92% Of Polled Russians Want To Return To The USSR

[tankasnowgod]

What a load of bull**** you're spewing

Really?

Communist Manifesto (Chapter 2)

On the relation between Communists and the working class

www.marxists.org

The distinguishing feature of Communism is not the abolition of property generally, but the abolition of bourgeois property. But modern bourgeois private property is the final and most complete expression of the system of producing and appropriating products, that is based on class antagonisms, on the exploitation of the many by the few.

In this sense, the theory of the Communists may be summed up in the single sentence: Abolition of private property.

That's exactly what Marx wrote.

Its called communism because the property of the society is owned by the community of the society. Youre projecting the capitalist state like we have in the united states which is the iron fist of capital onto the community system of governance that exist in socialism

Ridiculous. I'm quoting directly from the Communist Manifesto. The current system in THE UNITED STATES isn't a free market, and probably not exactly "capitalist." In fact, it features several of the planks that Marx himself suggested for a Communist state-

Nevertheless, in most advanced countries, the following will be pretty generally applicable.

1. Abolition of property in land and application of all rents of land to public purposes.
2. A heavy progressive or graduated income tax.
3. Abolition of all rights of inheritance.
4. Confiscation of the property of all emigrants and rebels.
5. Centralisation of credit in the hands of the state, by means of a national bank with State capital and an exclusive monopoly.
6. Centralisation of the means of communication and transport in the hands of the State.
7. Extension of factories and instruments of production owned by the State; the bringing into cultivation of waste-lands, and the improvement of the soil generally in accordance with a common plan.
8. Equal liability of all to work. Establishment of industrial armies, especially for agriculture.
9. Combination of agriculture with manufacturing industries; gradual abolition of all the distinction between town and country by a more equable distribution of the populace over the country.
10. Free education for all children in public schools. Abolition of children’s factory labour in its present form. Combination of education with industrial production, &c, &c.

Have you even read The Communist Manifesto? I have.

BTW the soviets had a billof rights almost identical of the one we have in the united states

So what? That is irrelevant to the point I made.

Maybe you should hit the books and look up the difference between private property which leads to the concentration of a societies wealth into the hands of a few people and personal possessions

Maybe you should take your own advice to "hit the books" and read The Communist Manifesto itself. It isn't long, only about 40 pages, and freely available. You really don't have an excuse not to, especially if it's a system you are interested in (either to promote it, or oppose it).

I absolutely understand the difference between public and private, and I got the definition of anarchy, private, and public straight from Black's Law Dictionary. As for communism, I quote directly from the Communist Manifesto. Hard to have better sources than those.

 

[Demyze]

Really?

Communist Manifesto (Chapter 2)

On the relation between Communists and the working class

www.marxists.org

That's exactly what Marx wrote.

Ridiculous. I'm quoting directly from the Communist Manifesto. The current system in THE UNITED STATES isn't a free market, and probably not exactly "capitalist." In fact, it features several of the planks that Marx himself suggested for a Communist state-


Have you even read The Communist Manifesto? I have.

So what? That is irrelevant to the point I made.

Maybe you should take your own advice to "hit the books" and read The Communist Manifesto itself. It isn't long, only about 40 pages, and freely available. You really don't have an excuse not to, especially if it's a system you are interested in (either to promote it, or oppose it).

I absolutely understand the difference between public and private, and I got the definition of anarchy, private, and public straight from Black's Law Dictionary. As for communism, I quote directly from the Communist Manifesto. Hard to have better sources than those.

I have a copy sitting on my bookshelf, along with Marx's other books and writings. You obviously don't even understand what "capitalism" is, its history, or the context in which it arose and in which Marx formulated his ideas.

Would you mind explaining what you think a "free market" is and why you would expect a capitalist society to have a "free market"?

You claimed that in a communist society, without private property in which there is government, the state owned all including a person. You're asserting that a communist society is a slave state in which the citizens of the society are the private property of the state. That is simply untrue and is either ignorant or deceitful.

