You are the victim of newspeak.
Your overlords have purposely poisoned the term 'communism' in your mind.
They know that if you knew the truth you would be a communist, too.
Think about it.
USSR=Union of Soviet Socialist Republics.
Its right there in their country's name.
What happened in Russia was socialism.
You can know what is happening in China is socialism by their use of crapitalism to keep the slaves on the factory floors.
Want to eat? Submit to exploitation.
Pay a boss for the privilege of work and not being starved to death.
Communists don't use money, they work together for the benefit of the whole.
Here is a report from a lady that knew her terms.
Take note that this report was from the scene after the revolution had had time to establish the new bosses.
http://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/emma-goldman-there-is-no-communism-in-russia
Why do you think that your masters have made sure that when you think communism you think false information?
Why was your fakeducation so all fired concerned with creating this myth in your mind?
Why would the elites, that decide what the textbooks are allowed to say, want you to equate socialism with communism?
Why is Marx the face of communism and not Bakunin, who was a contemporary of Marx, or Berkman, who expanded the ideas and put them in a worker's language 50 years later?
Or Kropotkin, who wrote the book on it?
http://theanarchistlibrary.org/category/author/petr-kropotkin
You know that the presstitutes are feeding you a line.
You know your govt sponsored fakeducation is more about turning out good little taxpayers that dont read books, nor ask questions, than actually educating you.
You know these things because you think for yourself.
The glitches in the matrix are becoming visible to you.
Now you need only widen what is possible for you to think.
You can only operate from what you know, you cant know what you dont know, nor that you dont know it.
These ideas were hashed out by well educated folks over 100 years ago.
They left us records to learn from.
We only have to read them.
If you want to know what is coming, Jack London wrote the book on that in 1908.
The Iron Heel
Any question why you havent heard about it?
.png)
Yep, communism, the word, has been corrupted as much as the word anarchism.
Fortunately, all these words will be stupid in the future.
Imagine all the diagrams, the left right-line, the left-right horseshoe, that square, all being turned 90 deg on their side, like out sticking out of the paper.
We will see new solutions to cooperative living along entirely new axis of measurement.
The problem with anarchy is that people need structure, and there are a lot of people that need help just living.
The problem with communism is that it doesn't scale well, and without a strong leader keeping it going it breaks down in petty feuds.
Fortunately, there will be really interesting solutions to both.
I cant wait,....
Just taking rule by force off the table ends most of the problems.
@freebornangel There is no way that I could agree more with you in this specific area.
oh? OK. Build a house. I will not. As soon as you will I move out and make a toilet in the living room. It is as mine as yours right?
1 tree, 2 people. Who will decide which one will be dominated?
I make bows and save people from starvation if they give me a percentage of their catch so I do not starve and continue improving lives. Am I already an evil lord of means of production? Or am I saving lives with voluntary agreements?
Humans are not ready for communism.
Yeah, tv commercials would have to be used for a couple weeks before the transition.
They will mostly do whatever the flashylight box tells them to do.
It's not the T.V. commercials I'm worried about. It's the recaptchas.
???
Instead of an army of computers mining crypto there will be an army of humans mining cryptos. They're gonna have to click " I am not a robot" a gazillion times. There will be humans that think they are bots, and bots that think they are human.
Lol, 'I am not a robot.' Click 'I am not a robot.' Click,....
'I am not a robot!' :stamps foot:
'I am a real boy!' :actuates servos:
Smdh
Its a fine mess they have gotten us into,...
the idea that I am not in control of what I create is not something to be ready for. I can choose to share, but forcing me to share is immoral. It is an extortion. Being ready to be an ant?
:D and the worst kind - the delusional collectivists wanting to kill everyone who has more than them
..funny how well intended socialism (communism) always ends up in millions of deaths...I wonder why?... because it doesn't work, and it's evil - , ...just maybe?
https://steemit.com/blog/@lucylin/the-left-will-always-lose
Lol, didnt bother reading the referenced books, did ya?
There is no point in arguing with ignorance.
