before, and people lived well, generally. Yugoslavians were rich, again, in generally, they could travel whenever they want, everyone had good flat, car, in one word good standard of life. But, I mind few things to YU communism, big depths they left, only one great leader (of cause, I can't mind this to anyone, but seriously, no one could possible replace marshall Tito), and few things I won't write because I could be banned or something, related to my republic, including our ex-communist politicians. Seriously, I think that Ex-YU should split immidiately after Tito's death, and there would be, altough small, possibility to avoid bloodshed, but greedy politicians (again, members of EX-communist factions, at least lot of them) wanted to get more from that, i that time already wasted country, and that led into war, which, I doubt they ever regreted altough many of their people died, they became rich. Of cause, the last things I wrote looked little offtopic, but they are related to communism, SR Yugoslavia lived in communism until 1999 under one man. Of cause it wasn't called coummunism, it was some kind of socialism/capitalism (yeah right). And the last year of Yugoslavian communism (after Tito's death) were (at least by my opinion, and I didn't make it up, I read some books and watch some documentaries made by people from almost all Ex-YU countries) responsible for war, unstabile politics of those politicians, and their greed; Everyone knew that it is end of the union, but it was in their interest to keep those countries together and to create war.

And about that thing about standard, Americans had bigger standard for sure, but I agree with Viggo in that thing. In Yugoslavia there were no very poor people, on the line of the existence, criminal was on minimum, in Russia too. You could lay on bench with 20.000 Marks or whatever, gold watch and to wake up in the morning and go home normally. In Russia too. But look at Moscow now, level of crime is extremely high, few brutal murders a day, not to mention roberryes, car stealing.. Ant during communism these things were very rare, while in US there was always crime organisations, bad neighbourhoods, poor people, and level of crime was also extremely high. Offtopic, Japan is great example how this world follow US style of life, 40 years ago number of murders was under 20 a year, and watch now, it is not anywhere near any European countri or US but if you compare to those years it is very big difference, and Japanesse people are taking so much from US countries these days

For short, the communist society is a Utopian society... But the obvious problem is that it is theoretical and inapplicable.

Written by [user id=21954] on 14.05.2007 at 19:29

@Necronomicon
Perhaps you should realize that ins situation such as these wikipedia is not the best source to be sighting, it does have it's uses but to use it as a dependable source of information is not in the least bit wise, as it is a community based website because of this, alot of the information can be faulty or one sided. http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/anarchy Here is a better website if you want to check the definition of a word.
And though an Anarchist may think that they do not want chaos; deep dow that is all they want and all they will get. They feel they have been wronged by the government in some way, and therefore feel that the government has to fall. When a government falls and there is nothing to create rules Humans fall back to their primal states.
For some this is compassion beyond all understanding, but for others, and for far more than the latter is greed, anger, rage, destruction. If you doubt this let's look at Japan. In December 1937, Japan took over the Chinese city Nanking. in 4 months the japanese soldiers killed over 300,000 citizens, and raped more than 80,000 women and children, many of the rape victims were mutillated afterwards. Why did they do this, because there were no rules against this, they were allowed to. Not every soldier commmitted these atrocious acts but a large number of them did. People love to not have rules when there aren't is when a man's true character will come out.
@Jet
Israel is a theocracy where their religion is the ruling government.

you have anarchism right here from your own dictionary:
3. a theory that regards the absence of all direct or coercive government as a political ideal and that proposes the cooperative and voluntary association of individuals and groups as the principal mode of organized society.

does it say anyhting about chaos.. hmm nope. and does i arugue against what i said before, no?

and the stuff you said about japan.. it is called war crimes of a imperialistic war and is indeed choas and is not anarchism.
A socity with no DIRECT government it means that people in a community decides what will happen not that everything just goes the way it goes and people are left to do their own buisness. Anarchism is build on socialism and that means equality and solidarity.