We need EQUITY

Post Reply New Topic

^Yes, these ideas are all good, although they are different from my expression, but we are thinking in the same direction.

In China, the government solves traffic congestion by limiting the number of new license plates and determining when a car can be used according to the tail number of the license plate, for example, one day is allowed for 13579 and one day is allowed for 02468.

It seems that there is no such thing in your country, so the example I gave doesn't make my point very well.

It can be considered that some people , especially handicapped that need to work at their own speed..In order to even have a shot at managing their own life , with any degree of effectiveness .. Just to get by....with even a modicum of self esteem or Independance .. and be alittle less of a burden on society .. And being A aspie am keenly aware of the psyche and physical drain on spoons trying to interact with bus ridership. Or suffering getting into tiny high mileage vehicle.
To go hours to one appointment and that given other riders needs and stops can suck the spoons out of a person. So perhaps
idealism needs to be tempered with pragmatic praticality . So the average disabled person might survive and thrive in a community?.

Please read  This Post  before making further comments about Communism or 'Equity'; because, as presented in this thread, they really are the same thing.

Yes. The phases of society go 1)hunter-gatherers, 2) Slaves societies of ancient times, 3) Feudalism, and finally 4) Capitalism. Which only came to the fore in the last five centuries. Each phase was based upon a different "mode of production" which spawned its own set of ideologies. And sets of class struggles.

But those are your personal views on communism.

Good. You're on the same page of "Historical Materialism" (the Marxist theory of class struggle). Hunter-gathering societies were also known as "primitive communist". What Marx was saying is that civilizations were born from collective effort and not individual effort as class societies began well after the first civilizations were born and as humanity first started to learn the principles of governing nations. The foraging societies were also the first anarcho-communist societies given the lack of governing structures which is why I disagree with the anarchist ideology itself since it pretty much is seeking to re-establish a primitive lifestyle which we have all evolved from since. We want progress, not reaction.

It is for that reason that anarchists are unconditionally reactionary with their desire to abolish the state but unknowingly bring back us to the primitive lifestyle which is outdated by a huge time gap. We cannot guarantee human progress if abolishing the state is the highest priority. We need to keep the economy stable if we are to improve the social and life standards of others. A stable economy will yield betterment of living and it is that we must not let the capitalist influence destabilize the economy and create a class war from which the bourgeois seeks to profit from as well as a culture war that divides and not unites people.

It is for this reason that a socialist state must accordingly rely on a stable economy and good living standards to ensure that none are impoverished by greed.

Ah, but those "personal views" are all based on the writings of Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels, and on the histories of China, Cuba, Laos, North Korea, Vietnam, and the former Soviet Union -- real things that cannot be successfully denied.

I see now. You have a common with an anti-communist rhetoric which largely ignores the Yugoslav aspect of communism. You base your view on all of communism based on certain nations and certain revolutionary theories for communism itself is not homogenous but a spectrum of revolutionary ideals yearning for such an egalitarian society. As I may agree with the fact that USSR, China, North Korea, and Cambodia had done grave atrocities mainly from power-hungry people and political paranoia, I must criticize you for not including Yugoslavia which was a socialist state that did not conform to reactionary elements of Marxism-Leninism that were present within the Stalinist USSR from 1920s to 1953, Maoist China from 1949 to 1976, Khmer Rouge from 1975 to 1979, and the present-day North Korea's Juche since 1948.

I consider Yugoslavia as the true Marxist-Leninist state in terms of how well it did with self-determination thanks to Tito and Lenin. Lenin inspired Tito and it was Lenin who first said that there must be self-determination for other nations not that we should align ourselves with the liberal bourgeois nationalism but instead focus on the plurality of the nations inside the great communist union for which the only most true to such was Yugoslavia.

But the anti-communists lack thereof Yugoslavia, ergo, they are either ignorant of Yugoslav history and dismiss it as a "totalitarian state" or simply are afraid of the truth that was Yugoslavia and Tito. To assume that every communist state was totalitarian is an univariate fallacy as the anti-communists themselves have very little understanding of communism and the spectrum itself that has different revolutionaries give different outlooks on how communism should be achieved and how socialism should work on its path to such achievement.

In the end, just because Yugoslavia was a socialist state does not mean that it was a puppet of the USSR the whole entire Cold War or was it some kind of a "Trojan Horse" of the West. Yugoslavia was Yugoslavia. Yugoslavia was never America or Russia and should have remained on its own after Tito died and purge the Serbian nationalism that threatened the Brotherhood and Unity of the Yugoslav people. Even my signature below every post is a quote from Tito in 1948 who criticized Serbian nationalism for Tito was the only man who stayed true to Lenin's self-determination and created the beloved concept that is "Brotherhood and Unity".

Tought And comments to digest...given the level of Indoctrination against all forms of communism, is a deeply rooted generational Understanding .." Of all USA CITIZENS It appears" you are presenting Tito s Yugoslavia was a more pure idealistic form of Communism. Not having any experience with that form of Gov. ( or Lack thereof ? ) How does one make non-bias , assumptions of Yugoslav , socialism/ Communism.
Occassionally I wonder , if expedition rules for climbing might apply here. ( similiar to most purest,idealist form of communist?) That the strength of entire group while climbing is only as strong as the weakest link ,in the group or chain of people on the climb. So it become incumbent that the entire group becomes responsible for each other...getting to the peak. [ think I made some weird analogy to the concept of a purest level of communism ,] Possibly something ,no country has ever tried to accomplish..? ( if an apropriate idea to offer.)

