Yes, but you have no influence on how much computers control life.

first past teh post voting systems suck balls and at most your only going to have 3 political parties in parliament. great britains may as well be 1 party state (bit extreme i know, but more like a national government as we had in ww2) because they all pretty much offer the same stuff.

now im a communist, but i believe in democratic reform (communism is in theory the most democratic idealogy) not the false dictatorships of china, cuba, ussr, and others. (although china and cuba are looking up recently).

fair enough you can call stalin and co as traitors to communism, lenin, fidel and mao are pervertors and evolved it for their own goals. however to say engels is retarded, he is the co-founder and in my opinion the better half the marx-engels 2some.

How do you think Marx and Engles got their books to research, their educations to help them understand and finally their works published? Capitalism.

LoL.

I love it when people think they really understand the US so well. The world and by extension, the US, is a lot more complicated than a bunch of statistics and/or stereotypes.
I suppose though that it is much easier to view the world so narrowly.

As for Europeans leading the world... Didnt they already have that chance? Didn't they kind of... conquer and destroy the non-European world twice over? It wouldn't be fair for the Chinese if Europe got another go at dominating the world. Its their turn!

This post was last modified: 07.06.2008 15:46 by vague.

Of cause they learned their stuff in capitalism, as there was nothing else to chose of.

Gutenberg has probably read hand-written books, before inventing movable type. But does that mean, that the first ones are in any way better?

@Portose: When you just look at the theory, then comunism is not the most democratic form of democrathy, but anarchism.
Unfortunately there's this little difference betwen theory and praxis.

They're hypocrites for saying capitalism fails. Communism as an idea wouldn't exist without the money Engles earnt through it to finance his works.

If he had had the choice to earn his money in a capitalist system or a comunist one, I don't think he had chosen the first one.
But as he HAD NO CHOICE ... ... ...

He couldn't have earned money in a Communist system. So, not only do ideas freely flow only in capitalism, but Engles is a hypocrite as, according to you, the only way to earn money in a capitalist system is to exploit.

Rowan, sorry very much, but I guess, you don't have a closer idea about Marx' work (as most people don't). He was a brillant thinker, who indepently analysed the capitalist system and showed in a scientific way it's weaknesses and strengths.

Regarding the ideological Marxism he said: "If this is Marxism, I am not a Marxist."

It's a fatality to blame the men for advancing the only way they can possibly do so, within the etablished society.
That's like blaming a bourgeois citizen/a capitalist, for achieving high ranks within a feudal society in order to take initiative for capitalism to be the replacement of feudalism.

And btw., how can one refer to exploitation when the given persons weren't owners of any workmanship?

This post was last modified: 09.06.2008 17:54 by Petrenkovich.