[static-harmony]

I wish people would just stop worrying about systems of goverment and live freely.

[Radioactive Poltergeist]

Originally Posted by porkmarras

Giving Leninism and Marxism as two different options is enough to throw you into a cold cell with no food or water till you implore but then you look at an option like anarchic communism and think to yourself:'Perhaps i should throw away the key and forget he's locked in there'.

not true. Lenin altered Marxism quite a bit. The idea of a vanguard party, NEP, etc.

Originally Posted by static-harmony

I wish people would just stop worrying about systems of goverment and live freely.

Thats why I'm an anarchist

[static-harmony]

I always thought them the same Lenin and Marx

[_slavo_]

I'm no fucking type of communist.
It's been enough for me to live 10 years under communist regime.
I just love these Che-loving threads.

[porkmarras]

Oh really?You're sure not talking about taking marxism to its logical,practical conclusions?What's eurocommunism for crying out loud?

[Radioactive Poltergeist]

nah, Lenin had to adapt Marxist principles because they were in Russia and not some highly industrialized country that Marx called for.

[static-harmony]

Anarchism is also a failed system, it just won't work when you have no rules.

edit*** I know I contradicted myself with the last post, but you also need rules to live better.

[Radioactive Poltergeist]

Originally Posted by _slavo_

I'm no fucking type of communist.
It's been enough for me to live 10 years under communist regime.
I just love these Che-loving threads.

This isn't a particularly che loving thread man. i'm not some idiot authoritarian

[_slavo_]

no big deal then

[Katy]

Anarchist Communism

Council Communism

Eurocommunism

Marxism

Leninism

Maoism

Stalinism

Titoism

Trotskyism

McCarthyism

and how about one more for good luck?

Christian Communism

[Radioactive Poltergeist]

Originally Posted by static-harmony

Anarchism is also a failed system, it just won't work when you have no rules.

Firstly, anarchism requires rules. Most people think it means some kind of chaos, but thats not true, it just calls for the deconstruction of power and institutions.

Secondly, it's not all that failed. The only time there has been anything close to an anarchist state was in Spain just before the civil war, around Barcelona I think. Orwell visited the communities and described a free, well functioning society. The Americans, British and Germans then destroyed them.

[static-harmony]

You know why communism doesn't work it is because, they won't do trade unless it is with themselves. This brings us back to tribalism and that stuff. It moves us backwards instead of foward.

[porkmarras]

Originally Posted by Radioactive Poltergeist

nah, Lenin had to adapt Marxist principles because they were in Russia and not some highly industrialized country that Marx called for.

That's enough to prove that all the dogmatic connotations associated with marxism are the very same rubbish that they are never said to be.And Lenin WAS a marxist!

[static-harmony]

Originally Posted by Radioactive Poltergeist

Firstly, anarchism requires rules. Most people think it means some kind of chaos, but thats not true, it just calls for the deconstruction of power and institutions.

But what kind of institutions do you put up, when someone gets out of line? you know murder's or rapes whatever.

[Radioactive Poltergeist]

Originally Posted by porkmarras

That's enough to prove that all the dogmatic connotations associated with marxism are the very same rubbish that they are never said to be.And Lenin WAS a marxist!

Yeah, except there were differences because Marx was purely theoretical and Lenin had to carry it out. Obviously there is a lot of bullshit in Marx and he had to change some things and pretty much turned Russia into a dictatorship, there in lies the difference.

I am neither Marxist or Leninist or anything like that, because I think that they are just toally flawed as an ideologie(s).

[Radioactive Poltergeist]

Originally Posted by static-harmony

But what kind of institutions do you put up, when someone gets out of line? you know murder's or rapes whatever.

well, institutions would exist such as police and the army in my mind, except there wouldn't be any single institution with large amounts of power to weild them as they wish. Descisions would lie with the public, not parties or leaders. Like, coordination would be carried out a group of people elected by the people.

Look, you have to realise that this is really not something I believe will happen for a very very long time, so I believe you have to look towards slow political reform, not some stupid ass revolution.

[static-harmony]

All that you just said now sounds like democracy, people vote for who could represent them and do the job of the people. I do see that now there is hardly any of this but yes. I think you just gave reasons for democracy.

[Radioactive Poltergeist]

Yeah, and I don't think that there is any country in the world that has actual democracy, and that actually gives a fuck about the people

[wax]

its all very nice and all, but it aint gonna happen.
it doesnt work.
there are always greedy trecharous bastards that will take power and put an end to your fairytale.
those with no morals will always outsneak you.
forget it and have as much fun in your short time in capitalism as you can.

[Hip Priest]

I could never be any kind of communist. Or any kind of socialist, for that matter.