http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=112416198980

It is not a question of \"perfection\"; it is a question of intent.

If I am leading a revolution and the people follow me because I claim that I am going to implement a Republic but I set myself up as Augusts Redux and enforce this with an army then I am a dictator and the government is a dictatorship by default. Everything after that is semantics.

Stalin’s intent, Mao’s intent, Kim Il-Sung’s intent, Castro’s intent, etc. from the very beginning was to set up a dictatorship. Communism was a word they attached to their cause to further this goal not something they took seriously. You can tell because of all the dead bodies that showed up after the fact (as Aware points so adroitly points out). A government cannot claim to be Communist if it rules against the wishes of the Proletariat any more than a government can claim to be a Democracy if it never holds an election. It is not that these governments were not “perfect” socialist or communist societies. They were socialist and communist is name only.

As a Capitalist I do not mind claiming victory over Socialism and Communism but I would find this more satisfying if we had actually been competing against real Socialists and Communists rather than Monarchies in Marxist clothing.

Clearly, you misunderstood the point of the article: That communism, socialism and fascism (all variants of the original Marxist theme) are the fastest route to tyranny. In no instance has pure Marxist socialism ever been tried. That is because “perfect” systems can never occur.

You’re falling into the same trap the author talks about early in the article: “Pure socialism has never been tried.” Right, because no system can ever be perfect. If we were dealing with perfect beings and a homeostatic planet with unlimited resources, then maybe socialism could work. But we don’t have perfect being and we don’t have a homeostatic planet. Since socialism is based on those ideals of perfection, it is fundamentally flawed from the start.

If you’re going to say that North Korea, Cuba and China are not truly communist, then you must also accept that America is not truly capitalist, as the government intervenes in our economic processes all the time and a true capitalist/free market economy would have no government interference.

Besides, if you’re going to compare economic systems based upon “perfection,” then I prefer a system where those who refuse to work live in poverty. I don’t believe in rewarding bad behavior.

Justin is correct when he points out in his June 7 post that Socialism / Communism really has never been a central theme of the governments that invoke it.

The Union of Soviet Socialist Republic was neither a Republic nor Socialist. It was not even Communist. It borrowed socialist / communist rhetoric and a few of the essentials at its inception but it was never run by a real collective empowered by the will of the proletariat that had any fear of being removed from office. That’s why Joe got rid of Lenin, Trotsky, and the rest of their ilk. He wanted to wear the crown without calling it that. He was a bloody handed tyrant not the “first among equals.”

There was no incentive to work because the people never saw the fruits of their labor. Capital was horded by the central government for their own consumption as well as being used to control the people rather than distributed equally as it should have been in a truly socialist / communist society. When the central government becomes bankrupt it doesn’t matter what political or economic system you have. If anything the USSR’s version of “Communism” was the antithesis of what Marx envisioned.

Stalin was in power from 1922 until he died in 1953. He remained in power because he had an army and killed just about anything that moved not by the will of the people and the same can be said for his successors. It should have been called the Soviet Empire with Joey as the new Czar but that probably wouldn’t have gone over well with his fellow revolutionaries so he had to pretend until he disarmed the people and killed or exiled anyone that might organize resistance against him. If the Founders in the US had a villain of equal guile and ruthlessness we might have suffered the same fate. The vision, wisdom, and selflessness displayed by the men that founded this nation is the exception in history, not the rule.

The same is true for the People’s Republic of China under Mao, the Republic of Cuba under Castro, and the Republic of North Korea as well. They keep calling themselves Republics, Socialist, and Communist, but they are not representative governments with socialist or communist cores any more than the British Empire was a Republic practicing communism under King George. These are nothing but dictatorships using modified command economies with ornamental names.

You can put a hat on a pig but it remains a pig.

It’s about time we grew up and put down these labels, instead look at some un-named method of dealing with the afflictions that beset our citizens and industries both.

There are problems that can be justifiably laid at the feet of money-driven industry – not least of which is the disgusting situation of people who, having swallowed the eager persuading of loan companies and government both, and washed it down with a hefty swig of the power of personal ownership, find themselves dispossessed of all they saw as fundamentally theirs by the same organizations who told citizens they could have it, and should have it, by borrowing from them.

But in the same breath, it was the fault of those who believed the crap, that everything could come to them, and that power would come to them, through the voluntary belief in their role as servants to the lenders, willing victims of their own desired usury.

Whichever name you give to us, it is us, all of us, who are victims and guilty in the same breath. We made it so.

Unless and until we can successfully change our beliefs about our society, life will be good for those with the power to take, and those with the power to retain what they take.
And, for the rest of us, life will be about striving to live, only to find that the things we receive have been taken from us before we truly had them.

