4 ms·

Speak for yourself. Also you have the option to move to socialist/communist countries whenever you see fit, they exist. Don't force your horrible ideology on th

Speak for yourself. Also you have the option to move to socialist/communist countries whenever you see fit, they exist. Don't force your horrible ideology on the rest of us (which communism literally calls for).

etplayer 9y ago
The idea that "if you don't like it, leave" can be used to excuse any injustice, such as against the Jews in Nazi Germany. What's your point, exactly? It's a farcical notion and I hope you can see that it is counter to the idea of human progress to expound it. >Don't force your horrible ideology on the rest of us (which communism literally calls for). No, it doesn't. Communism calls for the liberation of people via the abolition of private property, itself a concept which is forced on everyone, including the owners of private property. This is like saying that the abolition of slavery "forces an ideology" on everyone because now nobody can own slaves. Again, it's farcical. Oscar Wilde and Kropotkin have explained the individualist nature of Communism.
- janus28 9y ago
  > The idea that "if you don't like it, leave" can be used to excuse any injustice, such as against the Jews in Nazi Germany. That you need to bring up the Nazis shows how bad your argument is. Please just move to Venezuela or North Korea. > No, it doesn't. Communism calls for the liberation of people via the abolition of private property 1. It calls for the forced confiscation of private property. 2. Explain how someone can be liberated by having their economic freedom removed?
  - etplayer 9y ago
    The fact that you're telling me to move to Venezuela (capitalist economy) or North Korea (a country that doesn't even call itself Communist or even Socialist any more) shows just how bad your argument is. It was perfectly valid for me to bring up an example of a repressive regime as an immediately understood example of injustice. However I could have just as easily used the example of Bangladeshi sweatshop workers. Should they just shut up or move away? Moving is irrelevant, too - everywhere has become private property, everywhere is rented or taxed. One cannot escape capitalism. >1. It calls for the forced confiscation of private property. Yes. What about it? >2. Explain how someone can be liberated by having their economic freedom removed? People's economic freedom is not removed, rather, it is provided in the first place - higher stage Communism is the refined ideal of the free association of people as producers and labourers in the economic sphere.
    - friedman23 9y ago
      > The fact that you're telling me to move to Venezuela (capitalist economy) or North Korea (a country that doesn't even call itself Communist or even Socialist any more) sure, keep telling yourself that > Yes. What about it? Thank you for admitting that communism does require force confiscation of property. You need to understand that I wasn't arguing to convince you, I'm making statements to point out for anyone reading that when you say "liberation" you actually mean state police going door by door and confiscating any valuables you have. Maybe lynching some property owners along the way. >People's economic freedom is not removed, rather, it is provided in the first place - higher stage Communism is the refined ideal of the free association of people as producers and labourers in the economic sphere. Communism is supposed to be ownership of the means of production by the people. Can you sell what you supposedly own under communism? No, you cannot. This means that A. You don't actually own it the state does. (The state in this case can be whatever organizational body is being used to manage the means of production). B. You do not have any economic freedom under communism because you cannot sell what you supposedly own. Even under communism you do not have the option to sell your own labor freely. What occurs is that you are assigned work that the government believes is needed.
      - etplayer 9y ago
        >you actually mean state police going door by door and confiscating any valuables you have. Maybe lynching some property owners along the way. You misunderstand the concept of property. I have written about it here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15160835 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15160835 as an explanation. >A. You don't actually own it the state does. No; Communism is an anarchist ideology, and the workers through voluntary democratic institutions manage the means of production - so you, by extension manage the means of production. >You do not have any economic freedom under communism because you cannot sell what you supposedly own. No. These is no sale in Communism because the conceptions of freedom have changed, society adopts a different set of needs, namely, goods are not imbued with exchange value, as they are not commodities. It doesn't make sense to sell things in Communism. This is what Communism is - the bringing about of the condititions such that the current ones are obsolete. As Marx said, Communism is not an ideal to be achieved, but the constantly existing movement which abolishes the present state of things. >Even under communism you do not have the option to sell your own labor freely. This is a very good thing! You don't have to sell your labour to survive! And even if you wanted to, you can get higher returns by owning any more labour you do. >What occurs is that you are assigned work that the government believes that you are most suited to. Hilariously false. Please actually read Marx; I'll quote the relevant part here: "He is a hunter, a fisherman, a herdsman, or a critical critic, and must remain so if he does not want to lose his means of livelihood; while in communist society, where nobody has one exclusive sphere of activity but each can become accomplished in any branch he wishes, society regulates the general production and thus makes it possible for me to do one thing today and another tomorrow, to hunt in the morning, fish in the afternoon, rear cattle in the evening, criticise after dinner, just as I have a mind, without ever becoming hunter, fisherman, herdsman or critic. This fixation of social activity, this consolidation of what we ourselves produce into an objective power above us, growing out of our control, thwarting our expectations, bringing to naught our calculations, is one of the chief factors in historical development up till now."
s_kilk 9y ago
> Don't force your horrible ideology on the rest of us (which communism literally calls for). And Capitalism is totally non-coercive, right?
BeetleB 9y ago
>Speak for yourself. Also you have the option to move to socialist/communist countries whenever you see fit, they exist. Don't force your horrible ideology on the rest of us (which communism literally calls for). A perfect case of strawman. In his comment, GP was never advocating that communism is particularly good. He was merely using the same logic as his parent. Also, moving to different countries is not straightforward. The statement does not even come close to being an argument for anything, and does not contribute to the discussion.
- friedman23 9y ago
  Thank you for calling it a strawman when the person I was arguing just admitted that communism does call for forced confiscation of property. You people are delusional.
  - BeetleB 9y ago
    >Thank you for calling it a strawman when the person I was arguing just admitted that communism does call for forced confiscation of property. Yes, it is a strawman, when you attribute something to someone who did not say it. That he agrees with you or not doesn't have bearing on what makes an argument a strawman. The discussion of property arose after you made your comment. >You people are delusional. Very consistent with strawman-like behavior. Tell me how I am delusional. Not the other commenters in the thread. Me. In what way am I delusional?
Broken_Hippo 9y ago
"Also you have the option to move to socialist/communist countries whenever you see fit, they exist." Actually, most folks don't really have that option. Not legally, anyway. And honestly, I think your statement is pushing a horrible ideology on others as well - capitalist societies have the same sort of hangups on closed-mindedness you fault communism on, evidenced by people's outcry that national health care is a socialist policy. It makes actual fixes nearly impossible. More to the first point, it is expensive for folks to move, and expensive to find housing and work enough to meet immigration requirements. Even planning for schooling is expensive. Not to mention the fact that in many professions, you need to speak the local language. It is even an expensive prospect when you are moving for marriage (I've been through it, and it is still expensive). Sometimes the education from the US isn't quite good enough to transfer to the same job. Not really an option for large swaths of population making minimum wage or slightly more. Not when a flat tire messes up your finances for weeks or more. This advice is as bad as telling jobless folks they should just move to a part of the country with jobs. It isn't reasonable or practical. I was freaking lucky to be able to move out of the states and into a socialist democracy (Norway).

