--- Aristo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Since you have repeated a lot of your logic once > again by conveniently avoiding to give an answer to > the question "Karl Marx, 19-century Communist > Manifesto aside, in todays world of Cafeteria & > plural identities, what practically prevents a > Christian from being a Communist in > political/economic Ideology?", I will discuss this > no further. > Mario responds: > That's just as well, because you are comparing apples and oranges by trying to compare REAL Karl Marx communism where a state had to use it's coercive power in the day-to-day implementation and the impotent political version followed by obscure political parties which have no power to impose REAL communism and so are really socialists masquerading as communists. > Aristo writes: > > However, I would like to tell you that you have once > again misunderstood what I have written, and this > being the 3rd instance with me, I will assume that > you don't take the time to properly read since you > spend most of it typing away your voluminous views. > > This is what I had written: > "It do not think it is written anywhere in the > Communist Manifesto (yea, I had to actually > download it and go through it since you love > to refer to it ever so often) that Communism has to > be brutal and repressive. As per the philosophy, > Communism IS egalitarian in nature. > Mario responds: > On the contrary, I have understood that you have not understood the implications of the Communist Manifesto in it's day-to-day implementation. > The concept of egalitarianism is foreign to human nature, especially when forced on society by the state. Each individual is different. Some are achievers, others are not. Some are leaders, others are not. Some are smart, others are not. Some are successful in acquiring wealth, others are not. The Communist Manifesto made no common sense in forcing the theory of eglatarianism over these human and natural differences. This is precisely why brutality and oppression became necessary in the IMPLEMENTATION of communism, even though it was not written anywhere. > Oh, I forgot. Some people have common sense, others don't. > Aristo writes: > > .... However, I do not subscribe to the means of > obtaining that egalitarianism, ie, the Robin hood > method. To me, altruism (which is > against human nature) should be voluntary. I'd . rather prefer the trickle down effect, and > circulation of money to achieve egalitarianism. > Mario asks: > Does this mean you reject the coercive egalitarianism of REAL communism for the trickle down economic benefits of capitalism? Real egalitarianism is against human nature and a political pipe dream. > Aristo writes: > > Also, would you be kind enough to humour me and > answer the following questions with your Goveian > Logic? > > 1) What is the fundamental difference in the > Political & Economic ideology between Communism & > Socialism? > Mario responds patiently: > Socialism is communism minus the religious hostility and power of the state behind it, i.e. what was left when the coercive power of a state to impose REAL communism was relegated to the dustbin of history where it really belongs. > Aristo writes: > > 2) Can an Athiest be a Capitalist? > Mario responds: > Of course they can, Aristo. Sheesh! > Aristo writes: > > 3) Can a Christian be a fascist? > Mario responds: > Not a Christian who follows the rock solid Christian moral code. However, there have been people who claimed to be Christian but followed NOT A SINGLE tenet of the rock solid moral code, who were fascist. These were used to make exceptions the rule in the recent full-scale attack on religion which seems to have fizzled under it's own illogic, just like communism did:-)) These included the Crusaders and the Inquisition types of ancient times, and Hitler, Mussolini, Stalin and the Mafioso more recently. > Aristo writes: > > Mario, one thing that experience has taught me is > that when Quantity is the focus, there is a > definite compromise on Quality. Your writings > are an epitome of that lesson. That doesn't mean > that you cannot produce quality. Your answer to > Sunith's question on what next for India's economy > was a gem that made it the first MG piece that I > saved for future reference. I hope you can give us > more gems like that. > Mario responds: > Unfortunately, I have no way to respond to a gratuitous and meaningless generality like the first part of your last paragraph. However, if you can cite some specifics where quality was compromised by quantity I would definitely consider it. > For example, how am I supposed to restrict my responses when people CONTINUE to look for brutality and repression in the Communist Manifesto, when > a) common sense should have told them that it is IMPOSSIBLE for a state to force a whole society to be egalitarian across the board without brutality and oppression, and > b) even after all the real world evidence that ALL communist regimes were brutal and oppressive by necessity, and the two that remain, N. Korea and Cuba still are. >
_______________________________________________ Goanet mailing list [email protected] http://lists.goanet.org/listinfo.cgi/goanet-goanet.org
