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

Eulux · Feb 5, 2004, 02:49 am

Hmmm...since you seem to like occam, I should pay no heed to your arguements, but I feel compelled...

Explain how the path of least resistance applies?

If you think the USSR was socialism, then we were founded as a democracy as well.

Impenitent · Feb 5, 2004, 09:43 am

people will do the least amount required... path of least resistance... why do you think americans are in such great shape?

and you think the ussr was what?

PeterAngelo · Feb 6, 2004, 07:07 pm

The USSR was - and is - totalitarian.

People will do what they are talented at and truly love to do. We do not nurture peoples natural talents and desires. We try to make everyone fit a mold.

When people are forced to do work they hate for slave wages - no one works.

Like the Russians used to say, "The government pretends to pay us and we pretend to work".

Natural human behavior.

Imagine a society that nurtered each other instead of "dog eat dog" in a rat race.

That's us and we are PROUD of it.

IDIOTS!!!

Eulux · Feb 7, 2004, 02:04 am

Peter, I could not have said it better. That was great.

Impenitent · Feb 7, 2004, 11:39 pm

no, the country was socialist... government controlled the means of production in the name of the people... was it totalitarian in practice? you bet... ALL socialisms are totalitarian...

"When people are forced to do work they hate for slave wages - no one works."

and this explains why socialism must fail...

IDIOTS!!!

Eulux · Feb 8, 2004, 01:07 am

No, that explains why capitalism...nevermind...damn you took that out of context. If you knew anything about governments, you would at least know the ideologies behind them. Socialism in government is almost if not a pure democracy.

Perhaps USSR had socialism in it's intentions, but I and every other educated professor I have talked to have agreed that it never even came close to socialism.

1. the economy is owned by the workers...there is none of the greed of capitalism, meaning no competition. With competition comes a dog-eat-dog mentality, which socialism avoids, for everyone is working towards the betterment of the community. If they get the job done, everyone comes out on top. This never happened in the USSR, for the workers were still controlled by a ruling elite. The workers themselves were not in control. Actually, if you think about it, socialism is a free enterprise...unlike capitalsim.

2. As I have stated, there was a ruling elite, but not just in the sence of economics. There was a worker's party, which goes against the classless belief.

3. Their social programs were sometimes selective.

4. USSR WAS totalitarian, where in socialism, it would be like a town-hall democracy, on a much larger scale, hence my reference to true democracy.

All in all, try reading...or having a discussion with a professor.

Impenitent · Feb 8, 2004, 03:33 am

<blockquote>Quote:<hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (Eulux,)
No, that explains why capitalism...nevermind...damn you took that out of context. If you knew anything about governments, you would at least know the ideologies behind them. Socialism in government is almost if not a pure democracy.

Perhaps USSR had socialism in it's intentions, but I and every other educated professor I have talked to have agreed that it never even came close to socialism.

1. the economy is owned by the workers...there is none of the greed of capitalism, meaning no competition. With competition comes a dog-eat-dog mentality, which socialism avoids, for everyone is working towards the betterment of the community. If they get the job done, everyone comes out on top. This never happened in the USSR, for the workers were still controlled by a ruling elite. The workers themselves were not in control. Actually, if you think about it, socialism is a free enterprise...unlike capitalsim.

2. As I have stated, there was a ruling elite, but not just in the sence of economics. There was a worker's party, which goes against the classless belief.

3. Their social programs were sometimes selective.

4. USSR WAS totalitarian, where in socialism, it would be like a town-hall democracy, on a much larger scale, hence my reference to true democracy.

All in all, try reading...or having a discussion with a professor.<hr size="1" /></blockquote>

no, socialism is not pure democracy, pure democracy is a lynch mob... socialism is the government control of the means of production...

no, the ussr was intended to be communist... government would not be needed... it was supposed to be the workers paradice... the government of the ussr controlled everything, it was a socialist dictatorship

1. no, that's communism, in socialism, the state owns the means of production... socialism doesn't avoid anything, it forces citizens to work as wage slaves for the government... actually if you think about it socialism is slavery to the state...

2. the ruling elite government made it a socialist dictatorship... they called themselves the workers party, but communist workers wouldn't have need for a party, or class in a communist system, there'd be no government

3. their social programs, as all social programs run by socialist dictatorships are extremely selective

4. the ussr was totalitarian, as all socialisms are totalitarian... you cannot own the means of production in a socialism, you cannot own your own business in a socialism, you are a slave to the state in a socialism... learn the terms...

all in all, you need to read a political dictionary and listen to your professors...

