national communist
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
19-09-2015, 08:13 PM
national communist
I just decided to become politically correct. I'm declaring myself a communist.

I'm a communist. I'm a national communist. Not a part of the comintern.

You might say that violates basic tenets about marxism. Sure. I'm not marxist and not fanatical or religious or extremist about my views like bolshevik extremists and red-wing terrorists. I can have solidarity with the workers of other nations, and wish them them the best. But, my version of communism means each nation takes care of their people and folk. Immigration is therefore limited and checked, and controlled. Not to hate on or repress other people. That's the wrong-minded view. In sooth it's to preserve and protect and benefit the folk. Now if they are doing really well, really really really well and others neighbors not so, and they could use a hand, help can, could and should be proferred, but not help which affects future genetic stock of either or both nations. We have a debt to our ancestors and potential descendants and grandchildren. That's national communism in a nutshell.

I know it's not completely politically correct of me, but y'all will have to accept this fact. At least I'm a left-winger now Smile
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
19-09-2015, 08:29 PM
RE: national communist
Communism is never going to succeed because of human selfishness. I read Capitol. Marx was an idiot who failed to understand the human race.

Read Nietzsche instead. Or Voltaire.

Go and read about Leonard Cheshire's failed experiment with socialism.

It does not work.

NOTE: Member, Tomasia uses this site to slander other individuals. He then later proclaims it a joke, but not in public.
I will call him a liar and a dog here and now.
Banjo.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
19-09-2015, 08:58 PM
RE: national communist
(19-09-2015 08:13 PM)viking Wrote:  ...
I'm a communist. I'm a national communist. Not a part of the comintern.
...

I'm curious as to how you decided that this is for you.

In particular, why the decision to be national rather than local?

Cheers

Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
20-09-2015, 02:04 AM
RE: national communist
Nationalism in marxism-leninism isn't nothing new. If I recall correctly Orlando Figes in his book A People's Tragedy: The Russian Revolution: 1891-1924 wrote about nationalism mixing with m-l as soon as during Russian Civil War.

You say immigration is controlled? What about emigration? Citizens will be able to leave another "workers paradise" or they will be "encouraged" to stay?

As for debt you could think you have one, but I certainly do not feel in the same way.

About accepting the fact: we all have to accept what fact? That you're claiming to be something called national communist? I could not care less about political stance of someone that I do not know.

The first revolt is against the supreme tyranny of theology, of the phantom of God. As long as we have a master in heaven, we will be slaves on earth.

Mikhail Bakunin.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Szuchow's post
20-09-2015, 03:09 AM
RE: national communist
(19-09-2015 08:29 PM)Banjo Wrote:  Communism is never going to succeed because of human selfishness. I read Capitol. Marx was an idiot who failed to understand the human race.

Read Nietzsche instead. Or Voltaire.

Go and read about Leonard Cheshire's failed experiment with socialism.

It does not work.

Marx, an idiot? Ouch.
I think philosophers should not be judged without keeping the time they lived in mind. Anyone can seem like an idiot this way.

"Behind every great pirate, there is a great butt."
-Guybrush Threepwood-
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes undergroundp's post
20-09-2015, 05:42 AM
RE: national communist
(20-09-2015 03:09 AM)undergroundp Wrote:  
(19-09-2015 08:29 PM)Banjo Wrote:  Communism is never going to succeed because of human selfishness. I read Capitol. Marx was an idiot who failed to understand the human race.

Read Nietzsche instead. Or Voltaire.

Go and read about Leonard Cheshire's failed experiment with socialism.

It does not work.

Marx, an idiot? Ouch.
I think philosophers should not be judged without keeping the time they lived in mind. Anyone can seem like an idiot this way.


As I read that book I kept thinking "No no no no...."

Marx was, if I recall, part of the Anti Max Stirner set. I''ll take Max anyday. Even though my respect for him is not that high. Nietzsche was the man around those times.

Having said that, the serfdom was outdated and needed to change. Revolution was what was chosen. The system set up in its place was quite simply, a failure. As history has shown. Look at what became of Trosky. It was never going to work. Look at the great famine in China.

One funny thing. I had put 300 dollars in my copy of Capitol for safe keeping. I forgot about it. As I was about to sell the book I found my 300 dollars. Smile

NOTE: Member, Tomasia uses this site to slander other individuals. He then later proclaims it a joke, but not in public.
I will call him a liar and a dog here and now.
Banjo.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
20-09-2015, 08:00 AM
RE: national communist
Anyone who looks to organized politics for the answers is as doomed as anyone who looks to religion for salvation.

It's all just smoke, mirrors, lies and deception.

.......................................

The difference between prayer and masturbation - is when a guy is through masturbating - he has something to show for his efforts.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like onlinebiker's post
20-09-2015, 08:07 AM
RE: national communist
(20-09-2015 05:42 AM)Banjo Wrote:  
(20-09-2015 03:09 AM)undergroundp Wrote:  Marx, an idiot? Ouch.
I think philosophers should not be judged without keeping the time they lived in mind. Anyone can seem like an idiot this way.


As I read that book I kept thinking "No no no no...."

Marx was, if I recall, part of the Anti Max Stirner set. I''ll take Max anyday. Even though my respect for him is not that high. Nietzsche was the man around those times.