If you had bothered to read the works, you would've known that all of them take rule by force, and killing for compliance, off the table.
But lets dont let facts get in the way of our beliefs, eh?
So by that rationale, you mean there has never been any socialism/communism?
So by that rationale you are arguing for fantastic system never implemented in history, and presume it works...
..for the last 5000 years, socialism has never been implemented as a political system.
(I'm not arguing socialism can't work - because it can- but only as a small localized size - it does not scale up..).
...does that maybe tell you something?.. but let's not facts get in the way of ideology, eh?
lol
For short periods, but they were bombed back into submission by crapitalust bombs.
Spain in ~'37, Ukraine in the teens, Paris in the 1880s, a couple others.
Yep.
Socialism continues rule by force.
Im calling for communism, read the references if you care enough to know the difference, and dont want to argue from a position of ignorance.
Yes, use enough force and bullies get to rule.
Said the man arguing from ignorance of the facts.
Read just one of those authors, and get back with me, eh?
You do know that Bukarin's good mate in England (Herzen at al - their Russian publication - was funded by a Rothschild loan? Now why would they do that? lol).
Useful idiots to a man...just sayin'
...Communism is a Rothschild brain child -(why else would the US banks and Germany fund Lenin in his bolshevik revolution?) and it is now where crapitalism is leading to right now, interestingly..
(centralized means of production by any name. Apple, amazon, google. etc.)
...fundamental principles of communism (no money or authority is naivety and illogical).
Communism can work but does not scale up without centralization , leading to totalitarian regimes, ultimately.
It's flawed logic that doesn't take into account human beings, human nature, and laws of economics ,( natural laws of efficiency, not man made models).
(I've read one of those authors a long long time ago, and I'm not ignorant of communism and it's mechanics, and principles, btw )
I do know the irrelevance of debating details of people long dead.
The facts are, the workers can simply continue doing the work, while refusing to play crapitalism by paying to get that work back from the wealthy and the world doesnt end.
On any given tuesday proper management brings us as close to utopia as we can get.
We dont have to call that communism, we dont have to delineate who owns the factories, we only have to properly manage resources to end wars and poverty.
The only people that get mad are the folks that like the misery inflicted onto others by the status quo, and their dupes.
The factories are free? the plant machinery is free? the infrastructure is free?
It has to be paid for in advance by someone. If it's not stolen money, it's capitalism...
If its assets seized, its communism.
I don't like theft.
Why is it irrelevant to find out the motivations that sell snake oil?
It gives an sight into the motivations behind the actions of these people (selling ideologies that can never work, for example)
Does this not seem relevant?
...like Marx being 2nd cousin of Rothchilds. Does that not ring any alarm bells about the doctrine, and potential propaganda that might have been employed...?
u ignorant! :D I love when people start with: you are projecting, you are ignorant, you don't know, you are a bigot...
It makes it so much easier when they introduce themselves.
Oh, the irony!
Jabotinsky was one of the Zionists who was sponsored by Rothschild. They cooperated and sponsored Hitler to move Jews to a desert... also bought by R. Hitler's materials built it. Jews did not want to go, so Zionists paid Hitler to force them or kill them. This is where the trains were going from concentration camps... that had theaters, swimming pools, operas, football teams...
Communism was created by Zionists who started the Bolshevik revolution. First USSR government was 99% Jewish.
Zionists created KGB. Created Hitler. Slaughtered 100 million people (100 million also in China), now they are doing the same to Palestine... Israel is a socialist country... with some free trade... but why notice the reality... instead call people ignorant :D because that make you awesome :D this person is trolling my Voluntaryism posts... really hard to reason with insanity
(I did a few posts, some months back about Herzen etc and the Rothschild communist funded revolutions, if you want to read them..)
Trotsky's story in the US quite interesting...
Seems like a good reason to stop using money to me,...
Banks using money to corrupt people is a good reason to stop using it?..mmm...I see a flaw in that logic.
(One person hits their hand with a hammer, so we should stop using hammers, kind of thing...)