----------- ------------ ---------------- -------------------------
And if an ideal form of Government was to became a reality and was not Aligned with the USA , and the USA tendency to want to undermine any others countries system of Gov ..That DID NOT exactly( moderitly) align with the USA's political/ capitalistic Government( ie , Military Corporate interests) that system of Goverment. Would have to dealt with Such as the methods used in Haiti .To unseat their legally elected gov. Why would a Europeancountry be exempt, especially if your gov. had any communistion leanings ? Likewise Russia may have thought in similiar ways ?

The anti-communists have this univariate fallacy that all communist states were bad and that communism is inherently evil despite the major ideological differences in the spectrum and how it was practiced among different communist leaders. Stalin was a mass murderer without a doubt but can that be said for Tito who only had thousands and never killed millions like Stalin and Mao? It's not just about the body count but also about the treatment of enemies. Tito was rather merciful and wanted to use the captured enemy soldiers and bring them to his Partisan movement while the Red Army would undoubtfully pillage any enemy settlement they saw and it is the Red Army that is responsible for motivating the purge in Partisan-occupied Serbia from 1944 to 1945 in which 56,000 were killed, mostly Germans and Serbs.

Even during his break with Stalin and the Informbiro period from 1948 to 1956, Tito did not have that many people killed. However, one can counter this by saying something about the Albanians which at the time were being terrorized by a Serbian reactionary nationalist by the name of "Aleksandar Ranković" who unknowingly abused his power over Kosovo to espouse Serbian colonialism over Kosovo and the Albanians resulting in up to 50,000 Albanians killed from the 1940s to 1966 (Demolli, 2002) with 100,000 expelled between 1953 to 1966 (Qirezi, 2017). Tito would have been less harsh with the Albanians in Kosovo given that Ranković was an average Serbian nationalist in Yugoslavia who favored centralization (taking all of Yugoslavia into Serbian hands).

The specific reasoning for an independent, non-aligned socialist state is what was first intended by Lenin in his "The Right of Nations to Self-Determination" (1914) book in which he created an ideal concept of a socialist state with autonomous regions. The first such was the USSR (Union of Soviet Socialist Republics) but unfortunately it de facto became Russia following Stalin's rise to power and the political purges of those who were orthodox to the true Marxist-Leninist cause and who disagreed with the "Socialism in one country" policy that practically abolished the Soviet Union (not legally but de facto) and put Russia back at its place as a priority for all the ongoings of the other ethnic groups.

The only socialist state to have remained vigilant with the orthodox Marxism-Leninism was Yugoslavia. Josip Broz Tito's "Brotherhood and Unity" policy ensured that there must be tolerance of other ethnic groups and that force must be used against those who seek to divide and conquer Yugoslav lands and harass the minorities and other majority ethnic groups. His prime enemies were the Serbian nationalists due to the dominant presence of the Serbs as they numbered in huge units. He focused on re-educating the Serbian population from the nationalist egocentric agenda that plagued them and sought to purge anti-Yugoslav elements that were running rampant in no more than Serbia for Serbia was the main anti-Yugoslav catalyst of the collapse and it needed to be extinguished not by force but by persuasion.

By self-determination, I am not considering for an anarchist state for anarchy is not the solution for resisting imperialism from America, Russia, and China. We need self-determination not as a means of justifying the tendencies of the barbaric anti-authoritarians of the anarchist group that considers the need to re-establish a primitive economy that existed in the foraging societies and to which still exists among the tribes untouched by modernization or change in general.

It is the self-determination to preserve the identity and work together at the same time regardless of ethnic, cultural, and religious backgrounds and yet have a stable economy. It is for that reason that our collective struggle must be ensured that no one is pure because we humans have impurities that we can use to still hold hands together for it is that we need one another if we are to survive.

Conceptualizing survival by facing people with Weapons..??? "How many is not that many ?"

I did not say that we should fight a World War in order to spread communism. We cannot commit such a grave mistake that could have cost the revolution. Trotsky was simply rushing in for that to happen and we cannot rush a worldwide revolution unless we first build a socialist state capable of enduring pressure and maintaining itself mostly without depending too much on other imports.

Once that is done, we slowly begin to spread the word to other states.

One could grow to admire your idealism.....but now the humans are confined to a corporate world dominance .
And if you are of a class that the Gov controlled media , has selected( by virtue of Gov. input ) That has been deemed to be the divided class of people . Your existence coukd become so hard .. That survival on a day to day basis might be your situation. Under those circumstances you might choose the abilty to have food and water over going to vote for this person or that person.

Democracy is useless in desperate times. Desperate times call for desperate measures. If the liberals and reactionaries are gonna give us a hard time, then we will organize and fight for it by determination for we must stay determined for a self-sustaining economy if we are to prevail over such effort. We will go for food and water just to survive the sanctions. The geography of Bosnia itself is valid enough to justify for harvest and collectivization of food and redistributing it efficiently to the population as a means of achieving a level of independence.

Corporate controlled farming is in the lead here.. Unless you live in a more countryified area of the country..Even then
Walmart has made it so much easier to buy their foodstuff, than average people growing it and dealing amongst themselves. Even banning certain types of seeds , if you grow near a corporate farm . Have been reading about the chicken feed available to farmers has been intentionally reduced to breed low quality life for the chickens and cause eggshells to be so thin as to stop egg laying or if they do the shells are too thin and crack before any chicks hatch.
Occassionally free range chickens have a chance , but are easy targets for predators , as I have been told .
it appears this way to me , World corporate is set to achieve total dominance .Over all aspects of life, It appears to me.
As is the Goal of any Solid Corporation ..eliminate all competition . Absolutely wish you the best with your concepts you
espouse. And ideally must admit to great hope for a better world.

Reminds me of how Nestle's CEO ranted on why humans shouldn't have basic rights to drinking water.