all bullshit answers.
cool story bro
Mao is laughing so hard at this.
anyone who knows what Communism is is laughing at this.
I’m sure anyone who knows what Communism is is laughing at you as well.
Communism is a stateless classless society. Ill keep repeating it. Right wingers are very slow. Communist parties do not bring Communism. It has never once happened. Even Marx blatantly follows the definition i gave. He simply gave a system to achieve Communism, according to his view.
I like how you assume I’m a right-winger. I’m not.
And I like how you quoted from Wikipedia, then said it’s not the only source, yet the list of sources returned by a Google search is what gets rejected as bullshit. Lovely.
Really, really like how you don’t even bother to read any of the links and just choose to repeat your stupidity of going by communism in theory rather than look at the numerous examples of it in practice. Typical.
But what I like most of all is you warning us that you’ll keep repeating it. Fine by me. Not my place to force your head out of your ass long enough to take in information. Saves me the trouble.
Idiots named Necrotrophic have no business calling anyone slow when they can’t keep up.
The problem with what you’re saying is that you can’t tell the difference between people who call themselves communists and what actual communism is. You probably think Nazis were socialist too, right?
The whole point to Marxism is to achieve communism. This is why he advocated the dictatorship of the proletariat. This stage is not communism you shithead.
Your whole tirade about Wikipedia makes no sense, but I can tell you’re upset because someone mentioned a word u don’t like.
I’m literally 100% right about all of this. Its such an easy topic too because theres tons of information out there about this but since communism is just a political curse word, you guys fall for it and believe its supposed to be some scary totalitarian state when Communism was always about the removal of the state.
Oh yay one those “Thats not real communism” assholes.
So anyways, this supposed to be a thread about alternative energy sources, good one or jank like the Solar roadways. Not Political economic structures.
We need to bring this shit uncontrolled or the mods will shut this thread as one retard thinks that Wikipedia is the unquestionable authority on all things academic.
Necrotrophic, your wrong, you sources are known to lack credibility, hence why schools and colleges refuse to accept Wiki as a credible source.
Only people that should really be using Wiki is people with already having knowledge of the material and can sniff out the BS from the facts.
From the actual dictionary I copy paste from Dictionary.com, if you want to debate this know that my hardbound paper base Websters dictionary matches this description.
That already debunks your BS definition from Wiki saying Communism is state and classless. Nothing about actual socialism or Communism ignores class.
You still have your ruling parties.
Here from the Encyclopedia Britannica, a real Encyclopedia that verified and made credible by the International academic community.
The Word STATE is used. Communism is a form of government, without a state you can’t even have a government. State = Government
Thus your own definition is bull shit. Just drop being stupid, don’t reply as every time you do you only prove how stupid you are.
While on China, they are on record for having the Worst Air Quality due to a complete lack of environmental regulations. Children are not allowed to play outside due to concerns with how the outside polluted air will effect their health and development. The product of short sighted quick gains instead of looking into long term sustainability.
Something even the right-winged who aren’t brain dead are noticing.
actually im one of those “knows propaganda when he sees it” assholes.
I’m also uptight about definitions. I can’t stand seeing the bullshit in political discourse where words are often given their opposite meaning as a way to slander and avoid rational, unemotional evaluation of ideas.
You think communism is stupid? Cool. I actually don’t really care. I’m not a Communist myself, and I see flaws with some of the stuff they originally brought up. I’m also not a fan of Marx either because the idea that a dictatorship could bring Communism and remove its self is honestly stupid.
But I do want people to discuss communism for what it is. Not for the state-capitalist shit that people are actually talking about. what you guys are doing is lkke criticizing democracy because the Democratic people’s republic of korea sucks. they aren’t a democracy
Stop fucking with definitions and ill gladly stop posting about this.
I wasnt citing wikipedia, I was making of you for not even having the ability to check something so readily available as wikipedia before derping all over this thread. If you dont know anything about a subject, you can look at wikipedia and check its sources.
Speaking of lacking credibility, you cite dictionary.com? LOL. Dictionaries are not adequate, especially for words as polarized as communism. Encyclopedias will always be better for understanding these sorts of things. Dictionaries only need to get people to understand how words are colloquially used. They dont even bother getting into the history of propaganda related to a word. American propaganda is all over the place.
When you cited EB, the definition given is pretty much right, bit not perfect. Socialism isn’t really tied to Marx, and if you want to get technical Communism isnt either because there were a lot of people around during his day that rejected his ideas. Most earlier sociologists (which Marx was) use the word state differently than the ability to govern.
Anyway,
"It is evident that the new society must be much more solidly constructed than capitalism. As soon as the fundamental contradictions of capitalism have destroyed the capitalist system, upon the ruins of that system there must arise a new society which will be free from the contradictions of the old. That is to say, the communist method of production must present the following characteristics: In the first place it must be an organized society; it must be free from anarchy of production, from competition between individual entrepreneurs, from wars and crises. In the second place it must be a classless society, not a society in which the two halves are at eternal enmity one with the other; it must not be a society in which one class exploits the other. Now a society in which there are no classes, and in which production is organized, can only be a society of comrades, a communist society based upon labour."
https://www.marxists.org/archive/bukharin/works/1920/abc/03.htm
From E.B again:
Classless society, in Marxism, the ultimate condition of social organization, expected to occur when true communism is achieved. According to Karl Marx (1818–83), the primary function of the state is to repress the lower classes of society in the interests of the ruling class. However, after the class struggle has resulted in the victory of the proletariat and the establishment of a socialist society, there will be no further need for such a repressive institution; with the disappearance of classes, the state is expected to “wither away.”
I win, again. I’m used to it though.
I’m pretty sure I can tell the difference between people who call themselves communist and communism. One is a person, the other isn’t. As long as you subscribe to Marx’s ideas on it, then calling yourself “communist” seems to make sense. What other difference is there?
And as for Nazis being Socialist, let’s see:
[details=Spoiler]https://mises.org/library/why-nazism-was-socialism-and-why-socialism-totalitarian
[/details]
So maybe. Or maybe not. But we’re not talking about Socialism, we’re talking about Communism. Stay on topic.
I know what Marx’s ideas were for Communism. The government has to have the control / dictatorship in order to force the result. He just died before seeing it in action. Rest of the world got to see it in action, numerous times. Starting with Lenin, who used Socialism to put that whole dictatorship and single-party thing in place. How’d that go? For that matter, how’s it gone every time it’s been tried? And yes, it’s been tried. It’s had the results it’s had. It’s still in use today.
Your argument seems to be “well it didn’t achieve the goal Marx wanted so it can’t be Communist”. My argument is “lol ok”. Here’s a question – if these parties base themselves on Marxist ideology, including the parts of the single party / dictatorship and having that much control over the lives of the people, and given that these steps are part of that Communist Manifesto that Marx wrote about, then it would be fair to call them Communist in reference to that, wouldn’t it? I think so. No wait, I know so. And that’s what they are. They support the idea enough to call themselves Communist parties, with Marxism as the basis for how they govern. So guess what, they get called Communist. What a shock.
And that word would be “u”. This isn’t Twitter.
You’re literally 100% delusional, stupid, and in need of shutting the fuck up. It’s an easy topic because there’s tons of information? Yeah, I just gave you a fucking list full of that information. And all you did was toss it aside as “bullshit”, because, like many retards, you can’t be bothered to look at information that doesn’t fit enough into your tiny brain without knocking something like how to wipe your ass form your memory.
You: China was never communist.
Me: List of articles on why China was / is communist.
You: LOL BULLSHIT THAT’S NOT COMMUNIST
If I had to describe this conversation in one word, it would be “whydoiwastemytimewithstupidpeople”.
Didn’t just swing and miss. Swung, lost the bat, and killed a child in the stands. Shame.
You “won”? Only thing you won was this consolation prize of a chair with a dildo attached to sit the fuck down on.
Don’t ever argue with a genius again.
Hm, you almost had me. The dildo part, followed by the genius statement makes the trolling too obvious.
You do have what it takes to be an amazing troll one day though. Just be a little more subtle.
You want me to remove those parts? I can remove those parts, since that’s all you seem to care about reading and responding to. Rest of my brilliant post will remain.
No trolling. Just me being shit loads smarter than you’ve ever been.
I think kinetic roadways are a much better solution.
Like this?
Necrotrophic: Tries to define Communism. Tells people not to use definitions of Communism.
Voted Trump, eh? 
I used the correct version of communism without getting confused by parties that referred to themselves as communist and weren’t.
Even a brief overview of history will reveal that those in power use names that sound appealing to gain support. National Socialism for example, had nothing to do with socialism. Thankfully most people caught that one. the DPRK is not Democratic. Its pretty common, and its use is ubiquitous in legislation, the Patriot act, citizens united for example.
ALL rulers use propaganda. There will never, ever be hierarchy without it.
You used a definition of communism by Wikipedia, then chided someone for using a definition elsewhere.
Sean Spicer, you are.
Should I just change the thread title to “Is China Communist or not? the Real definition of Communism” ?
No. I’ve already explained why I mentioned Wikipedia and used multiple sources.
I was willing to let it die but some people just won’t stop addressing me over the fact that they don’t know what they’re talking about and are sensitive about it