Communism is not the same as socialism. Communism is collective ownership with no state, while socialism is state ownership supposedly on behalf of the collective. Socialism is a hack used to approximate communism because real communism is an entirely incoherent idea. That's why most examples of supposed communism are actually socialism.
Communism means collective ownership, and ownership defines who has the exclusive right to control how a scarce resource is used. Everyone can't exclusively use the same scarce resources. That's what "scarcity" and "exclusivity" mean. Because of this, claims of collective ownership require the creation of a single entity trusted to speak on behalf of the collective. This is typically the socialist state.
Communism could only appear to function if the collective were entirely homogeneous and all its members shared the same preferences such that there was no conflict between them. Given such an absence of conflict, it would not matter who was recognized as owning anything so communism would offer no benefit over alternatives.
you cannot share the same preferences if you value things you need. If you value things you need, you value the people who have better skills than you to make them. You support them more than people who have skills useless to you. you vote with a piece of your time/life/wealth/capital. If you are free to value things, you value people differently. You still treat people equally, but not as if people were equal. The differences make us beautiful. This is what humanity is about; the subjective experience of reality. There is not 2 identical experiences. Forcing it on people is against all human knowledge.
So... I choose the voluntary hierarchy, because I recognize some people are better at some things than I am. You must be an arrogant, ignorant, useless, entitled, spoiled "victim" to even think communism is moral. Then if you want to live in a communist commune, do it! Take your comrades, take your wealth and share it equally... until you will need money to trade your produce with other communities, based on voluntary association... you will become a capitalist. Or just be tribal, grow potatoes... so no one ever has to be exposed to genocidal ideology again... and extinct in your community... while slaughtering each other, as the nature shows... evolutionary impulse pushes our awareness to new discoveries. If you are stuck on theft as being moral... you will extinct to make room for civilization. Rabid ape circus is obsolete.
Once rule by force is off the table, it wont really matter what we call things, we will be free from coercion to conform.
Rule by force is indeed the disease. Yet I have not seen any comment of yours that proceeds to detail how that disease might be cured. Regardless of the rhetoric behind any system of governance imposed on people, force inevitably creates oppression.
Do you have any thoughts on how force might become obsolete?
The same way other bullies learn, you punch them in the nose until they get with the program.
Anybody using force to control another should find swift, and sure, punishment.
They would now, but John Wayne is dead, and we are all pussified by having cops to call instead of relying on ourselves to solve our problems ourselves.
Ah. Well, I am working on a means of actually preventing rule by force that doesn't rely on the Duke, or cops. I wondered if you had some ideas that didn't involve bloodshed, because I'd like to have more options.
My plan is not fast enough for me, but I'll take what I can get.
Its not going to be easy to free yourself from someone that will kill you to maintain control of you.
Maybe this will help.
https://www.aeinstein.org/free-resources/free-publications/
This has been happening for 20 years in Venezuela, and I believe that my country is a clear example where you want to equate socialism with communism
Socialism uses the violence of the state to force the people to comply.
Communism offers a better deal to be voluntarily accepted, or rejected.
They would both be called one or the other, if they didnt have this difference.
If you would like to read more, in spanish, here is the link.
http://es.theanarchistlibrary.org/special/index
If you want to know about nonviolent tactics to use to defeat the violent, also in spanish, this is the link.
https://www.aeinstein.org/free-resources/free-publications/espanol/
Until the people of venezuela learn to cooperate outside crapitalism, this is what they get.
you have all the reason here they have used violence until they can not, thanks for sharing that material
So, I can decide if I want to decide what to do with what I create or not? I decide to decide. Your idea is over. Thanks. Do you have any other means of convincing me to communism? Or totalitarian state/socialism is the only way to make sure someone does not have more than I do? Let's just make people not create anything because it will be taken away from them... so why bother. Let others do stuff for you... this is insane!
Never proposed that.
That is your emotions getting the best of you.
