Volconvo is a debate forum for the discussion of political, religious, and news-based topics.

Section 8 · Oct 12, 2003, 02:14 am

Over the past years, communism has been brutaly distorted into meaning evil. This of course is because of the bourgousie propaganda. So what would you like communism to be renamed?

Godsmom · Oct 12, 2003, 03:42 am

Rename it?

Why not rename the period of the "Divine Right of Kings"?

Communism is a historical fact, as dead as the Whig Party.

Onwards, workers, into the world of stock ownership and guarenteed seats on the Board of Directors and in Management decision meetings!

G. Adams · Oct 12, 2003, 04:42 pm

Communism cannot die until we transcend it, and as we have not even bettered capitalism yet, i can't see that happening for a a long time.

Ahh I hate the way communism has been so wrongly portrayed and described over the years. It means I have to think twice every time I am about to say I'm a communist, and I usually just say I'm a socialist to avoid an earful from an ignorant.

Another name for communism. Utopianism? But that of course makes people think you've simply got your head in the clouds. Revolutionary Socialism? The revolutionary bit will scare people away. Humanitarian Socialism? Hmm, maybe?

Bayou · Oct 15, 2003, 05:27 am

I dont beleive that communism if reached will mean utopia.
Yes I too try to downplay communism when I discuss it, hell I couldnt even mention socialism when talking about the anti-american sentiment fillinf southamerica right now(all the governments being socialist).
I can barely fathom what might have been if Trotsky had succeeded Lenin.
The good name of communism died with Stalin.
Humanitarian socialism sounds right to me.
Though the simplist expression of communism is "democratising industry".
Something that has never been achieved in any nation (truly thanks to the buergoise and the military power mongers).

Section 8 · Oct 15, 2003, 11:47 am

The anarchists used to call themselves mutualists. That sounds pretty good.

Impenitent · Oct 15, 2003, 01:47 pm

how about enslave the population to communal ends?

that is the only thing that communism does, enslaves...

if you think that being a slave is good...

the ends justify the means?

Section 8 · Oct 15, 2003, 02:10 pm

Communism is freedom from slavery, you offer no evidence to back up your claim.

Impenitent · Oct 15, 2003, 02:36 pm

no, you are the one with no evidence... I have human nature as evidence...

Section 8 · Oct 15, 2003, 02:40 pm

Depends on how you define human nature, many define it differently, and it is impossible to prove it.

G. Adams · Oct 15, 2003, 03:10 pm

<blockquote>Quote:<hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (Impenitent,)
how about enslave the population to communal ends?

that is the only thing that communism does, enslaves...

if you think that being a slave is good...

the ends justify the means?<hr size="1" /></blockquote>

How could anyone be enslaved without a government or upper class to do so?

Waychel · Oct 15, 2003, 03:26 pm

"Why does man not see things? He is himself standing in the way: he conceals things." - Nietzsche

Honestly, there's just no winning with people who refuse to see reason, learn from history or take natural fact into consideration.

The guy is loony toons.

Section 8 · Oct 15, 2003, 03:28 pm

Ahhhhhh, Neitzche. He was the pioneer of nihilism. Odd you should quote him, because he also believed in anarchism for a form of government.

Waychel · Oct 15, 2003, 03:33 pm

Yes, and he also would have loved Hitler's Genocide.

Neitzche is one of my favorite philosophers, but he was still insane.

Section 8 · Oct 15, 2003, 03:34 pm

He did? Could you post a link. I'm interested.

Impenitent · Oct 15, 2003, 04:54 pm

G...

being a slave for the herd is just as much slavery as being a slave for one upper class person or government...

Way...

Nietzsche would not have approved of hitler's misrepresenting his (Nietzsche's) philosophy... and his sanity collapsed only after his writing career, although some argue that one may see glimpses of it in Ecce Homo...

no 8...

1. Nietzsche was very anti-democratic
2. Nietzsche thought the strongest members of the society would rule it, very aristocratic...
3. Nietzsche was not the pioneer of nihilism, he was the uncoverer of it behind the value systems we use...
4. Nietzsche argued for strong individuals... and vehemently against the herd...

