Marxism vs Socialism vs Communism vs Totalitarianisms

Oh but I do care about the wellbeing of Muslims and Socialists. Their wellbeing consists first of all in being set free from their false beliefs.The Kibbutzim were not based on Marxism, they were a benign sort of socialism which does exist here and there. But obviously they served their purpose and Israel no longer needs them.I don't support "Capitalist Oligarchs" I've said that capitalism at certain levels needs to be restrained by law. I DID say that, perhaps you didn't notice. It remains gthe best economic system, but nothing's perfect on this planet, we do need laws to restrain the fallen nature. The problem with Marxism is its utter unreality, and its belief that you can tinker with the human heart to make it conform to some pieinthesky false idea of how to run things. Leave humanity alone and design your laws to keep the fallen nature in check. That's what the Constitution aimed at, but Marxism magnifies the fallen nature for its own chosen class and promotes the oppression and murder of all those who disagree with it. It's evil to the core.

For the good of society ... But there is no pure capitalist system operating in any nation. What you have is capitalism mixed with socialism in varying degrees. Socialism. Curiously Marxism is a theory that says the progression of society passes through (benign) cooperative socialism ... it is not that the Kibbutzim were based on Marxism but that his analysis of politics applied. He doesn't tinker he observes. Social engineering, thinking you can tinker with the human heart to make it conform to some pie-in-the-sky false idea of how to run things. Silly me, I thought the Constitution was aimed at providing a just and equitable society:

quote:

---

We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.

---

It would be interesting if you could actually quote Marx rather than froth at the mouth, but you are too indoctrinated in fear of Marxism for a rational discussion. Of course what you are talking about is Stalin rather than Marx.EnjoyEdited by RAZD, : subt

No, but Stalinism is one of the inevitable outcomes of Marxism. The killing of your opponents, dissidents, etc., is the natural outcome of Marxism. Some have seen the connection and left the movement. The whole Marxist utopian nightmare should be scrapped.

Like the Spanish Inquisition is the inevitable outcome of Christianity?I hold no brief for Marx, but he was a nice old geezer and would not have approved of Stalin any more than St Paul would have rooted for Torquemada.

I'm also sure Marx wouldn't have liked Stalin but that's because he believed his own utopian fantasy, just as RAZD does.But the Inquisition was not the natural outgrowth of Christianity, but of the apostasy of papal Rome and its ambition to rule the world.

Which is why it occurred in China ... oh wait that was Maoism ...Stalinism occurred because there was a vacuum in government once the Czars were deposed and he took the opportunity to take control, not to impose marxist theory but to impose a dictatorship that suppressed dissent ... killing off people that were a threat to his control.The problem with revolution is that an oppressive dictatorial system is most likely replaced by another oppressive dictatorial system because ... (a) that is what the people are used to (and accept as government) ... and (b) the new oppressors already know how it works. ... revolution, as those hungry for power fight over the crumbs of government left in the vacuum created by revolution.The same pattern occurred in South America with military coup d'etats deposing a dictatorial leader and installing a new dictatorial leader. Violence begets violence.Out of interest to the argument you are attempting to make, who was more oppressive in Chile, Faith -- Marxist Allende or (US backed) Fascist Pinochet? Curiously that won't make the progress of social forms as he analyses go away. Nor will that magically make capitalism any better. It will just come up again ... perhaps with a different name ... should we also say: Or is the key be not relying on any one single form as an ultimate answer.Would you agree that changes need to be made as problems are encountered, so we should not be "wed" to any one system?EnjoyEdited by RAZD, : clrty

Though as our resident Calvinist, you have to admit that that was completely inevitable ...

The fact that there are other evil governments and leaders has nothing to do with the fact that Marxism predictably tends in that direction.

Also prophesied...

The fact that Allende's "marxist" government did not end in oppression of dissent etc as you claim is inevitable, while Pinochett's non-marxist government did end up with all the evils you claim for marxism, means that your hypothesis is rubbish, and you need to look for another explanation for the evil that explains the evidence. Let me summarize:

1. predicted result of marxism did NOT occur from Allende government
2. predicted result occurred from non-marxist government
   ∴ marxism is not linked to the result

The alternative hypothesis is simple: violent revolution leaves a vacuum of government and a predisposition to violence, the most likely move for people seeking to take control of government will be continued violence as the crumbs of government are gathered, which they then solidify by murdering their competition, and then reinstating the oppressive government to squash dissent. It doesn't matter what the name is, what matters is the acts. Let me correct that for you: Oppressive governments cut across ideological ground.Enjoy

Actually, the killing of your opponents is the natural outcome of capitalism. You know, that whole competition thing?

Bullshit.You see Apple, IBM, General Motors field armies and shooting their competition?

I saw the British and French armies shooting each other for centuries in competition for world resources and markets.

And the whole US war for oil program ...Enjoy

How about we look at Walmart and what it does to competition from local companies?Stores close and average income becomes depressed, workers have to rely on social programs to make ends meet. (from 21 jan 2014 ... but curiously still true ... Tom Toles for January 21, 2014 - GoComics)Unregulated capitalism inevitably leads to repressive social structures that are closer to feudal kingdoms than free societies.Enjoy