4 ms·
> Well, are they wrong? Once you get past the stupid rehtoric associated with the word, the goal of communists is to usher in an age of post-scarcity. So, if y
by sofixa 2y ago
> Well, are they wrong? Once you get past the stupid rehtoric associated with the word, the goal of communists is to usher in an age of post-scarcity.
So, if you ignore what a word means, and redefine it, yes, anything can mean whatever you want it to mean.
Communism has an element of post-scarcity as a sort of a prerequisite, but that's neither the main goal, nor the means. There is nothing even remotely communist in anything even remotely mainstream in US politics.
- randomdata 2y ago> So, if you ignore what a word means, and redefine it, yes Go on. What does the word mean? It is oft associated with "member of the Communist Party", of which Harris clearly is not. Perhaps that is what you are thinking of? But that usage is like calling a member of the Democratic Party a liberal – something that is also often done. But to be a liberal does not automatically make you a member of the Democratic Party, even if members of the Democratic Party are often liberal. > but that's neither the main goal, nor the means. What is the main goal, then? The means is undefined. Different communists have different ideas about how to achieve post-scarcity. The Communist Party has a particular stance about that, certainly, but as before, while members of the Communist Party may be communist, not all communists are members of the Communist Party.