I do not think it helps your argument when you have none, but instead talk about what you think my emotions are. I think you should focus on fixing yourself first before you assume you know anything about me.
How will you make me a communist without force? I do not agree already? Go! :D
By offering you a better deal.
If you can pull your head out of your mind controlled matrix long enough to recognize a better deal when you see it.
wait... what? you really have a lot of issues with being coherent and rational. Could you use honest language and write exactly what you want to say by what you type? I am not buying your snake oil.
So you want to do all the thinking for all of these people who are inferior to you Joseph?
They just can't ever be as smart as you, so you will fix them? :D
Tell me at what point you get confused:
I am doing something. Then I have an option to keep doing it or choose something I'd rather do. I have a clear agreement that as 2+2=4 has to be beneficial for both parties. Otherwise I am a total retard to choose something that is worse. I take it that you would?
So I catch fish. Some dude invested all his life's wealth to create something that was not, that gave me a second option. I did not create it. Someone else did. They need help. Offer me something. I decide if it is more beneficial for me than what I did before. I can try to negotiate based on how useful I am to the guy. He cannot go above some level, because the whole project and many people would suffer.
At what point did I loose you now? 2+2?
The question i would want to ask is " if the word communism is corrupted and being taken out of contest, why is it that the majority of folks in the world are yet to see its true meaning and benefits?"
I have a question too, if you do not need capitalism creating all the things, why don't communists take their stuff and go share it equally? Why this has never happened and first they need to steal what they did not create from the people they do not need?
Mind control.
You dont have to burn books if you can convince the slaves not to read them.
Read the books for yourself, they are linked.
Note the publication dates.
Ask why they dont get mentioned in skools.
The idea of communism don't seem feasible to the average man that is why it's finding it difficult to gain a wide acceptance.
Yes the mind control has been very effective.
You're funny! Do you think if you see something that will be very beneficial to you and you're very sure that such thing will be very beneficial to you, someone else can be able to persuade you from doing such thing? It's more than mind game. If it's applicable, everyone will embrace it
Yes, they will.
Do you prefer the status quo, or would you like to work less while having more?
My proposal makes that possible.
No one is pleased with the status quo where a very few control the wealth of the world but that is what it is now and it will be very difficult to change. If your proposal is workable, keep presenting it to the world and with time it will gain acceptance
Just a question here, if rule by force is off the table, there is really no difference between 'no force communism' and voluntaryism.
Forced communism required the involuntary distribution of products, while what you are suggesting requires the voluntary distribution of products.
What is the reason you feel attached to the word communism?
Berkman and Kropotkin repeatedly framed their Communism in the context of violent revolution, which doesn't fit in the voluntary model anymore, so why is it important to advance their position?
In their day violence was a much more common daily fact of life.
Peaceful revolution wasnt really an option.
(It could also be that they were picked by historians/publishers over those more nonviolently oriented for just this reason. We certainly dont see authors that offered nonviolent means, though they must have existed. Thoreau couldnt have been the only one.)
Nonviolent revolution may be more likely today, but when it really comes to cutting the nuts, do you expect hitlary, et al, to put their heads in the noose willingly?
As for regaining the narrative regarding communism, part of getting the masses to stand on their own two feet will be getting them to recognize that their most cherished beliefs are wrong.
That their most trusted authorities lied to them.
That they need to examine their beliefs to see if that is what they actually know to be the truth, or if they have accepted it blindly through faith.
This one will be difficult for nearly everybody 'educated' in the united snakes.
That makes it broadly applicable to what i wish to accomplish.
Causing us all to think critically before accepting something as truth.
Folks will largely have to learn to live with having been wrong.
That wont be very easy for most of them, too emotionally attached to their infalibility illusions.
I think volutaryism continues trading this for that, communism does away with that.
Though you still trade your time for standing in the community, the willingness to withold your contribution doesnt necessarily mean you will starve or be forced to be naked under a bridge.
Voluntaryism continues that option on the part of goods manufacturers.
Either jump through the hoops the voluntaryists erect, or do without.
Not very voluntary if you ask me.
Still there is this disparity in your offered communist position that in one context, you say 'no rule by force', but within the same context there continues to be the offering up of the authors of force of revolution, and 'putting heads in nooses'.
You have become much better in arguing your position, but this contradiction continues to repeat. I think Emma may be a singular writer that doesn't use force of revolution, but it is taking time to sift through her work and find mention of it.
What hoops are you seeing under voluntaryism?
Taking rule by force off the table means violent revolution wont be needed to change things.
Voluntary hoop:
Submit to exploitation by a have to get money, or starve.
The havenots are not free if they have to dance to get food from a have.
I dont expect all of those that rule by force to surrender their priviliges willingly, they will have to be forced from power.
What final stands they make remains to be seen, maybe they will all break weak.
-"Taking rule by force off the table means violent revolution wont be needed to change things."
I completely get what your saying, but the authors you keep citing have rule by force as a premise.
Kropotkin and Berkley specifically, they make your argument in this area weaker.
-"Submit to exploitation"
The many facets about what is often perceived as exploitation are addressed here:
If you think he somehow gets the nuances of it wrong, let me know where, as he does a pretty detailed job of the subject as far as I can tell.
I don't see a specific mandatory requirement for money within voluntaryism, or that money would lead to the 'surplus value' problem I think communism is concerned with.
Privileges are only granted by power, and when they find they have no power, then there is no privileges.
I had to check out, the guy's accent was driving me, i made it to the 15min mark.
If you got a link to a text copy, id be glad to read it.
The guy presumes that the worker can wait, that he has sufficient crapital to live while waiting for these future goods.
The worker wouldnt sell his labor if this was true.
Show me how to escape this and i wont call it exploitive.
The crapitalust pays the lowest wage possible thereby insuring the worker cant escape the plantation.
Which again, largely becomes accademic in freedom.
When rule by force stops sucking sooo much to the few this wont really be an issue.
Workers will become scarcer as money spreads out.
Voluntaryism will end in a cooperative, and therefore, communist society.
When scarcity no longer is the driving force of so many life becomes much more relaxed.
No worries. As far as I can tell there is no presumption made that the worker can wait. The assumption is the worker has time preferences on the return of his labor.
Time preferences also show up in communist models.
There is no proof that voluntaryism will end in a economic model where the products of labor are taken from the worker and distributed (or even distributed 'equally') by a social construct.
As we discussed before demand is the 'pull' part of the system, and scarce resources will remain scarce unless the motivate to produce the resources is directly linked to the need. Social distribution uncouples the motivation from the need. As Hoppe mentions, you get less resources.
https://mises.org/system/tdf/9_2_5_0.pdf?file=1&type=document
Voluntary communes are awesome.
Mandatory communism is slavery.
According to Rummel, Rudolph Joseph
Approximately 148,000,000 people were
murdered by communists from 1900-1999.
When government kills its own people so
that they accept slavery, that's a bad sign.
Yes, the world will be a better place when we stop letting the bullies run it.
This is beyond silly. How do you achieve communism? By the totalitarian slavery, total rule of the state, which is socialism. Oh what a surprise the dictators did not give the power back to the idiots, who value others by the status angry gang-raping mob give them. Hey, how about we eat you first when 99% of people are hungry, and they will be, because communism is anti-economics. You cannot possibly count what people need. You cannot make people equal. There is a difference in treating people equally and enforce being equal with deadly force... threat of death. Every person with a tiny brain knows this. This is why socialists always mass slaughter the intelligent people first, so only dumb cowards are left, and it is easy to terrorize them into paradigm of an ant.
How arrogant and ignorant you have to be to skip the entire human knowledge and project your ignorance on others?
If you cannot survive without the theft of what you did not create, you do not deserve to survive... and the nature keeps telling you this, every single time this most horrible idea of humanity is tried. 300 million dead in last 100 years is not enough to convince you collectivism is bad? How many do you need? Billion? How about capitalism while oppressed by socialism, the state reduced worlds poverty 2004-2012? In 8 years, close to 4 billion people stopped suffering from lack of basics to survive. Let's compare it to 6 000 000 farmers and people depending on them, slaughtered and starved to death in Ukraine, because their crop was "everybody's", which means, the "managers" decided the monopoly evil corporation should give it to its mercenaries?
How about that... I will make a list of achievements of socialism/communism and you make the list for capitalism (this should keep you occupied till you extinct):
Socialism that its end goal is Communism, list of achievements:
death, suffering, destruction, starvation, the highest number of people slaughtered than any ideology. 20 times more victims than Hitler's.
I'm done with my list.
Start yours here:
when you get through first million things, take a break... but please do not preach for slaughter of innocent people who just know how to be useful to others and just want to express themselves through creating things they consider extension of themselves, therefore they own them... AGAIN!
I skipped most of that last comment, this one, too.
Didnt you say that you were through discussing this with me?
I proved that there is no point discussing anything with delusional people. You could not present a half a dick of evidence, but since you rode in on your high moral horse, to spread the cancer of the most evil idea humans ever came up with, I feel the moral duty to be the counterbalance for your murderous aspirations ;)
And I know it is hard for you to notice anything else but your own subjective reality and you do not respect any other freedom but the one you are hallucinating... but I am here to talk with others, who also seem to disagree with you.
I do not debate sect members. It is pointless ;)
Then why are you?
Because as a Voluntaryist I love humanity and I care about freedom. It is my moral duty to stop violent or confused people from spreading the most murderous, crazy idea, that mass-slaughter people every single time it is tried. Because I remember what collectivism done to my country. Because I know the state=collectivism=socialism and communism will always be one execution from your silly utopia and it can never happen. It is a self-contradictory, superdumb idea that comes from good place of compassion and this is why dummies fall for it. It is attractive when you don't know much about anything. Because I will do my best to stop delusional people like yourself, people who dare to think "if I was Stalin, Mao or Hitler, I would know how to fix everyone so they know how to live their lives", from spreading this cancer YET AGAIN, after 300 000 000 dead bodies. You think people before you did not know the ideology like you do? Emma did. Still all went to shit as every single time. Therefore I know Emma is dumb and I will not waste time on her. I will not lie like you did, that you know anything about Austrian economics. If you really read something, you cannot read with understanding. I think until you will watch your closest family starving, raped and torn to pieces in front of you, you will not get your head out of your ass... therefore I am writing this for others. You are not my target audience. You dared to come to my blog, arrogant enough to think you can teach... while your moral compass sucks as much as it can. This is the consequence of your actions. You are a lost soul; emotionally underdeveloped human, on previous stage of evolution, who is due for extinction, that blames the world for not being able to catch up. You also may be a child... I dunno. If you are above 30 and you still did not develop enough to grow out of the stage of communism, most people go through, you are a weak gene that makes space for something improved. A new human. You will not pull the humanity down with you. The reason you cannot survive without theft is clear indication that you should not. Evolution doesn't care about your entitlement and resentment feelz.
"If at age 20 you are not a Communist then you have no heart. If at age 30 you are not a Capitalist then you have no brains."
George Bernard Shaw
You should trouble yourself to read what ive eaid before you troll me with memes, but true beliebers got to belieb irrespective of the facts.
So, welcome to my blog, forgive me if i dont bother to respond, very often.
you have not, because you cannot respond to anything I wrote, not to sound silly to yourself. your ego will never let you question your cult ;)
that's fine... your non-argument was crushed by every single comment by everyone else... and you still fail to recognize it. I wonder if you ever will. I wish all the best to you. I hope you will wake up.
I'm just happy to see that there is such a positive response. It looks like anarchy is better understood every day and AnComs are a minority now. There is hope for human race
Now you are repeating yourself.
did I? I don't see any harm in that. Maybe you need a kind of repeating hypnosis to make you stop hallucinating? :D I will be repeating myself until you will grow up to reply to simple questions of logic without straw ;)