Suburbanite · Feb 8, 2004, 06:43 am

<blockquote>Quote:<hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (castille,)
(I assume everyone here is a factory worker, since they seem to know so much about the workers)<hr size="1" /></blockquote>

First of all, I am a part time pirate, part time lumber jack.

Secondly, I agree here, I personally LOVE small businesses. It is probably the sole reason I gave up on my ideals of communism when I was a kid... that and realism.

castille · Feb 8, 2004, 07:12 am

You want pure democracy?

How about 1000 Chinese students rioting and attacking Japanese students? Well, it was democracy - most of those Chinese students voted to riot and attack the Japs.

**Pooeypants** · Feb 8, 2004, 03:04 pm

<blockquote>Quote:<hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (castille,)
You want pure democracy?

How about 1000 Chinese students rioting and attacking Japanese students? Well, it was democracy - most of those Chinese students voted to riot and attack the Japs.<hr size="1" /></blockquote>
*scratches head* What is pure democracy?

Xicano82 · Feb 8, 2004, 07:10 pm

I have a question. What do you meassure success with? Minimum wage is the lowest it's been since the 70's (adjusted with inflation). There was a time when unions were bigger than they are now as about 11 percent of workers in America are getting poorer. I believe about the richest ten percent own 80-90 percent of all wealth in America, as Nader stated in 2000. I also beleive that critiques against capalism are pretty much outlawed. If someone on TV, or anywhere, says capitalism is not good, they'd be considered crazy or radical and not be taken seriously. The three facts I just listed are true, but they never get talked about on TV or in campaigns.

Feb 5, 2004, 02:49 am	#21 (permalink) (top)
Eulux Molten Ash Location: houston Posts: 27	Hmmm...since you seem to like occam, I should pay no heed to your arguements, but I feel compelled... Explain how the path of least resistance applies? If you think the USSR was socialism, then we were founded as a democracy as well. "Man acts as though he were the shaper and master of language, while in fact language remains the master of man." -Heidegger www.rorta.com -knowledge is power...

Feb 5, 2004, 09:43 am	#22 (permalink) (top)
Impenitent Hot Lava Posts: 1,859	people will do the least amount required... path of least resistance... why do you think americans are in such great shape? and you think the ussr was what? "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...

Feb 7, 2004, 02:04 am	#24 (permalink) (top)
Eulux Molten Ash Location: houston Posts: 27	Peter, I could not have said it better. That was great. "Man acts as though he were the shaper and master of language, while in fact language remains the master of man." -Heidegger www.rorta.com -knowledge is power...

Feb 7, 2004, 11:39 pm	#25 (permalink) (top)
Impenitent Hot Lava Posts: 1,859	no, the country was socialist... government controlled the means of production in the name of the people... was it totalitarian in practice? you bet... ALL socialisms are totalitarian... "When people are forced to do work they hate for slave wages - no one works." and this explains why socialism must fail... IDIOTS!!! "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...

Feb 8, 2004, 01:07 am	#26 (permalink) (top)
Eulux Molten Ash Location: houston Posts: 27	No, that explains why capitalism...nevermind...damn you took that out of context. If you knew anything about governments, you would at least know the ideologies behind them. Socialism in government is almost if not a pure democracy. Perhaps USSR had socialism in it's intentions, but I and every other educated professor I have talked to have agreed that it never even came close to socialism. 1. the economy is owned by the workers...there is none of the greed of capitalism, meaning no competition. With competition comes a dog-eat-dog mentality, which socialism avoids, for everyone is working towards the betterment of the community. If they get the job done, everyone comes out on top. This never happened in the USSR, for the workers were still controlled by a ruling elite. The workers themselves were not in control. Actually, if you think about it, socialism is a free enterprise...unlike capitalsim. 2. As I have stated, there was a ruling elite, but not just in the sence of economics. There was a worker's party, which goes against the classless belief. 3. Their social programs were sometimes selective. 4. USSR WAS totalitarian, where in socialism, it would be like a town-hall democracy, on a much larger scale, hence my reference to true democracy. All in all, try reading...or having a discussion with a professor. "Man acts as though he were the shaper and master of language, while in fact language remains the master of man." -Heidegger www.rorta.com -knowledge is power...

Feb 6, 2004, 07:07 pm	#23 (permalink) (top)
PeterAngelo Igneous Magma Posts: 169	The USSR was - and is - totalitarian. People will do what they are talented at and truly love to do. We do not nurture peoples natural talents and desires. We try to make everyone fit a mold. When people are forced to do work they hate for slave wages - no one works. Like the Russians used to say, "The government pretends to pay us and we pretend to work". Natural human behavior. Imagine a society that nurtered each other instead of "dog eat dog" in a rat race. That's us and we are PROUD of it. IDIOTS!!!

