[G. Adams]

</span><blockquote><span class="smallfont">Quote:</span><hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (castille,)
There is an old Asian coinage about voting...."It only takes 50+1 to vote for a dictator."

That means if 50+1 want something, the 49% of people will be oppressed under laws they dont want, rules they dont want, and options they dont want.



Now onto your topics:

HUMANITY
How do you know somebody is slacking off? What if everyone just hates that person and votes him/her off, even if that person is working hard? At work, there was an employee nobody liked (he was too quiet, never talked to others), and everyone kept pressuring me to fire him! I obvously couldn't fire him, because I would then be sued. But what if I wasn't there? (being the greedy evil capitalistic boss) That poor guy would be fired!


GOVERNMENT
No matter who or what does the governing, there must be somebody coordinating the process. You don't tell all the factory workers from around the world to come over to Algeria just to elect a local militia. Somebody must be there distributing the weapons, etc. And whats the difference between corruption under Communism and capitalism? (see below)


PRODUCTION
Hitler never gave an order for genocide. It was his lower-subordinates who did. There is no such evidence to show Hitler deliberately gave any death order.

Who will get to debate on the Communist Forum? Will the ENTIRE WORLD get chosen? Or just an elite few? Its those elite debating on the forums who will hold the power.

In contrast, the US President who refuses to give up his power is kicked out by ORGANISED POLICE. In other words, the cops come and drag him off.

Also, how can you know whether somebody is a criminal before giving them a free AK47 or AKSU rifle? If they're planning to kill somebody for extra bread they wont be telling you....


Hitler didn't simply appeal to desperate people....he appealed to everyone, Americans included. Even Ghandi and Churchill applauded Hitler's speeches as fine speeches and policies.

On the oil well: What if a group wants to set up camp on top of an oil well? Since the land belongs to everyone, you can't just go and shoot them (like Bush is doing).


"And what need is there to save for a rainy day?"

Good question. What if crops fail this year? Locusts? Earthquake? Drought? Destroyed transportation lines? Computer failure (which eliminates all your credits)?


"Why do 99% of people under capitalism not steal from their workplace?"

People under capitalism choose not to steal because theres other ways to get more money. Under Communism, because everyone is equal, and there is no way you can get more money than anybody else, then stealing is the ONLY way.

Under capitalism, there are thousands of ways to get more money than everybody else.


"But I believe that as the population would be armed, and well experienced in war after a revolution, they would not sacrifice there new found freedom to such oppurtunists."

The Chinese population was armed and well-trained in warfare in 1949, but Mao still took dictatorship.


"I bet they do want to overthrow him, but (i'll have to check on this) I don't think the North Koreans are an armed populace."

Many are. North Korea has a huge armed force (many of whom also live in poverty). Why don't they overthrow him?

Because of human APATHY. The majority of humans prefer to live in poverty (some pain) rather than risk getting shot in a rebel war (more pain!). The same with capitalism; most people endure crap jobs, rather than risk their financial future on business or investment.



Also, you want the ENTIRE WORLD to become liberal democracy before Communism can take root? I doubt that will happen, especially when socialist protestors are supporting dictatorial regimes and opposing US democracy.<hr size="1" /></blockquote><span class='postcolor'>

HUMANITY - How do you know someone is slacking? If suddenly the workload goes up for everyone else without a clear reason, such as a need to produce more food, then somebody down the line isn't pulling their weight. Also if someone isn't working and just hanging about someone will spot them, or more likely not see them were they are meant to be. if that became regular it could be brough up for discussion.
As for someone simply not fitting in with a workplace, if you didn't under communism you may as well move yourself to somewhere your happy. And although some people are content being quite people, they still interact with those around them, even if it isn't as boisterous as most people. And if they are someone who really doesn't want to talk to people at all, then it sounds like a sociopathic tendency to me, and they would be better off talking to a shrink than be at work.
All of this wouldn't of course be possible under capitalism. You took this job because you needed the money, not because you enjoyed the work or the people around you. You don't get on with your colleagues and it makes life miserable that kind of isolation, but still you work there because you need that money.

Government - Yes, there will be people co-ordinating, but these people will be elected and subject to recall. This has already been said. And factory workers from Bengal wouldn't be voting on the militias for Algeria, that would be the job of the council of each town in Algeria, and this council is only elected by the locals of that town. People from Bengal would only be casting votes that effect Algerians in things like international companies that affect both the Algerians and the Bengalis, such as the CEO of a company.