 

[tankasnowgod]

I have a copy sitting on my bookshelf, along with Marx's other books and writings. You obviously don't even understand what "capitalism" is, its history, or the context in which it arose and in which Marx formulated his ideas.

Well, then you should take it off your bookshelf and READ IT. And regardless of the context of which he formulated his ideas, it is very clear (to anyone who reads and understands his text) that he is advocating for complete government control of everything.

Why do you keep on bringing up "capitalism?" I never mentioned it in my initial comment.

Would you mind explaining what you think a "free market" is and why you would expect a capitalist society to have a "free market"?

Definition of a "Free Market?" Easy. That is a market without government regulation. That would pretty much have to include private money, like gold and silver, not money that is issued by a central bank.

While even the constitution grants the Federal Government power to regulate commerce, it's pretty ridiculous to think that THE UNITED STATES today is close to a free market, when you have governments demanding you wear a mask or take an experimental drug to participate in certain commercial activities.

You claimed that in a communist society, without private property in which there is government, the state owned all including a person.

Basically, yes, except they obviously wouldn't be the "private" property of the state (since private, by definition, means "absence of government"), merely property of the state. And that is exactly what Marx said. "Abolition of Private Property." If you can't own your own body (since it can't be "private") obviously, the state would then own it.

Even if they wouldn't own you outright, they would absolutely have de facto ownership, since you wouldn't be allowed to own anything. No private land, no private transportation, no private food or water, no private shelter. You would be totally dependent on the government or state.

You're asserting that a communist society is a slave state in which the citizens of the society are the private property of the state.

Yes. And this is directly in the writings of Marx, which I quoted. "Abolition of private property." If you don't know what "Abolition" or "private" or "property" means, I suggest you look them up in the dictionary.

That is simply untrue and is either ignorant or deceitful.

Again, I think you need to re-read what Marx wrote. Or are you going to claim that the man who literally wrote the book on Communism has no idea what Communism is?

Abolition is the elimination of something.
Private is the absence of government.
Property is physical things in the world, like land, shelter, food, water, animals, and such.

There is literally no other way to interpret "Abolition of Private Property." To claim otherwise is ignorant or deceitful.

And also, to your earlier point about a Soviet "Bill of Rights," I would suggest you learn the principles that the United States of America were founded on. Justice Antonin Scalia made the point that Separation of Powers is what really helped to make the Republic free, not so much the Bill of Rights, as several countries have a Bill of Rights, but without Separation of Powers, it can be re-written or ignored at will-


View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E2a0souub60

 

[Demyze]

Well, then you should take it off your bookshelf and READ IT. And regardless of the context of which he formulated his ideas, it is very clear (to anyone who reads and understands his text) that he is advocating for complete government control of everything.

Why do you keep on bringing up "capitalism?" I never mentioned it in my initial comment.

Definition of a "Free Market?" Easy. That is a market without government regulation. That would pretty much have to include private money, like gold and silver, not money that is issued by a central bank.

While even the constitution grants the Federal Government power to regulate commerce, it's pretty ridiculous to think that THE UNITED STATES today is close to a free market, when you have governments demanding you wear a mask or take an experimental drug to participate in certain commercial activities.

Basically, yes, except they obviously wouldn't be the "private" property of the state (since private, by definition, means "absence of government"), merely property of the state. And that is exactly what Marx said. "Abolition of Private Property." If you can't own your own body (since it can't be "private") obviously, the state would then own it.

Even if they wouldn't own you outright, they would absolutely have de facto ownership, since you wouldn't be allowed to own anything. No private land, no private transportation, no private food or water, no private shelter. You would be totally dependent on the government or state.

Yes. And this is directly in the writings of Marx, which I quoted. "Abolition of private property." If you don't know what "Abolition" or "private" or "property" means, I suggest you look them up in the dictionary.

Again, I think you need to re-read what Marx wrote. Or are you going to claim that the man who literally wrote the book on Communism has no idea what Communism is?