Feb 8, 2004, 03:33 am	#27 (permalink) (top)
Impenitent Hot Lava Posts: 1,859	</span><blockquote><span class="smallfont">Quote:</span><hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (Eulux,) No, that explains why capitalism...nevermind...damn you took that out of context. If you knew anything about governments, you would at least know the ideologies behind them. Socialism in government is almost if not a pure democracy. Perhaps USSR had socialism in it's intentions, but I and every other educated professor I have talked to have agreed that it never even came close to socialism. 1. the economy is owned by the workers...there is none of the greed of capitalism, meaning no competition. With competition comes a dog-eat-dog mentality, which socialism avoids, for everyone is working towards the betterment of the community. If they get the job done, everyone comes out on top. This never happened in the USSR, for the workers were still controlled by a ruling elite. The workers themselves were not in control. Actually, if you think about it, socialism is a free enterprise...unlike capitalsim. 2. As I have stated, there was a ruling elite, but not just in the sence of economics. There was a worker's party, which goes against the classless belief. 3. Their social programs were sometimes selective. 4. USSR WAS totalitarian, where in socialism, it would be like a town-hall democracy, on a much larger scale, hence my reference to true democracy. All in all, try reading...or having a discussion with a professor.<hr size="1" /></blockquote><span class='postcolor'> no, socialism is not pure democracy, pure democracy is a lynch mob... socialism is the government control of the means of production... no, the ussr was intended to be communist... government would not be needed... it was supposed to be the workers paradice... the government of the ussr controlled everything, it was a socialist dictatorship 1. no, that's communism, in socialism, the state owns the means of production... socialism doesn't avoid anything, it forces citizens to work as wage slaves for the government... actually if you think about it socialism is slavery to the state... 2. the ruling elite government made it a socialist dictatorship... they called themselves the workers party, but communist workers wouldn't have need for a party, or class in a communist system, there'd be no government 3. their social programs, as all social programs run by socialist dictatorships are extremely selective 4. the ussr was totalitarian, as all socialisms are totalitarian... you cannot own the means of production in a socialism, you cannot own your own business in a socialism, you are a slave to the state in a socialism... learn the terms... all in all, you need to read a political dictionary and listen to your professors... "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...

Feb 8, 2004, 06:43 am	#28 (permalink) (top)
Suburbanite BANNED Location: Los Angeles Posts: 3,203	</span><blockquote><span class="smallfont">Quote:</span><hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (castille,) (I assume everyone here is a factory worker, since they seem to know so much about the workers)<hr size="1" /></blockquote><span class='postcolor'> First of all, I am a part time pirate, part time lumber jack. Secondly, I agree here, I personally LOVE small businesses. It is probably the sole reason I gave up on my ideals of communism when I was a kid... that and realism.

Feb 8, 2004, 07:12 am	#29 (permalink) (top)
castille Citizen #21521 Posts: 2,599	You want pure democracy? How about 1000 Chinese students rioting and attacking Japanese students? Well, it was democracy - most of those Chinese students voted to riot and attack the Japs. Ideological loyalty is the act of giving your soul to a vague concept, to be manipulated by people smarter than you.

Feb 8, 2004, 03:04 pm	#30 (permalink) (top)
Pooeypants Neo Moderator Location: England Posts: 5,595	</span><blockquote><span class="smallfont">Quote:</span><hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (castille,) You want pure democracy? How about 1000 Chinese students rioting and attacking Japanese students? Well, it was democracy - most of those Chinese students voted to riot and attack the Japs.<hr size="1" /></blockquote><span class='postcolor'> scratches head What is pure democracy? War is Peace Freedom is Slavery Ignorance is strength Harness the power of Ingsoc, then you can capture someone killed the year before

Feb 8, 2004, 07:10 pm	#31 (permalink) (top)
Xicano82 Sedimentary Rock Posts: 12	I have a question. What do you meassure success with? Minimum wage is the lowest it's been since the 70's (adjusted with inflation). There was a time when unions were bigger than they are now as about 11 percent of workers in America are getting poorer. I believe about the richest ten percent own 80-90 percent of all wealth in America, as Nader stated in 2000. I also beleive that critiques against capalism are pretty much outlawed. If someone on TV, or anywhere, says capitalism is not good, they'd be considered crazy or radical and not be taken seriously. The three facts I just listed are true, but they never get talked about on TV or in campaigns.