The revolution of capitalism

[DVTimes]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-14764357

Karl Marx may have been wrong about communism but he was right about much of capitalism, John Gray writes.

As a side-effect of the financial crisis, more and more people are starting to think Karl Marx was right. The great 19th Century German philosopher, economist and revolutionary believed that capitalism was radically unstable.

It had a built-in tendency to produce ever larger booms and busts, and over the longer term it was bound to destroy itself.

Marx welcomed capitalism's self-destruction. He was confident that a popular revolution would occur and bring a communist system into being that would be more productive and far more humane.

[Cherry7]

Karl Marx wrote nothing about communism, so how could he be wrong about it?

He believed that new societies and their economic structures grew out of the previous society.

To plan a society in abstract he called Utopian.

The forces to change feudalism grew up under it, the the merchants, which became the new capitalist class, and changed society into what they wanted. Pushing aside the aristocracy.

Marx believed the working class would be the agent of change to a new society based on social need and not private greed. He never said how this society would look.

[AsianDivaGirlsWebDude]

ADG

[My Pimp]

I am suprised that Karl Marx is so popular in the USA.

[Coup]

Originally Posted by Cherry7

Karl Marx wrote nothing about communism

Are you retarded? this is a serious question.

[GGurls]

blah I wanna see girls! lol

[Coup]

Originally Posted by GGurls

blah I wanna see girls! lol

then why are on a webmaster forum? clicking on threads about communism?

[Coup]

Originally Posted by My Pimp

I am suprised that Karl Marx is so popular in the USA.

I wouldn't say popular... he's held in the same regard in this country as osama bin laden really.

[Paul Markham]

The problem with Capitalism or Communism and religion. Isn't the system, it's the people behind it.

AsianDivaGirlsWebDude posted this.



The same can be said for any system.

No "Communist state allows true Democracy, No "Communist state has an economy worth squat. Many have a problem looking after peoples basic needs. Generally Communism rewards those at the bottom less than Capitalism does.

Yes Capitalism has it's faults. But the faults are in the people that run it. Communism will never work with the same mentality running it and in a World of Capitalism. The examples are many.

Capitalism may produce larger booms and busts. Communism never produces booms. Even if it were run the way Marx envisioned it would never of produced booms. People do the minimum, if that's all they get rewarded.

[SimonScans]

Originally Posted by Coup

Are you retarded? this is a serious question.

One step beyond the useful idiot... the useful retard.

I maybe the only brit on this board who isn't a total commie.

Strange, but when I visit countries who have actually lived under communism I find them to be much less positive towards it. But then, it's not exactly hammered home in schools in the UK that Stalin, in the name of communism killed over 20 million, which kinda puts that german bloke in a shade.

Two weeks ago I was Budapest shooting - outside a shopping mall is a memorial to the 1956 uprising. Complete with fresh cut flowers, so clearly someone remembers and gives enough of a shit to put them there.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hungari...lution_of_1956 Happy times, indeed.

[CurrentlySober]

i prefer cannibalism...

[cardinalvices]

China is got communism. And has all yo moneyz..

[seeandsee]

Originally Posted by cardinalvices

China is got communism. And has all yo moneyz..

china got cheap and big in state of numbers labor...

[CaptainHowdy]

Originally Posted by Coup

Are you retarded? this is a serious question.

Thanks ...

[Joshua G]

a problem with capitalism is what to do when all the wealth ends up with the rich.

idiot repubs think they "invest" & create jobs. while idiot libs think they should be taxed at 90% so the libbys can spend the money on their own whims.

But this is not the true problem. nobody cares if the rich horde money if the middle class can grow economically.

the true problem is that the "floor" for the middle class, like the minimum wage, high tariffs on imports, private sector unions, have been marginalized. Now corporations hire chinese children. Steve jobs makes more money, & the american worker gets the shaft.

Where o where are the populists of today.

[u-Bob]

Strange that someone would come to that conclusion since no country on earth currently has a capitalist economy.

[GatorB]

Originally Posted by joshgirls

a problem with capitalism is what to do when all the wealth ends up with the rich.

idiot repubs think they "invest" & create jobs. while idiot libs think they should be taxed at 90% so the libbys can spend the money on their own whims.

But this is not the true problem. nobody cares if the rich horde money if the middle class can grow economically.

That IS the problem. The middle class CANNOT grow as long as the rich are hording money. 70% of our economy is consumer spending. Now when if you take $1 trillion and give it to the top 1% or you take that $1 trillion and give it to the bottom 50% guess who is actually going to spend it in way that will get the economy moving and create jobs? The bottom 50%. The idiot republitards thinks it's perfectly ok for the top 1% to have 95% of al the wealth because they "earned" it. Well guess what, even if you could make a case for that it's an unsustainable system and eventually they won't have any wealth either. It's not healthy for the economy for the top 1% to have that much money. If some dude has to earn "only" $1 bil a year instead of $2 bill well that guy will just have to learn how to live on "only" $2.8 mil a day.

Of course the repubs and the rich are in denial. Just like the rich were in denial about their situations in the late 18th century in France and early 20th century in Russia. How did that turn out for them? But as they say those that ignore history are doomed to repeat it.