As far as I have been able to tell, the earliest advocate was Plato in his Republic, but Hegel and Rousseau are sure the undiluted version that fed Marx and Engels. If you are able to say anything to further your goals, soon you will DO anything for the same purpose. You don\’t need a Gypsy or a crystal ball to know how it will go, just look at the history of every, and I mean EVERY, time it is tried. Of course these thinkers mentioned where brilliant! There\’s no denying that. But they where wrong. Tragically. Ironically!

And there is no doubt, among those who actually KNOW things, that we(USA) are far down the same squalid, miserable road. But no matter how much effort and expense is expended. And no matter how long it takes, it will fail. All efforts and schemes that promise you can live at others expense have a shelf life. Ultimately it is an unsustainable path. Nothing can ever change that. This as true in your personal life as it is as a member of the Hive( how many retired worker bees do you think there are?….zero.).

We are told how great the soft socialism of Europe and Asia is. And how wonderful life is there. But it is not finished. The play is not over. They, and we, are staggering under the financial burden. Central bank money making and magical accounting have enabled the illusion to last this long. Plus they have been able to shift most of the costs to us for 60 years. Now we are broke. We\’ve been broke for years but thanks to our past(and fading fast) reputation we\’ve been able to dupe some foreign yokels into loaning us the cash so we can act like we\’re not.

This has a breaking point. Let\’s see what happens then. It has the potential to be quite hideous, as mass movements of the herd always are.

Thank you for your defense of liberty.

I have always believed that freedom (or liberty) is unrestrained choice–the fewer choices the less freedom. Choice correlates directly to responsibility. Meaning, with the choices we make, we are responsible for our actions, including mistakes. Every choice or responsibility government takes (or is given) is a step toward state servitude.

Aware, are you aware of what communitarianism is?

Hegel believed freedom was servitude to the state. Communitarians believe that the balance (or compromise) between communism and capitalism is communitarianism. Clinton, HW and H Bush, and now Obama all support communitarianism. According to Niki Raapana of the Anti-Communitarian League, government is using the Hegelian Dialectic to guide Americans toward communitarianism. You will have the social justice of communism, the private / public partnerships of fascism, and the corporations still dealing through capitalism.

Of course, there isn’t much choice or freedom in communitarianism.

The ideal of the American system was founded on the concept that individual liberty is a commodity possessed by each of us at birth(…endowed by our Creator…) and therefore the only legitimate role for government is to protect that liberty from…..all enemies, foreign or domestic….(sorry but using quotation marks here just gets you lots of backslashes too). This is the beginning and the end of GOOD government. At the time and even now this is a radical idea.

I, and you, should be able to do as each of us please, anyway we please, so long as we do not interfere with anyone else\’s right to the same liberty. This makes no demands on others as to party membership, conformity, group identity, political affiliation, among other things. In fact, it is politically neutral, socially neutral, and is the very essence of self government. In such a system the only limiting factor is you, nothing else is placed in your way.

This is real freedom. At the individual level, the only place liberty even exists. It translates into concrete choices and actions that happen millions of times throughout the course of our lives, in ways that affect that course and you are the agent of the actions and choices. Of course this requires courage and a willingness to accept the risks and if required, the consequences of these decisions. Alas, there doesn\’t seem to be as many of this type of citizen among the hypersensitive whiners who pass for citizens these days.

When government does, or tries to do, anything outside this sole rightful duty of protecting this God given liberty, it becomes the State. The State is always in opposition to the truth. It sets up vast theft networks so it can dole out largess to its favored minions and calls it fairness. It organizes murder on a colossal scale and calls it our patriotic duty. All kinds of schemes are brought into being by it for the good of the people, no matter how many persons are destroyed in the process. It is a system of exploitation of the losers by the winners. The road of the State is like the road to Hell, paved with good intentions.

The State is Mr. Hyde to the Dr. Jekyll of government. It tries in its crude way to pretend it is the good doctor. It demands all to agree. But when you don\’t see it that way the response is bestial fury which revels the true nature of the beast. It can kill without consequence, on a massive scale. Something no individual can do.

To the point…..the State is the only mortal enemy of individual liberty there is or ever has been. In some forms it may seem more virulent and some more benign, but it always tends to the same goal…absolute, unquestioned, and total control. This is the exact opposite of freedom. Whether it is by gun barrels or tax inducements or any other method, coercion is used to intrude on the actions and choices of individuals and so proscribe their liberty.

And though the State wants you to believe it is the upholder of civilization, consider how it goes about gaining control. It offers fixes for free to the susceptible, and then a few more until complete dependence sets in. Just like a drug dealer at the school yard. Except in this case its not just the kid that suffers cause with the State there is no dissent. At its command we are all socialist or fascist or communist or whatever, with no exceptions.

True freedom isn\’t being a vagabond or an esoteric intellectual exercise. To be free of threat, either from individuals or the State, has real life benefits that can\’t be had any other way.

Sorry for the long post and rant.