Waychel · Oct 15, 2003, 05:08 pm

Read his works. :P Neitzsche had an insane obsession with war and justified it with Darwin's scientific theory of evolution. Hitler claimed in Mein Kampf that Neitzsche was a major influence upon him, an inspiration, and used Neitzsche to justify his philosophies (which, in actuality, were Neitzsche's). The genocide itself was Neitzsche's original idea as well: he claimed Germans were the "super race" and called for them to eradicate all other races whom were their competitors.

The strong will impose their rule upon the weak under any and all circumstances. That's not just human nature, that's nature in and of itself. Once you realize this fact, the futility of Communism or any civilization based upon "anarchy" as you put it is made quite apparent.

G. Adams · Oct 15, 2003, 05:18 pm

<blockquote>Quote:<hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (Impenitent,)
G...

being a slave for the herd is just as much slavery as being a slave for one upper class person or government...

<hr size="1" /></blockquote>

You are not a slave to the group, you choose to be part of the group because you realise the a) man has always been part of a group that relies on each other for survival, and b) that without the group you will die.

You are part of this group for yourself, as is everyone in the group. But mutual respect between members of the group allows people to recognise rights, including the right not to be exploited to somebody elses benefit.

Impenitent · Oct 15, 2003, 05:20 pm

Way, no, you are simply incorrect with your misreading of Nietzsche... I own copies of everything Nietzsche published (except the dawn which I have read) and recommend that you read his actual works and not some commentary about his works or propaganda from some liberal philosophy professor... and no, Nietzsche did not advocate genocide anywhere in his works... if you had actually read Nietzsche, you would know that Nietzsche actually did not like germans and made no such claim of their being a super race... the ubermensch or superman to which you are referring was an individual, not a herd creature

Impenitent · Oct 15, 2003, 05:28 pm

G?

1. you CHOOSE to be in the group?
but
2. without the group you DIE?

some choice...

mutual respect and recognizition of rights is a choice as well... not everyone chooses as you would wish... it all is exploitation

Waychel · Oct 15, 2003, 05:51 pm

I have read Neitzsche's works and, although Hitler did embellish on his views considerably, Neitzsche did condone and in many cases encourage violence in asserting such things as his will to power philosophy. Hitler didn't have to embellish on much because a great deal was already there to draw from.

Also, Neitzsche's distinction between the individual and "member of the herd" was so elitist as to condone the right of the individual over the herd. Any Ubermensch's actions of egotism or slaughter (in Hitler's case, Genocide) would have been condoned, possibly even encouraged.

The only fallacy is that Neitzsche would have seen the Aryan Brotherhood and the Nazi movement as a following of the herd as well. Hitler was still a prime example of an Ubermensch himself regardless.

Oct 12, 2003, 04:42 pm	#3 (permalink) (top)
G. Adams Fyrdman Location: Middlesbrough UK Posts: 4,152	Communism cannot die until we transcend it, and as we have not even bettered capitalism yet, i can't see that happening for a a long time. Ahh I hate the way communism has been so wrongly portrayed and described over the years. It means I have to think twice every time I am about to say I'm a communist, and I usually just say I'm a socialist to avoid an earful from an ignorant. Another name for communism. Utopianism? But that of course makes people think you've simply got your head in the clouds. Revolutionary Socialism? The revolutionary bit will scare people away. Humanitarian Socialism? Hmm, maybe? Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy, its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery. Winston Churchill

Oct 15, 2003, 05:27 am	#4 (permalink) (top)
Bayou Igneous Magma Location: Calgary Alberta Canada Posts: 154	I dont beleive that communism if reached will mean utopia. Yes I too try to downplay communism when I discuss it, hell I couldnt even mention socialism when talking about the anti-american sentiment fillinf southamerica right now(all the governments being socialist). I can barely fathom what might have been if Trotsky had succeeded Lenin. The good name of communism died with Stalin. Humanitarian socialism sounds right to me. Though the simplist expression of communism is "democratising industry". Something that has never been achieved in any nation (truly thanks to the buergoise and the military power mongers). <span style='font-size:16pt;line-height:100%'><span style='font-family:Impact'><span style='color:green'>Vote NDP "The independence of art for the revolution. "The revolution for the complete liberation of art!"</span></span></span>