Abolition is the elimination of something.
Private is the absence of government.
Property is physical things in the world, like land, shelter, food, water, animals, and such.

There is literally no other way to interpret "Abolition of Private Property." To claim otherwise is ignorant or deceitful.

And also, to your earlier point about a Soviet "Bill of Rights," I would suggest you learn the principles that the United States of America were founded on. Justice Antonin Scalia made the point that Separation of Powers is what really helped to make the Republic free, not so much the Bill of Rights, as several countries have a Bill of Rights, but without Separation of Powers, it can be re-written or ignored at will-


View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E2a0souub60

Real property is land and things appurtenant to it, like buildings, rights of way, rights to remove minerals, etc. Other property is personal property.

"The classical idea of a free market was one free from economic rent – from rentier income in the form of land rent.

This rent – a quasi-tax paid to the heirs of the warlord bands that had conquered Britain in 1066, and the similar Viking bands that had conquered other European realms – threatened to minimize foreign trade. That was a threat to Europe’s banking classes, whose major market was the funding of commerce by bills of exchange."

The rentier resurgence and takeover: Finance Capitalism vs. Industrial Capitalism | Michael Hudson
---
authors you should read
David Ricardo - Wikipedia
Adam Smith - Wikipedia
Paul Sweezy - Wikipedia
Karl Marx - Wikipedia
Michael Hudson (economist) - Wikipedia *

*recommended by Peat

 

[Demyze]

Real property is land and things appurtenant to it, like buildings, rights of way, rights to remove minerals, etc. Other property is personal property.

"The classical idea of a free market was one free from economic rent – from rentier income in the form of land rent.

This rent – a quasi-tax paid to the heirs of the warlord bands that had conquered Britain in 1066, and the similar Viking bands that had conquered other European realms – threatened to minimize foreign trade. That was a threat to Europe’s banking classes, whose major market was the funding of commerce by bills of exchange."

The rentier resurgence and takeover: Finance Capitalism vs. Industrial Capitalism | Michael Hudson
---
authors you should read
David Ricardo - Wikipedia
Adam Smith - Wikipedia
Paul Sweezy - Wikipedia
Karl Marx - Wikipedia
Michael Hudson (economist) - Wikipedia *

*recommended by Peat

View: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=iZzH8xxCzR0


Transcript - Reality Detours | Michael Hudson

 

[Demyze]

View: https://mobile.twitter.com/Zis1941/status/1510565764272726017?cxt=HHwWgoC91eXjzfYpAAAA

 

[Elderflower j58]

The Magnitsky Act: Behind the Scenes – Banned documentary – Watch it here · DLive

Video created by majes.tytyty | News | This 2016 documentary exposes the many "strange holes" in Bill Browder's story of the events surrounding the death of his accountant in a Russian prison.

dlive.tv

@Drareg
This should guide you as to what side of the fence you sit on.

Not sure if you have seen this before but this is An extremely watchable and riveting account of the magnetsky Act Which is a hoax.

Kudos to the filmmaker who became an investigative journalist During the making of his film.

And Bill Browder is on the prowl again Selling his lies.

 

[Whichway?]

And Bill Browder is on the prowl again Selling his lies.

why is it always members of a certain race that are able to start banks and financial institutions and gain access to countries such as Russia to ply their trade? You or I wouldn’t be rable to do it.

Browder seems dodgy as f**k, but as usual stands behind all the legalities he can muster using the power his race wields in the US.

 

[Adf]

A lot of arguments here for and against. Key points to remind yourself with...

- Anyone who grew up in Western countries, is blasted with propaganda against Russia, and against communism. Even if USSR was wonderful and amazing, Western state media will convince you constantly how horrible it is. You are programmed to hate anything but so called democracy.

- Anyone who grows up inside Russia right now, will be blasted with propaganda for whatever the Russian government wants.

So IMO the only people who can have a valid opinion on this subject are the Russians who grew up in those times and live today. Because I certainly don't know what is the truth, we are all programmed with someone's propaganda.