etplayer 9y ago

The idea that "if you don't like it, leave" can be used to excuse any injustice, such as against the Jews in Nazi Germany. What's your point, exactly? It's a farcical notion and I hope you can see that it is counter to the idea of human progress to expound it. >Don't force your horrible ideology on the rest of us (which communism literally calls for). No, it doesn't. Communism calls for the liberation of people via the abolition of private property, itself a concept which is forced on everyone, including the owners of private property. This is like saying that the abolition of slavery "forces an ideology" on everyone because now nobody can own slaves. Again, it's farcical. Oscar Wilde and Kropotkin have explained the individualist nature of Communism.

janus28 9y ago
> The idea that "if you don't like it, leave" can be used to excuse any injustice, such as against the Jews in Nazi Germany. That you need to bring up the Nazis shows how bad your argument is. Please just move to Venezuela or North Korea. > No, it doesn't. Communism calls for the liberation of people via the abolition of private property 1. It calls for the forced confiscation of private property. 2. Explain how someone can be liberated by having their economic freedom removed?
- etplayer 9y ago
  The fact that you're telling me to move to Venezuela (capitalist economy) or North Korea (a country that doesn't even call itself Communist or even Socialist any more) shows just how bad your argument is. It was perfectly valid for me to bring up an example of a repressive regime as an immediately understood example of injustice. However I could have just as easily used the example of Bangladeshi sweatshop workers. Should they just shut up or move away? Moving is irrelevant, too - everywhere has become private property, everywhere is rented or taxed. One cannot escape capitalism. >1. It calls for the forced confiscation of private property. Yes. What about it? >2. Explain how someone can be liberated by having their economic freedom removed? People's economic freedom is not removed, rather, it is provided in the first place - higher stage Communism is the refined ideal of the free association of people as producers and labourers in the economic sphere.
  - friedman23 9y ago
    > The fact that you're telling me to move to Venezuela (capitalist economy) or North Korea (a country that doesn't even call itself Communist or even Socialist any more) sure, keep telling yourself that > Yes. What about it? Thank you for admitting that communism does require force confiscation of property. You need to understand that I wasn't arguing to convince you, I'm making statements to point out for anyone reading that when you say "liberation" you actually mean state police going door by door and confiscating any valuables you have. Maybe lynching some property owners along the way. >People's economic freedom is not removed, rather, it is provided in the first place - higher stage Communism is the refined ideal of the free association of people as producers and labourers in the economic sphere. Communism is supposed to be ownership of the means of production by the people. Can you sell what you supposedly own under communism? No, you cannot. This means that A. You don't actually own it the state does. (The state in this case can be whatever organizational body is being used to manage the means of production). B. You do not have any economic freedom under communism because you cannot sell what you supposedly own. Even under communism you do not have the option to sell your own labor freely. What occurs is that you are assigned work that the government believes is needed.
    - etplayer 9y ago
      >you actually mean state police going door by door and confiscating any valuables you have. Maybe lynching some property owners along the way. You misunderstand the concept of property. I have written about it here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15160835 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15160835 as an explanation. >A. You don't actually own it the state does. No; Communism is an anarchist ideology, and the workers through voluntary democratic institutions manage the means of production - so you, by extension manage the means of production. >You do not have any economic freedom under communism because you cannot sell what you supposedly own. No. These is no sale in Communism because the conceptions of freedom have changed, society adopts a different set of needs, namely, goods are not imbued with exchange value, as they are not commodities. It doesn't make sense to sell things in Communism. This is what Communism is - the bringing about of the condititions such that the current ones are obsolete. As Marx said, Communism is not an ideal to be achieved, but the constantly existing movement which abolishes the present state of things. >Even under communism you do not have the option to sell your own labor freely. This is a very good thing! You don't have to sell your labour to survive! And even if you wanted to, you can get higher returns by owning any more labour you do. >What occurs is that you are assigned work that the government believes that you are most suited to. Hilariously false. Please actually read Marx; I'll quote the relevant part here: "He is a hunter, a fisherman, a herdsman, or a critical critic, and must remain so if he does not want to lose his means of livelihood; while in communist society, where nobody has one exclusive sphere of activity but each can become accomplished in any branch he wishes, society regulates the general production and thus makes it possible for me to do one thing today and another tomorrow, to hunt in the morning, fish in the afternoon, rear cattle in the evening, criticise after dinner, just as I have a mind, without ever becoming hunter, fisherman, herdsman or critic. This fixation of social activity, this consolidation of what we ourselves produce into an objective power above us, growing out of our control, thwarting our expectations, bringing to naught our calculations, is one of the chief factors in historical development up till now."

s_kilk 9y ago

> Don't force your horrible ideology on the rest of us (which communism literally calls for). And Capitalism is totally non-coercive, right?

BeetleB 9y ago

>Speak for yourself. Also you have the option to move to socialist/communist countries whenever you see fit, they exist. Don't force your horrible ideology on the rest of us (which communism literally calls for). A perfect case of strawman. In his comment, GP was never advocating that communism is particularly good. He was merely using the same logic as his parent. Also, moving to different countries is not straightforward. The statement does not even come close to being an argument for anything, and does not contribute to the discussion.

friedman23 9y ago
Thank you for calling it a strawman when the person I was arguing just admitted that communism does call for forced confiscation of property. You people are delusional.
- BeetleB 9y ago
  >Thank you for calling it a strawman when the person I was arguing just admitted that communism does call for forced confiscation of property. Yes, it is a strawman, when you attribute something to someone who did not say it. That he agrees with you or not doesn't have bearing on what makes an argument a strawman. The discussion of property arose after you made your comment. >You people are delusional. Very consistent with strawman-like behavior. Tell me how I am delusional. Not the other commenters in the thread. Me. In what way am I delusional?

Broken_Hippo 9y ago

"Also you have the option to move to socialist/communist countries whenever you see fit, they exist." Actually, most folks don't really have that option. Not legally, anyway. And honestly, I think your statement is pushing a horrible ideology on others as well - capitalist societies have the same sort of hangups on closed-mindedness you fault communism on, evidenced by people's outcry that national health care is a socialist policy. It makes actual fixes nearly impossible. More to the first point, it is expensive for folks to move, and expensive to find housing and work enough to meet immigration requirements. Even planning for schooling is expensive. Not to mention the fact that in many professions, you need to speak the local language. It is even an expensive prospect when you are moving for marriage (I've been through it, and it is still expensive). Sometimes the education from the US isn't quite good enough to transfer to the same job. Not really an option for large swaths of population making minimum wage or slightly more. Not when a flat tire messes up your finances for weeks or more. This advice is as bad as telling jobless folks they should just move to a part of the country with jobs. It isn't reasonable or practical. I was freaking lucky to be able to move out of the states and into a socialist democracy (Norway).