Communist Electoral Victory

[USSRv2]

The republic of Cyprus elected the AKEL for government, the Communist Party Of Cyprus. This thread is for the purpose of discussing the politics of AKEL, and how the future looks for Cyprus. I wrote a very long article on the topic here.

[Roxdog]

What's wrong with communism?

(sarcasm)

[USSRv2]

Nothing. I am a convinced Communist, and Communist Party member. You'll have to point it out to me.

[Roxdog]

Wow, so you believe in a power monopoly of the State....just like George Bush. You two should hang out. :)

"Communism" was created by people you perceive as "capitalists" in order to make you believe you are a part of some sort of revolution, while in actuality, you work for the very same people you think you are fighting against.

[Milton Bradley]

Quote by: Roxdog Wow, so you believe in a power monopoly of the State....just like George Bush. You two should hang out. :) "Communism" was created by people you perceive as "capitalists" in order to make you believe you are a part of some sort of revolution, while in actuality, you work for the very same people you think you are fighting against.

LOL, well said.

[USSRv2]

Quote by: Roxdog Wow, so you believe in a power monopoly of the State....just like George Bush. You two should hang out. :) "Communism" was created by people you perceive as "capitalists" in order to make you believe you are a part of some sort of revolution, while in actuality, you work for the very same people you think you are fighting against.

Quote by: Milton Bradley LOL, well said.

Sorry to say, but this is more than borderline uninformed. Was Karl Marx "Capitalist"? Apart from that, Communist is a stateless society. Socialism is the transitional state, but state isn't increased there, it's prepared to be broken down. But this is not a Capitalism VS Communism thread. It's a thread about the recent development in Cyprus. So stick to that. And those responses were very Impolite, i hope you know.

[Morality Games]

Wow, so you believe in a power monopoly of the State....just like George Bush. You two should hang out. :) "Communism" was created by people you perceive as "capitalists" in order to make you believe you are a part of some sort of revolution, while in actuality, you work for the very same people you think you are fighting against.

No, communism was most prominently implemented by well-intentioned but harsh (the ends justify the means mentality) revolutionaries in Russia (transforming it into the founding pillar of the Soviet Union) -- communism was devised by Karl Marx decades before and was refined by later philosophers. Neither he, they, nor the earliest proponets of communism in Russia were looking primarily for personal financial benefits from establishing a new economic system, but were rather trying to resolve the gross class-income differences of 19th century Europe -- and nowhere was that difference greater than in Russia.

[USSRv2]

Quote by: Morality Games No, communism was most prominently implemented by well-intentioned but harsh (the ends justify the means mentality) revolutionaries in Russia (transforming it into the founding pillar of the Soviet Union) -- communism was devised by Karl Marx decades before and was refined by later philosophers. Neither he, they, nor the earliest proponets of communism in Russia were looking primarily for personal financial benefits from establishing a new economic system, but were rather trying to resolve the gross class-income differences of 19th century Europe -- and nowhere was that difference greater than in Russia.

Exactly. There is no need to be misinformed about an ideology, even if you don't support it. Might i ask where your political allegiance lies friend?

[Morality Games]

I am liberal, although my willingness to make compromises with conservatives (when possible) gives me some moderate features.

Now, as for how I think the market ought to be run; an effectively managed third way approach strikes me as the only sensible way of handling economics (inluding education) in the United States. I live in the United States, so that is the approach to economics I feel most favorable toward and am most likely to support. Other countries can run on whatever mode suits them best, so long as it does not disrupt things too horribly in the international market.

I feel sympathetic toward most of the goals of socialism and appreciate sizeable tracts of the philosophy, but history has gone past the point where implementation on an international scale is likely to happen anytime soon, and I am too practical to invest effort into being socialist when there is no capacity for socialism as an economic policy to be succesfully operated. That is the primary reason for why I am not a socialist, but there are others.

Additionally, no economic system has a monopoly on virtue. Capitalism can achieve good ends as well. I never feel comfortable declaring myself all for one thing and not the other unless I feel certain it is the best by a long margin and the other has no chance of accomplishing anything worthwhile.

[phoenix_fire]

My biggest practical problem with socialism and communism are rampant lack of motivation. My biggest ideological problem is that it tries to fix the lack of motivation by elevating the state and the system to the level of a religion (while, if the USSR is our formula, booting other religions). I don't treasure the idea of living in an ideocracy of any kind, whether it be an Islamic theocracy or a communist one. The U.S. is kind of an ideocracy too, but at least we theoretically have the ability to hate it while still living unmolested in it. I wouldn't even prefer a Christian theocracy, since those never seem to work out well either. This transitions to my next point: skepticism of government. In a perfect world, communism miiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiight work. In the real one, it implodes. We have plenty of examples of this principle.

