Adam Phillip Churvis wrote:
>
> > You agreed with
> > this when you wrote "despite all claims to the counter", recognising that
> this was not how it was supposed to be, and not
> > what was stated.
>
> I NEVER agreed that Communism sounded good on paper, nor would I ever.
> "Despite all claims to the counter" was in reference to the fact that, while
> Communism was claimed to be a dictatorless system, its very tenents REQUIRE
> a dictatorship to force everyone to do exactly as the dictatorship desires.
> Sorry for miscommunicating, Gel.
>
Not to step directly between the two of you on this, but didn't Marx
indicate that the "Dictatorship of the Proletariat" would be only
temporary? And was this not, in simplest terms, a means of flipping the
governmental structure to allow the lowest classes -- the workers -- to
rule themselves, rather than suffering under the elite? It sure sounded
good to a lot of people whose pockets they felt had been picked by the
rich.
Don't get me wrong. I think Capitalism is the best economic system the
world has ever seen, and it provides the environment for the best
governments. But Communism took root, in Russia anyway, precisely
because of the abuses inherent in Capitalism. We still see many of those
same abuses here in America in the 21st Century. One might argue that,
were we to dismantle our current system of entitlements and replace it
completely with a merit system, Communism could very well see a
resurgence of popularity right here. It certainly does look good on
paper to someone who has nothing, has no hope of getting anything, risks
starvation of his family as a result, and who sees rich capitalists as
the cause of his miseries.
--John
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Structure your ColdFusion code with Fusebox. Get the official book at
http://www.fusionauthority.com/bkinfo.cfm
Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/
Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists
