I agree. Systems should be judged more by the corruption and oppression they invite, and less by their claimed good intentions.
+++++++++++++++++++++ My bias is likely derived from the fact that almost ALL communist countries are absolute totalitarian dictatorships. North Korea, anyone? There have been precious few other examples that have not tried to exercise total control of the populace that they rule. Marxism is almost as bad in eroding personal liberty. David "People with a mission to save the earth want the earth to seem worse than it is so their mission will look more important."*--**P. J. O'Rourke * uncoolrabbit wrote: > Nothing is wrong with them, though your mistaken view is common and > understandable. > > What is any worse about communism than any other sustem of > goverment? Your bias is likely derived from the fact that in recent > times the greatest enemy of the west, likely through the duration of > your developing years, was communism. Make no mistake, the Soviet > Union under Stalin was a bad thing. I do not see a bias in that and > it is my feelings aswell. > > There is however a difference between Marxism and Stalinism and to > my understanding, the end goal of Marxism is the very same end goal > of die hard libertarian hardliners. Both thier endstate and the > Marxist end state is no state at all. > > So what could be the primary difference if we remove the bias? Well > the bias we must remove is corruptions and the evil of Stalinism. It > is critisized in your article thier belief that communism is > democratic for instance. Though both the article and your reactions > imply that communism is inherently undemocratic however this is not > true, this is the inherant bias of those viewing exhisting examples > of Communism in our lifetimes such as Red China and Soviet Russia. > We can find examples of capitolist 'democratic' depots in our life > times as well however due to the reality that in our life time none > of them have been so influential on us as these large communist > states it is easy for your mind to overlook them when developing > your bias. > > The enemy is not communism, it is coruption, control and various > human evils wich are a part of our race as a whole and not a part of > any one particular form of government. > > So what is that difference I spoke of between the two endstates that > are not states? It is of course the motivations and means to those > ends. In those liberty minded Marxists the the lower classes are > victims of a controlling upper class wich may or may not use the > government to further thier own agendas and benifit themselves > directly. So you don't sign on to this, yet you still sign on to the > end state, what do you become? One of you would be best to answer > that question rather than me, because for me you could only become, > for example Stalinist. Using centralized power to further your > personal goals. Stalin used the comunist government for this. This > would certainly NOT be the means of power and control for those > libertarian extremists who would seek to control you in a manner not > pertaining to goverment but still none the less unlibertarian. > > They are often governed by the belief that success makes self > evident those worthy of success, and should other succede in a > manner that prevents them from excelling to the level the desire > they identify it as an evil for they feel confident in thier > superiority and they themselves should be succesfull. Now I realize > I am not the greatest comunicator so I know the meaning of what I > said will be lost on alot of people, if you got my point and can > explain it better for me please do. > > The bottom line for me is that Liberty can be userped not merely by > goverment, but by any individual. The idea that forms of goverment > are more or less condusive to liberty is a bias that I do not belive > can be factualy supported. The real enemy to libertey is corruption, > state or no state corruption will independantly threaten liberty. > > The real mind bender is that Liberty and Justice were the desired > end goals of the modern state, and now those claiming to seak > liberty have forgotten so much of the past that they attack the > state, not corruption as the main oponenet of liberty. >
