Marxist-Leninist

[peter12]

Originally Posted by flip

Yeah that was kind of my point. That does seem unlikely. But how do we then explain the relative peacefulness and success of extreme socialism in these countries.


As a sort of aside here I'd like to point out this is a rather interesting debate going on here and I'm really glad it hasn't deteriorated into petty name calling or making inferences about each others personalities, ethics, morals or beliefs as several of my past debates have turned into in recent weeks. Personal attacks have no place in a political discussion. Especially one about political theory.

Sweden and others have made big steps towards the privatization and freeing up of many sectors in their economies and societies. They also seem to have found, probably because of a nearly uniform national culture, a balance between freedom and socialism. As I said, this is rapidly breaking down with the arrival of immigrants from other countries. The level of racism and ethnic division in any of the Northern countries is shocking to a pluralist Westerner.

[Flame Of Liberty]

Originally Posted by Phanuthier

Azure, how would you feel about a flat tax all around. Rather then the rich paying more tax, everyone pays the same. None of this stuff about the upper class paying more the middle and lower class. And, privatized health care and tier 2 education system, including K-12. You want free market, that is free market. None of this funding for arts stuff, or other industries that financially arn't able to support their own weight, but still bring intangibles to society.

Lets let survival of the fittest thrive

Pardon my ignorance, but if you lower taxes for everyone, does that not mean that everyone has more cash to spend on, I don't know... art for example? among other things?

[flip]

Originally Posted by Flame Of Liberty

Peter, I am kind of dissapointed that you did not cite Hayek's Use of knowledge in society, considering you seem to be a fan

As far as this debate goes, as someone who was born in a communist country, frankly I find it insulting to see attempts to put a lipstick on this pig called communism.

Keep in mind that I am defending communism only insofar as that a) it does not have to be violent or an epic failure and b) just because all of the preexisting examples of it have sucked doesn't mean we can't continue to try and examine its feasibility.

I totally empathize with your hatred of it and understand that no existing (or previous) incarnations have been good.

Think of it this way. Hate the people that instituted it, not the institution itself, the people that put it in place/ran the governments that practised it are at fault here not the theory itself.

[Phanuthier]

Originally Posted by Flame Of Liberty

Pardon my ignorance, but if you lower taxes for everyone, does that not mean that everyone has more cash to spend on, I don't know... art for example? among other things?

Well under this extremist capitalism (which I think sides on the side of the USA, personally) ... pretty sure that extra cash would go into things like paying your own medical bills, your kids education, etc

My apologies if you feel insulted about my stance, are you from a former soviet state? The fear tactics et al emloyed by the Russians were horrifying beyond belief. So I sympathize with you if you had to live through any of that.

My argument is purely economic, the consequences of communism/socialism are a different story. (And from what I know, China is not nearly to the degree that the Polish, Hungarians, Slovaks et al suffered from)

My argument was merely to show, that for the outcomes of what current economic critics of extreme communists are, capitalist states aren't too much better, and I find that they'll come to (near) the same fate.. And all roads seem to lead to China vs USA.

Quite frankly, ideologically, I think Canada has it about right. I consider Canada to be more on the socialist side, however.

[peter12]

Originally Posted by flip

Keep in mind that I am defending communism only insofar as that a) it does not have to be violent or an epic failure and b) just because all of the preexisting examples of it have sucked doesn't mean we can't continue to try and examine its feasibility.

I totally empathize with your hatred of it and understand that no existing (or previous) incarnations have been good.

Think of it this way. Hate the people that instituted it, not the institution itself, the people that put it in place/ran the governments that practised it are at fault here not the theory itself.

But the theory led to the institution. Just like our institutions are based around, say John Locke and others. Communist systems were based around theories of their own. In fact, some of their practitioners, such as Lenin and Mao, were also some of the main theorists of communism. It's an evil theory, one designed for coercion and elitist arrogance.

[peter12]

Originally Posted by Phanuthier

Well under this extremist capitalism (which I think sides on the side of the USA, personally) ... pretty sure that extra cash would go into things like paying your own medical bills, your kids education, etc

My apologies if you feel insulted about my stance, are you from a former soviet state? The fear tactics et al emloyed by the Russians were horrifying beyond belief. So I sympathize with you if you had to live through any of that.

My argument is purely economic, the consequences of communism/socialism are a different story. (And from what I know, China is not nearly to the degree that the Polish, Hungarians, Slovaks et al suffered from)

Perhaps as many as 30-60 million perished in the Cultural Revolution.

I would like to hear of the economic possibilities of socialism and how you think they would interact with human nature as we know it. Think of how you would accomplish this without transforming humanity.

[flip]

Originally Posted by peter12

But the theory led to the institution. Just like our institutions are based around, say John Locke and others. Communist systems were based around theories of their own. In fact, some of their practitioners, such as Lenin and Mao, were also some of the main theorists of communism. It's an evil theory, one designed for coercion and elitist arrogance.

See this is where we'd be at a fundamental disagreement and likely have reached an impasse.

I probably can't convince you otherwise and you for certain wouldn't be able to convince me that communism is inherantly evil and designed for coercion and elitist arrogance.

We'll have to agree to disagree.

Just be lucky we're not in a communist country or one of us would be dragged off by the secret police in the middle of the night for our views.

[peter12]

Originally Posted by flip

See this is where we'd be at a fundamental disagreement and likely have reached an impasse.

I probably can't convince you otherwise and you for certain wouldn't be able to convince me that communism is inherantly evil and designed for coercion and elitist arrogance.

We'll have to agree to disagree.

Just be lucky we're not in a communist country or one of us would be dragged off by the secret police in the middle of the night for our views.;)

I win.

[Phanuthier]

Originally Posted by peter12

Perhaps as many as 30-60 million perished in the Cultural Revolution.

I would like to hear of the economic possibilities of socialism and how you think they would interact with human nature as we know it. Think of how you would accomplish this without transforming humanity.

As I just editted my post above ...

I think Canada has a good system. You'll have to pardon me since its not easy for an engineer to talk politics with a masters of poli sci here.

- Flat tax for general needs (police, fire-fighters, security, etc)
- Taxes based on community for services that are community focused. If you have more money, you should have more luxery. If you can't afford it, tough beans.
- public education, good funding for post-secondary as well
- privitized banking. recent events have me bias.
- government supported/invested entrepreurship. Its in the best interests of the state to support this, helps the entrepreneur as well. In return, the government gets a stake and some control and regulation.
- optional welfare. If you want to donate, great. But welfare should not be offered; rather, those who need it can be supported by those that are willing to donate to it.
- tight control on private companies, the government should have a say in how a business is run - not alot of power, but some. For instance, not let all the work be outsourced to Sri Lanka and Mexico the way the USA has.
- tier 2 health care. Very basics of support are offered to the public, but the wealthy should be able to have more if they can afford it
- as an aside, I think government should have longer terms. I find there isn't enough long-term planning in this democracy/capitalist run society because of the constant need to fight for votes... whether its good for the nation or not. I also think you should have a certain level of education to vote, be it high school or to pass a test to test your understanding of economics, as all votes should be educated votes - something I don't think we're seeing in democratic votes.

Those are a few values, to name a few. Far from China, but far from the USA. Quite Canadian, actually, with a little more on the side of socialism. My biggest beef with the US is that its short-term gains, long term pains; greed and corruption because of little regulaton; poor health care; and the biggest issue that will plague this country, poor education system.

On the side of selfishness... I would like to live in almost pure capitalism.

[Flame Of Liberty]

Originally Posted by flip

Keep in mind that I am defending communism only insofar as that a) it does not have to be violent or an epic failure and b) just because all of the preexisting examples of it have sucked doesn't mean we can't continue to try and examine its feasibility.

I totally empathize with your hatred of it and understand that no existing (or previous) incarnations have been good.

Think of it this way. Hate the people that instituted it, not the institution itself, the people that put it in place/ran the governments that practised it are at fault here not the theory itself.

a) yes it does. without market (real) prices, economic calculation is not possible, and if by an epic failure you mean poverty and economic collapse, then yes it does.

b) yes, by all means, do continue and try and examine, but the way I see it, the problem is that communism continues, tries and examines people who do not want any part of that.

You know, this notion that "the theory is good, its the practice that has failed" is what was driving me crazy for years. I've heard it from my canadian, american and australian teachers, friends, colleagues, you name it.

Of course not one of them ever lived under communism and of course not one of them bothered to read works of L. von Mises and F.A. von Hayek (for example) that clearly demonstrate that communism (or socialism, as an economic system) cannot work and will not ever work, due to several reasons (problems with economic calculation, problems of knowledge, etc. etc.)

Then I stopped being bothered by it, and decided not to let myself to be dragged into any debates about communism. Until now

[Rathji]

Communism has never worked in a manner that allowed for the full application of basic human rights, that does not mean it will never and could never work, however if I was a betting man I would be betting on the market economy every time.

[Azure]

Originally Posted by Phanuthier

Azure - I meant, everyone pays the same amount of tax.

Well, 10% across the board would be the SAME amount for everyone.

[Flame Of Liberty]

Originally Posted by Azure

Well, 10% across the board would be the SAME amount for everyone.

?

No it wouldn't, if taxable salaries are different amounts.

Flat tax rate is one big myth.

[Azure]

Originally Posted by Flame Of Liberty

?

No it wouldn't, if taxable salaries are different amounts.

Flat tax rate is one big myth.

As in 10% of your salary goes to taxes, the rest you can keep?

I don't care how much you make....10% goes to the government.

[peter12]

Originally Posted by Rathji

Communism has never worked in a manner that allowed for the full application of basic human rights, that does not mean it will never and could never work, however if I was a betting man I would be betting on the market economy every time.

Do you believe in science at all? What you just said is totally irrational. If an experiment repeatedly fails, we chuck out the crappy hypothesis and go with the one that can hold up under repeated investigation.

[Flame Of Liberty]

Well, I guess Phanutier meant everyone pays the same amount of tax dollars, no? Say, a head tax of $1000 a year/person. That would be a true flat tax.

[Phanuthier]

Originally Posted by Flame Of Liberty

Well, I guess Phanutier meant everyone pays the same amount of tax dollars, no? Say, a head tax of $1000 a year/person. That would be a true flat tax.

Yeah that was what I was saying. I just sort of gave up.

[peter12]

Originally Posted by fotze

Well I guess that explains the communism thing.

Whatever, man. You married into it.

[Azure]

Originally Posted by Flame Of Liberty

Well, I guess Phanutier meant everyone pays the same amount of tax dollars, no? Say, a head tax of $1000 a year/person. That would be a true flat tax.

Perhaps.

But the flat tax I'm talking about is in terms of percentage, not in the amount of dollars.

[Flame Of Liberty]

Yeah but at the end of the day, everyone would pay different amount of dollars. How is that different from what we have now?

I'll take a progressive system of 3%, 5% and 7% tax brackets over a 10% flat rate, eventhough I would end up with a higher % than some other sucker, and I am sure every pro-capitalist would.

It's all about the dollars you have to hand over to the government, not about percentages.