[Roxdog]

No, communism was most prominently implemented by well-intentioned but harsh (the ends justify the means mentality) revolutionaries in Russia (transforming it into the founding pillar of the Soviet Union) --

I think this is merely what modern day commies would have us believe.

communism was devised by Karl Marx decades before and was refined by later philosophers. Neither he, they, nor the earliest proponets of communism in Russia were looking primarily for personal financial benefits from establishing a new economic system, but were rather trying to resolve the gross class-income differences of 19th century Europe -- and nowhere was that difference greater than in Russia.

This is merely a leap of faith on your part. You really have no idea what their intentions were. I judge them by their fruits....which have proven to be pretty rotten.

[Chris the Chees]

I think this is merely what modern day commies would have us believe.

Ah, so just about every historian to have looked at the subject is a "modern day" commie conspiritor?

[Morality Games]

I think this is merely what modern day commies would have us believe.

That is what contemporary historians will have you believe. That is actually what most anyone who has actually studied the matter will have you believe.

This is merely a leap of faith on your part. You really have no idea what their intentions were. I judge them by their fruits....which have proven to be pretty rotten.

You like the word 'merely'. Why is my view a 'leap of faith' when it is the standard of the academic world and your view 'excellent' when it sounds like you are on the verge of proclaiming Senator Joseph McCarthy was set up and that Edward Murrow was a communist?

Anyway, the intentions of leading figures in history are usually far more certain than the intentions of leading figures in contemporary times, and it is fairly certain from the way they lived their lives that Vladmir Lenin and most of his lieutenants were outraged at how upper class (especially the Czar and his family) managed Russia and genuinely cared about the suffering of the poor and uneducated masses. While they were induced to commit atrocious deeds, most of these were quite typical of desperate situations in those times (or, for that matter, any time).

Lenin put himself under far too much risk throughout his life to be motivated primarily for monetary advantages (for years early on it seemed almost certain he would not succeed and would be killed or imprisoned, but he kept up anyway -- that is the mark of someone with a dream or ideal that they perceive serves something more than then themselves). A greedy person would have given up.

[USSRv2]

Quote by: Morality Games I feel sympathetic toward most of the goals of socialism and appreciate sizeable tracts of the philosophy, but history has gone past the point where implementation on an international scale is likely to happen anytime soon, and I am too practical to invest effort into being socialist when there is no capacity for socialism as an economic policy to be succesfully operated. That is the primary reason for why I am not a socialist, but there are others. Additionally, no economic system has a monopoly on virtue. Capitalism can achieve good ends as well. I never feel comfortable declaring myself all for one thing and not the other unless I feel certain it is the best by a long margin and the other has no chance of accomplishing anything worthwhile.

While this is not a debate of Capitalism VS Communism, your broadness might be something i could learn from. I look forward to debating with you. :)

Quote by: phoenix_fire My biggest practical problem with socialism and communism are rampant lack of motivation. My biggest ideological problem is that it tries to fix the lack of motivation by elevating the state and the system to the level of a religion (while, if the USSR is our formula, booting other religions). I don't treasure the idea of living in an ideocracy of any kind, whether it be an Islamic theocracy or a communist one. The U.S. is kind of an ideocracy too, but at least we theoretically have the ability to hate it while still living unmolested in it. I wouldn't even prefer a Christian theocracy, since those never seem to work out well either. This transitions to my next point: skepticism of government. In a perfect world, communism miiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiight work. In the real one, it implodes. We have plenty of examples of this principle.

What you mention is not Communism. The idea of the ideocracy was a Soviet one, it was never meant to be implanted. And on top of that, Communism isn't equal wages for everyone. That's the most common misunderstanding on what Communism is. (The ideology) Communism itself, builds on the idea that everyone is politically, and socially equal, and should have equal opportunity for making wealth, trough working for a democratic Government. Communism at it's base, builds on "justice for the workers!". But even a Communist (We don't count Stalinist's) see no justice in letting two men not working equally hard make the same. That's not justice.

Quote by: Morality Games Lenin put himself under far too much risk throughout his life to be motivated primarily for monetary advantages (for years early on it seemed almost certain he would not succeed and would be killed or imprisoned, but he kept up anyway -- that is the mark of someone with a dream or ideal that they perceive serves something more than then themselves). A greedy person would have given up.

Same argument with Castro.



Nevertheless, this thread is NOT about Communism VS Capitalism. It is on the specific topic of Cyprus, and the elections there. Could it be possible to stick to just that topic, and have me shoot down Capitalism elsewhere?