PRODUCTION - No Hitler may not have given direct orders, but I'm sure the anti semitism of Mein Kampf and Hitlers ravings may have influenced the Final Solution.

Who will debate in the world forum? Each region or locality depending on the scale of this forum would elect a delegate to the forum. The delegate would be subject to recall at any time. The forum would like be composed of 'elites', in that it is likely the most intelligent people would be elected by each area to represent them. But as this forum has no executive powers it would be unable to become a world government, as a government requires executive, legislative and judical powers, none of which the forum would possess. The forum is exactley as it sounds, a forum. A place for debating. To highlight ideas and possible course of action. It would still take popular support for any ideas put forward for it to become reality.

And if the councillor refuses to leave his office then the ORGANISED MILITIA would do exactley the same thing.

How do you know if someone is a criminal before arming them? How do we do it today? Then we'll do it that way.

No, Hitler appealed to the desperate. Throughout the early half of the 20's Hitlers support came from his party, the German Workers Party. It was oddly enough, not a middle class party, but a workers party. However, in order to expand Hitler began dropping the socialist facade that the party had previously maintained, best highlighted by the disollution of the SA in the night of the Long Knives. This was during the great depression, when EVERYONE in Germany was desperate. Hitler promised to protect german business's, appealing to the now terrified middle class, and create new jobs, appealing to the working class.
So yes, your right, Hitler appealed to everyone, because everyone was desperate.

I'm not surprised Churchill didn't admire Hitler in many ways, they were both demagogues obsessed with their own place in history. As for Ghandi, I'd like to see what you are basing your claim on. I know Ghandi commended Hitler on bringing Germany out of the state it was in, but I doubt Ghandi was getting all the facts on how Hitler was doing this. And considering that WWII was tying up the British elsewhere, and bankrupting its empire, I'm sure Ghandi was quite delighted.

On the oil well: you have hit the nail on the head, everyone owns that oil and no minority has a right to place any claim on it. So if they tried to expropriate the oil for personal wealth, they they would be removed.

If crops failed then saving for that rainy day would mean nothing, because there would be no crops related goods to buy anyway. However as crop failure is expected to happen somewhere in the world, all agricultural industries can produce a little more than neccesary. If it isn't needed, then everyone gets a little more. The same goes for all other such industries.

On the computer failure: I gave the idea of credit cards as one possible way of doing it. It is not the only way of doing it. There could be four or five very seperate but identical systems recording how many credits you have, so if one goes down the others still know what you have.
Its the same under capitalism. If for some reason all the banks got wiped due to, for instance a virus, they have seperate mechanisms to record what is where. And in the unlikely event that they go as well, all (responsible) governments have emergency plans. The councils could organise such plans for that unlikely circumstance.

On stealing: As everyone has everything they need, there is no benefit to stealing. You can't sell it on, who would pay for something they already have? Theres no point keeping it, you already have one of your own, or can acquire one easily enough through your work.

The Chinese population may have been well armed and well trained, but it was not well educated and spent many previous years living under a liberal democracy, both of which I specified were needed to produce a succesful revolution.

I know NK has a huge armed force, almost 10% of the country is. But that 10% have a better lifestyle than the rest. So why would they give up there position, which would be contrary to your survival instinct. But again, NK did not experience a great many years under a liberal democracy, providing the people with liberal culture and a decent education.

On apathy, I would disagree. People become apathetic when they believe that they have no way of improving their situation, or believe that 'this is already as good as it gets'. When people realise that they CAN lead a better life, and more importantly SHOULD be leading better lives, they will do what they can to do so. This is what starts all revolutions, although the expected outcome is not always achieved.
Once liberal democracies are established across the globe, the good education these people will recieve will allow them to realise that they are living in lesser conditions than they should be, and that the only way to improve their situation will be to revolt.

Yes, I want the entire world to become a liberal democracy, or many liberal democracies (though a one world government would be preferable). Don't you?

And there are few socialists or communists supporting dictatorial regimes, and the ones that do are very misled, they don't even know their socialism.

By liberal democracy I simply mean a combination of democracy and a respect for rights, it needn't be the 'most minimal' government possible. Social democracies, such as those in Scandinavia could persist, as long as the respect for individual rights remain.