Oct 15, 2003, 01:47 pm	#6 (permalink) (top)
Impenitent Hot Lava Posts: 1,859	how about enslave the population to communal ends? that is the only thing that communism does, enslaves... if you think that being a slave is good... the ends justify the means? "I really like this jacket, but the sleeves are much too long..." insanity is doing the same thing over and over again, but expecting different results...

Oct 15, 2003, 02:36 pm	#8 (permalink) (top)
Impenitent Hot Lava Posts: 1,859	no, you are the one with no evidence... I have human nature as evidence... "I really like this jacket, but the sleeves are much too long..." insanity is doing the same thing over and over again, but expecting different results...

Oct 15, 2003, 03:10 pm	#10 (permalink) (top)
G. Adams Fyrdman Location: Middlesbrough UK Posts: 4,152	</span><blockquote><span class="smallfont">Quote:</span><hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (Impenitent,) how about enslave the population to communal ends? that is the only thing that communism does, enslaves... if you think that being a slave is good... the ends justify the means?<hr size="1" /></blockquote><span class='postcolor'> How could anyone be enslaved without a government or upper class to do so? Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy, its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery. Winston Churchill

Oct 12, 2003, 02:14 am	#1 (permalink) (top)
Section 8 Hot Lava Location: Spokane, WA Posts: 782	Over the past years, communism has been brutaly distorted into meaning evil. This of course is because of the bourgousie propaganda. So what would you like communism to be renamed?

Oct 12, 2003, 03:42 am	#2 (permalink) (top)
Godsmom Sedimentary Rock Posts: 20	Rename it? Why not rename the period of the "Divine Right of Kings"? Communism is a historical fact, as dead as the Whig Party. Onwards, workers, into the world of stock ownership and guarenteed seats on the Board of Directors and in Management decision meetings!

Oct 15, 2003, 11:47 am	#5 (permalink) (top)
Section 8 Hot Lava Location: Spokane, WA Posts: 782	The anarchists used to call themselves mutualists. That sounds pretty good.

Oct 15, 2003, 02:10 pm	#7 (permalink) (top)
Section 8 Hot Lava Location: Spokane, WA Posts: 782	Communism is freedom from slavery, you offer no evidence to back up your claim.

Oct 15, 2003, 02:40 pm	#9 (permalink) (top)
Section 8 Hot Lava Location: Spokane, WA Posts: 782	Depends on how you define human nature, many define it differently, and it is impossible to prove it.

Oct 15, 2003, 03:26 pm	#11 (permalink) (top)
Waychel Supercalifragilistic Posts: 431	"Why does man not see things? He is himself standing in the way: he conceals things." - Nietzsche Honestly, there's just no winning with people who refuse to see reason, learn from history or take natural fact into consideration. The guy is loony toons. Float like a butterfly, sting like a bee.

Oct 15, 2003, 03:28 pm	#12 (permalink) (top)
Section 8 Hot Lava Location: Spokane, WA Posts: 782	Ahhhhhh, Neitzche. He was the pioneer of nihilism. Odd you should quote him, because he also believed in anarchism for a form of government.

Oct 15, 2003, 03:33 pm	#13 (permalink) (top)
Waychel Supercalifragilistic Posts: 431	Yes, and he also would have loved Hitler's Genocide. Neitzche is one of my favorite philosophers, but he was still insane. Float like a butterfly, sting like a bee.

Oct 15, 2003, 03:34 pm	#14 (permalink) (top)
Section 8 Hot Lava Location: Spokane, WA Posts: 782	He did? Could you post a link. I'm interested.