Having said that, the serfdom was outdated and needed to change. Revolution was what was chosen. The system set up in its place was quite simply, a failure. As history has shown. Look at what became of Trosky. It was never going to work. Look at the great famine in China.

One funny thing. I had put 300 dollars in my copy of Capitol for safe keeping. I forgot about it. As I was about to sell the book I found my 300 dollars. Smile

Well, just because we disagree with a philosopher it doesn't mean they're stupid. Of course Marx wasn't exactly scientific, but many of his ideas changed the world. That should count for something. You can't even be a politician without having studied Marx.

I'm not a communist and don't take this as a defense of communism, but the fact that something failed due to unforeseen circumstances does not mean that the original idea was faulty. Besides, Marx was only a philosopher. He wasn't responsible for what happened in Russia and China.

Philosophers make mistakes. They're not perfect, but that does not lessen their worth. Marx was a brilliant mind and I don't think the word "idiot" does him justice. That's all.

And it's always nice to find forgotten money Tongue
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 4 users Like undergroundp's post
20-09-2015, 08:22 AM
RE: national communist
(20-09-2015 08:07 AM)undergroundp Wrote:  
(20-09-2015 05:42 AM)Banjo Wrote:  As I read that book I kept thinking "No no no no...."

Marx was, if I recall, part of the Anti Max Stirner set. I''ll take Max anyday. Even though my respect for him is not that high. Nietzsche was the man around those times.

Having said that, the serfdom was outdated and needed to change. Revolution was what was chosen. The system set up in its place was quite simply, a failure. As history has shown. Look at what became of Trosky. It was never going to work. Look at the great famine in China.

One funny thing. I had put 300 dollars in my copy of Capitol for safe keeping. I forgot about it. As I was about to sell the book I found my 300 dollars. Smile

Well, just because we disagree with a philosopher it doesn't mean they're stupid. Of course Marx wasn't exactly scientific, but many of his ideas changed the world. That should count for something. You can't even be a politician without having studied Marx.

I'm not a communist and don't take this as a defense of communism, but the fact that something failed due to unforeseen circumstances does not mean that the original idea was faulty. Besides, Marx was only a philosopher. He wasn't responsible for what happened in Russia and China.

Philosophers make mistakes. They're not perfect, but that does not lessen their worth. Marx was a brilliant mind and I don't think the word "idiot" does him justice. That's all.

And it's always nice to find forgotten money Tongue


Of course we are all different and hopefully come to different conclusions. I simply present mine at the time I read it.

I felt that not including human selfishness, after over thousands of years of written history recording it, was a very bad conclusion.

Like I said, the serfdom/landowner relationship was outdated and needed to be changed. It was with murder and slaughter with the murder of Trotsky crowning it followed by communist dictatorships beginning with Stalin. So the system collapsed The world over within a few decades.

That system was faulty from the start. Marx was wrong! Had he included human selfishness in his philosophy, he may have come up with a more useful realistic and effective system.

As it happens he failed.

At least in my opinion.

NOTE: Member, Tomasia uses this site to slander other individuals. He then later proclaims it a joke, but not in public.
I will call him a liar and a dog here and now.
Banjo.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
20-09-2015, 08:52 AM
RE: national communist
(20-09-2015 08:07 AM)undergroundp Wrote:  Well, just because we disagree with a philosopher it doesn't mean they're stupid. Of course Marx wasn't exactly scientific, but many of his ideas changed the world. That should count for something.


Sure, his ideas changed the world. But what was the cost of such change? And, yes it counts, though not necessarily in favour of Marx.

(20-09-2015 08:07 AM)undergroundp Wrote:  You can't even be a politician without having studied Marx.

I highly doubt it. It's ascribing too much importance to this guy.

(20-09-2015 08:07 AM)undergroundp Wrote:  I'm not a communist and don't take this as a defense of communism, but the fact that something failed due to unforeseen circumstances does not mean that the original idea was faulty.

Nor it mean that such idea was good. Also unforseen circumstances or just being nothing more than utopia and/or mean to take the wealth and freedom of others away?

(20-09-2015 08:07 AM)undergroundp Wrote:  Besides, Marx was only a philosopher. He wasn't responsible for what happened in Russia and China.

Depends how one look at this. Without Marx and his writings such horror could not have come to pass. I would not say that he was directly responsible, but in my opinion Marx name never will be clear of the odium of XX century tragedies.


(20-09-2015 08:22 AM)Banjo Wrote:  It was with murder and slaughter with the murder of Trotsky crowning it followed by communist dictatorships beginning with Stalin.

Why it's Trotsky death so important? Sure he had a big role back then, but I would say that he was just minor nuisance in great scheme of things. Also he was not innocent victim, he just reaped what he helped to sow, same with other members of old guard. It's the innocents lives that really matters I would say.

(20-09-2015 08:22 AM)Banjo Wrote:  That system was faulty from the start. Marx was wrong! Had he included human selfishness in his philosophy, he may have come up with a more useful realistic and effective system.

As it happens he failed.

At least in my opinion.

One can argue that what Marx envisioned wasn't whatever Lenin created, so as it goes Marx wasn't wrong.

I think that what Lenin created is what will happen if someone would try to recreate Marx utopia; I certainly can be wrong but I don't think that there is need to try again what already failed.

The first revolt is against the supreme tyranny of theology, of the phantom of God. As long as we have a master in heaven, we will be slaves on earth.

Mikhail Bakunin.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Szuchow's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: