Should the Gov. be able to ban you from meeting with political parties?

[2-0-Sixx]

@Attay,

In my opinion, neither capitalism nor communism work in practice, alone. That is why I find it incredible that so many people here seem to adhere so blindly to one or the other. I.e. ”Capitalism good, communism bad” vs. ”Communism good, capitalism bad” when both are gross oversimplifications.

I hope this is not also directed at me since I don’t “blindly” follow anything; I read, study, research etc.

Though they are opposing thoughts, a political system where both political inclinations are represented simultaneously can accomplish a LOT of good. The best example of the type of society I think you are trying to describe would be Scandinavian welfare states (nothing to do with how the word 'welfare' is understood in the USA) or the ”Scandinavian model”, of which Sweden would probably be the best example. The "welfare" concept is basically the intention of controlling unemployment and poverty by means of governmental action and regulations.

While it is true that Sweden and other countries accomplish a lot of good, they are still capitalist nations which oppress and are controlled by big business. Take Sweden for example. Sweden is supposed to be one of the most peaceful nations on the planet and yet, just recently, they used violent methods to tyrannize innocent civilians who were speaking their minds. Not much freedom when people are murdered by police. Not much freedom when one very wealthy Swedish family owns over 30% of the media and 80% of the newspapers are right-wing.

This is perfect example of capitalism; EVERY time they feel threatened, they will use violent methods to crush their “opponents”. EVERY capitalist state will eventually be tarnished by big business, greed etc. All capitalist nations are designed for corruption, as in the case of Sweden.

The Nordic model can be characterized as a democratic system with rather subtle class difference, and is in broad outline perhaps the most equitable and humane society that history has seen, though certainly NOT flawless (I'm not here to glorify it as such - just to give some perspective). I strongly recommend familiarizing yourself with the idea, if interested. Kinda like "social democracy", if you will, and operates on controlled market economy (or "mixed economy").

Note: For the sake of argument, Norway and Sweden got top positions (1. & 2.) in the UN human development index for 2004. ”A composite index measuring average achievement in three basic dimensions of human development—a long and healthy life, knowledge and a decent standard of living”

….

I strongly disagree. I believe a market economy is the only plausible option (Although market economy doesn’t equal capitalism – capitalism simply functions in a market economy. I just understood that this is what you meant by ”a little capitalism”). It just has to be regulated and controlled.

How can it be regulated and controlled? How can you ensure the greedy capitalists will not be the ones controlling and regulating?

One of the fundamental flaws of Communism as theory is that it forgets the individual – If only people were as hard-working and self-sacrificing as, say, ants. Heh. Marx was greatly a product of his times, and it is hard to take his dialectics regarding Communism seriously in this day and age. Plus he succumbed to the number one sin of the materialistic worldview – oversimplification.

I suppose this is the “human nature” argument.

You have to remember that under communism, the incentive is different. The incentive to come up with more efficient ways to do things is that we'd have to work less time to do the same amount of work, which means, more free time, vacation, more time for research etc. "The amount of NECESSARY labor needed to produce the things we NEED"

Why work more efficiently at work if you know you have to be there for 8 hours no matter what? I know I don't.
Marx explained that "conditions determine consciousness". In other words, our environment determines our mentality.

You also have to remember that humans got where we are today not by crushing and killing eachother, it's more about communication and working together. Only by cooperation have we been able to hunt successfully, buld shelters/cities, and advance.

Under capitalism, the ruling class does everything they can to effect the way we think. Through media, education, religion, etc. we are raised with values of a capitalist system, which is that 'dog eat dog', 'every man for himself' mentality. This isn't human nature, this is something we have been conditioned to think.

This kind of mentality doesn't benefit the common man...only the very rich. It's amazing how some people think this is fair, we produce the wealth socially, but the profit goes into private hands.

This mentality would slowly go away under communism. Since conditions determine consciousness, new generations would see the world entirly different. Think about when babies are born. They do not know about race, violence, sexual herrasment, being materialistic etc. they only learn about it those things later when they are pointed out.

You have to remember that Human nature, like all things, in a constant state of change.

 

[Spitz]

about a week ago i was wathcin eighter 48 hours or dateline. i cant remember i was half asleep. but it was a hour long thing about some new law that limits cuban americans from visiting cuba but a few times per year. and they was with a dude that could never go back and he was on his last visit. cause they was his aunts and not considerd immedite family.

some shit bush came up with. im not gonna speak on it cause like i said i was half asleep and didnt get to get all the info. someone fill me in on it

 

[tadou]

So on one hand, Bush is an idiot.

And on the other, he's able to systematically undermine a Communist government in Cuba by disallowing the visits of non-essential family members, in a psychological attempt to strike at the emotions of everyday Cubans.



..........

 

[Spitz]

So on one hand, Bush is an idiot.

And on the other, he's able to systematically undermine a Communist government in Cuba by disallowing the visits of non-essential family members, in a psychological attempt to strike at the emotions of everyday Cubans.



..........

i think it was more of an attempt to reduce the amount of money (over 2 billion last year) that american cubans send back home. but hes still a fuckin idiot. you really think he comes up with these policys himself. no. hes to stupid. for the life in me i could never pic bush in a room with his top advisors goin toe to toe in a debate on any subject.

like bush walked in one morn and said aye yall i got this plan to limit american funds being sent to cuba. HAHAHAH naw man he does what hes told to do by his partys other leaders. and his close advisors.

 

[WHITE DEVIL]

Bush is a tool for his cabinet - that is basically even confirmed by White House sources. No one has any misgivings about where the intellectual and organizational thrust of his policies comes from.

 

[tadou]

^^ Basically confirmed by noone you can name specifically. Got it.

 

[WHITE DEVIL]

1. Bush's request to testify before the 9/11 commission with Dick Cheney at his side. (LOL)

2. Dick Cheney issuing "shoot down" order on 9/11 and other tactical decisions without consulting the president, which he and Condoleeza fumbled and consistently conflicted about in testimony.

3. The White House's scuttling of critical reporters and press who may ask hard questions of Bush. This administration has been notorious for allowing access to only their select press corps, even remarking publicly about the "liberal media".

4. (AP) On several occasions since 9/11, in speeches before the Iraq war and since, Cheney has run ahead of Bush on policy, only to be lassoed back in by the White House. In August 2002, he dismissed U.N. inspections just before Bush called for them in a speech. Later that fall the veep suggested in another speech that Iraq might have had a hand in 9/11, forcing Bush to deny later that it did. And some staffers thought it was interesting that Bush and Cheney insisted on testify-ing before the commission together.

5. Bush has reportedly been schooled often by Condi in poly sci and foreign affairs.

6. Paul O'Neill (former Bush staffer):


"Bush...disengaged president who "didn't know the questions to ask." On policy making: "It was a broken process, or rather no process at all; there seemed to be no apparatus to assess policy and deliberate effectively, to create coherent governance... Surround a president like that with one of the most experience-heavy teams of any recent administration, and you have senior officials both formulating and, in some cases conducting, U.S. policy." Mr. Bush appears entirely overwhelmed by his long-time political adviser Karl Rove and a policy direction set by his political contributor-base, and by Dick Cheney, assertions of the neocon world-view of the military and the interests of the powerful energy-construction industries.
There was nobody in charge. "This president was starting from scratch on most issues and relying on ideologues like Karl Rove and now Dick (Cheney)...It was not just the president's credibility around the world. It was credibility with his most senior officials." "

 

[tadou]

Blah blah blah.