Oct 15, 2003, 04:54 pm	#15 (permalink) (top)
Impenitent Hot Lava Posts: 1,859	G... being a slave for the herd is just as much slavery as being a slave for one upper class person or government... Way... Nietzsche would not have approved of hitler's misrepresenting his (Nietzsche's) philosophy... and his sanity collapsed only after his writing career, although some argue that one may see glimpses of it in Ecce Homo... no 8... 1. Nietzsche was very anti-democratic 2. Nietzsche thought the strongest members of the society would rule it, very aristocratic... 3. Nietzsche was not the pioneer of nihilism, he was the uncoverer of it behind the value systems we use... 4. Nietzsche argued for strong individuals... and vehemently against the herd... "I really like this jacket, but the sleeves are much too long..." insanity is doing the same thing over and over again, but expecting different results...

Oct 15, 2003, 05:08 pm	#16 (permalink) (top)
Waychel Supercalifragilistic Posts: 431	Read his works. :P Neitzsche had an insane obsession with war and justified it with Darwin's scientific theory of evolution. Hitler claimed in Mein Kampf that Neitzsche was a major influence upon him, an inspiration, and used Neitzsche to justify his philosophies (which, in actuality, were Neitzsche's). The genocide itself was Neitzsche's original idea as well: he claimed Germans were the "super race" and called for them to eradicate all other races whom were their competitors. The strong will impose their rule upon the weak under any and all circumstances. That's not just human nature, that's nature in and of itself. Once you realize this fact, the futility of Communism or any civilization based upon "anarchy" as you put it is made quite apparent. Float like a butterfly, sting like a bee.

Oct 15, 2003, 05:18 pm	#17 (permalink) (top)
G. Adams Fyrdman Location: Middlesbrough UK Posts: 4,152	</span><blockquote><span class="smallfont">Quote:</span><hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (Impenitent,) G... being a slave for the herd is just as much slavery as being a slave for one upper class person or government... <hr size="1" /></blockquote><span class='postcolor'> You are not a slave to the group, you choose to be part of the group because you realise the a) man has always been part of a group that relies on each other for survival, and b) that without the group you will die. You are part of this group for yourself, as is everyone in the group. But mutual respect between members of the group allows people to recognise rights, including the right not to be exploited to somebody elses benefit. Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy, its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery. Winston Churchill

Oct 15, 2003, 05:20 pm	#18 (permalink) (top)
Impenitent Hot Lava Posts: 1,859	Way, no, you are simply incorrect with your misreading of Nietzsche... I own copies of everything Nietzsche published (except the dawn which I have read) and recommend that you read his actual works and not some commentary about his works or propaganda from some liberal philosophy professor... and no, Nietzsche did not advocate genocide anywhere in his works... if you had actually read Nietzsche, you would know that Nietzsche actually did not like germans and made no such claim of their being a super race... the ubermensch or superman to which you are referring was an individual, not a herd creature "I really like this jacket, but the sleeves are much too long..." insanity is doing the same thing over and over again, but expecting different results...

Oct 15, 2003, 05:28 pm	#19 (permalink) (top)
Impenitent Hot Lava Posts: 1,859	G? 1. you CHOOSE to be in the group? but 2. without the group you DIE? some choice... mutual respect and recognizition of rights is a choice as well... not everyone chooses as you would wish... it all is exploitation "I really like this jacket, but the sleeves are much too long..." insanity is doing the same thing over and over again, but expecting different results...

Oct 15, 2003, 05:51 pm	#20 (permalink) (top)
Waychel Supercalifragilistic Posts: 431	I have read Neitzsche's works and, although Hitler did embellish on his views considerably, Neitzsche did condone and in many cases encourage violence in asserting such things as his will to power philosophy. Hitler didn't have to embellish on much because a great deal was already there to draw from. Also, Neitzsche's distinction between the individual and "member of the herd" was so elitist as to condone the right of the individual over the herd. Any Ubermensch's actions of egotism or slaughter (in Hitler's case, Genocide) would have been condoned, possibly even encouraged. The only fallacy is that Neitzsche would have seen the Aryan Brotherhood and the Nazi movement as a following of the herd as well. Hitler was still a prime example of an Ubermensch himself regardless. Float like a butterfly, sting like a bee.