Nihilism and Anarchy

[The One and Only...]

Originally Posted by davinxtk

I knew this guy had a lot more going for him than the red star in his avatar.


Read your Marx, bitches. Zhukov is bang on in this one, regardless of the wool of deceit that the west has pulled over your eyes. Communism isn't the fascist dictatorships that have sprung up here and there accross the globe. Those are totalitarian governments that can only serve to supplement a capitalist economy by causing wars.
No, communism is so much more dangerous than these states run by brutal maniacs that capitalists are even more scared of it than they are of labor unions.
You've been deceived your entire life about the true meaning of the color red.
Read a book, it'll do you well.

I'm sure most of us are quite aware of communist theory.

[Ant10708]

"I'm sure most of us are quite aware of communist theory."


Not all of us are smart enough to take AP statistics.

[kahljorn]

Most of us are smart enough to drop out of highschool

[Zhukov]

'C' is generally used when it is the name of a formal party (like the Communist Party of France) and 'c' is used when one is discussing the communist socio-economic system or ideas in general.

It's hardly a rule that one has to stick to. personaly, I don't care whether 'C' or 'c' is used in any situation, and I use either randomly. Some people use the capital as a sign of respect, but that's kind of silly. 'C' or 'c' doesn't mean any ideological difference.

I'm hoping that will suffice as your sentence, Zhukov...

Oh, You shouldn't have.

I'm sure most of us are quite aware of communist theory.

I'm impressed.


By the way, the Stalin sig is a Vince quote, I'm not a stalinist if anyone cares.

[davinxtk]

Thanks for the sociology lesson, jackass. While your somewhat distorted concept of the point you're trying to make might pan out well in your head, it doesn't quite work itself out in the context of this thread. What I saw, and participated in, was a foolish disagreement that seemed to be ignorant of your oh-so-eloquently described dichotomy.
You have this idea that there's some holy division between commnuist principles and any Communist party. You're building a linguistic wall based on specific examples and attempting to argue based on rules that nobody else follows. Thank you, Red Queen.

Get off your more-educated-than-thou trip and quit splitting hairs.

[Ant10708]

Originally Posted by davinxtk

Thanks for the sociology lesson, jackass. While your somewhat distorted concept of the point you're trying to make might pan out well in your head, it doesn't quite work itself out in the context of this thread. What I saw, and participated in, was a foolish disagreement that seemed to be ignorant of your oh-so-eloquently described dichotomy.
You have this idea that there's some holy division between commnuist principles and any Communist party. You're building a linguistic wall based on specific examples and attempting to argue based on rules that nobody else follows. Thank you, Red Queen.

Get off your more-educated-than-thou trip and quit splitting hairs.

Who is that addressed to?

[davinxtk]

Preechr.

[Preechr]

Sorry, davin... I didn't mean for you to think that entire post was directed at you. I can see how you thought that, though. I sort of started off talking to you, then went off on a tangent there...

However, if by rules I'm making up you're referring to the capitalization stuff, I didn't make that up. Like Zhukov, I generally don't follow the form exactly either, but it's helpful to use when discussing the differences between Marx and Stalin/Lenin, which was what we were talking about, just as I generally prefer to think of myself as a small L libertarian, or a small L liberal or classical liberal... at least to a degree. That way, people don't confuse me for a Libertarian Party member or a Democrat.

Instead of that previous post, I had considered a longer, but more to the point detail of the difference between an anarchal group and a commune, but as I said, it would have been much longer and probably a little more soap-boxy/ insulting, so I just tried to clarify a related position. I don't think I said anything all that controversial, but I'd be happy to discuss it further. I didn't mean to piss you off.

[davinxtk]

You just seemed to be unleashing an avalanche of condecension, but maybe I can attribute a little of that to the atmosphere and what I expect from I-Mockery.

I didn't mean to say you were straight-out making it up, either, you just seemed to be inflating its importance in this context.

Originally Posted by Zhukov

Communism is not authoritarian, Stalinism, however, is.

See what I mean?

It's a subject that's hard to discuss with people who didn't enjoy their history lessons. I know people who won't listen to word one about communism because the only thing they associate the word with is Stalin. I'm used to having to scream at people and tell them to read a book, hence my initial post.

[Preechr]

I can understand that. I started off ready for the usual communism fight, too, but I gave up on that because it's unwinnable. I still maintain that there is a fundamental difference between ideological anarchy and communism, even in it's utopian or advanced form.

[Helm]

ideological anarchy and communism

Yeah there is a difference. Communists believe the socialistic groundwork between capitalism and anarchism to be critical, whereas anarchists do not. They're all for revolution and armed strugge to go from capitalism to anarchy. That's basically it. Nobody is disagreeing with you.