[Cherry7]

Originally Posted by Coup

Are you retarded? this is a serious question.

Marx made no attempts to create a plan for socialism or communism beyond principles.

The communist manifesto is an analysis of capitalism and explaining that history can be seen as a history of class struggle.

Marx believed that the structures created in the struggle to overthrow capitalism would be the foundations of the new society.

The Soviets on taking power had no blueprints, in fact their five year plans were based on the German command economic plans used in WW1.

[Cherry7]

Originally Posted by Paul Markham

The problem with Capitalism or Communism and religion. Isn't the system, it's the people behind it.

No "Communist state allows true Democracy, No "Communist state has an economy worth squat. Many have a problem looking after peoples basic needs. Generally Communism rewards those at the bottom less than Capitalism does.

Yes Capitalism has it's faults. But the faults are in the people that run it. Communism will never work with the same mentality running it and in a World of Capitalism. The examples are many.

Capitalism may produce larger booms and busts. Communism never produces booms. Even if it were run the way Marx envisioned it would never of produced booms. People do the minimum, if that's all they get rewarded.

True democracy ? Where is that please? In the west where we can choose which business party to have in power every 5 years ? Pepsi or Coke ?

Most communist countries have been underdeveloped but have had good levels of growth at various times.

You have to compare like with like. So you can compare Socialist Poland with capitalist Brazil, in the 1970s (both per capita $1000 ) Poland was a far better place to live for the majority of its population...

Free high quality education, Health Service, Cheap transport, culture, films theater, sport

No unemployment, poverty or homelessness. Brazil ....well you know the story 1% fantastic the rest in the garbage

Marx never envisioned how it should be run, you most start reading those books!

Capitalism measures profit, like you only talking about $$$$, but the important matters are happiness, culture, quality of life, freedom from polution...

The Russian Revolution failed for many reasons, but capitalism is incapable of meeting the needs of the majority of human being, so we will have to try again.

[porno jew]

we will see some stunning changes within our lifetime. problem is deep propagandization and killing of the imagination has made most literally incapable to imagining anything different than "the way things are."

[Coup]

Originally Posted by Cherry7

Marx made no attempts to create a plan for socialism or communism beyond principles.

The communist manifesto is an analysis of capitalism and explaining that history can be seen as a history of class struggle.

Marx believed that the structures created in the struggle to overthrow capitalism would be the foundations of the new society.

The Soviets on taking power had no blueprints, in fact their five year plans were based on the German command economic plans used in WW1.

http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx...festo/ch02.htm

god damn you're fucking retarded.

[Cherry7]

Originally Posted by Coup

Are you retarded? this is a serious question.

Marx made no attempts to create a plan for socialism or communism beyond principles.

The communist manifesto is an analysis of capitalism and explaining that history can be seen as a history of class struggle.

Marx believed that the structures created in the struggle to overthrow capitalism would be the foundations of the new society.

The Soviets on taking power had no blueprints, in fact their five year plans were based on the German command economic plans used in WW1.

[Rochard]

Originally Posted by Cherry7

Karl Marx wrote nothing about communism, so how could he be wrong about it?

Um, he wrote an entire book about it:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Communist_Manifesto

[DaddyHalbucks]

Nice try, but it's the creeping socialism in the USA that is causing the problems.

[Coup]

Originally Posted by DaddyHalbucks

Nice try, but it's the creeping socialism in the USA that is causing the problems.

Creeping socialism? Haha. if anything the US is creeping away from socialism.

[porno jew]

from the perspective of the rest of the world america is dominated by two far right parties. to think they are in any way socialist let alone leftist is pretty funny.

[Cherry7]

Originally Posted by Coup

http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx...festo/ch02.htm

god damn you're fucking retarded.

You don't get the point I made, and if you read Marx you would. In his life he attracted those who made plans for socialism, exactly for the reason that socialism would come out of the struggle to end capitalism.

99% of his writings, all 3 volumes of Capital are about capitalism.

He did not say whether factories should be under workers control, a state plan, whether there should be some sort of market...

Whether farms should be State farms, co-ops, communes or small private holdings...


Name calling shows a rather low level of culture on your part...

[spazlabz]

Originally Posted by Cherry7

True democracy ? Where is that please? In the west where we can choose which business party to have in power every 5 years ? Pepsi or Coke ?

Most communist countries have been underdeveloped but have had good levels of growth at various times.

You have to compare like with like. So you can compare Socialist Poland with capitalist Brazil, in the 1970s (both per capita $1000 ) Poland was a far better place to live for the majority of its population...

Free high quality education, Health Service, Cheap transport, culture, films theater, sport

No unemployment, poverty or homelessness. Brazil ....well you know the story 1% fantastic the rest in the garbage

Marx never envisioned how it should be run, you most start reading those books!

Capitalism measures profit, like you only talking about $$$$, but the important matters are happiness, culture, quality of life, freedom from polution...

The Russian Revolution failed for many reasons, but capitalism is incapable of meeting the needs of the majority of human being, so we will have to try again.

wow.....................................

[Coup]

Originally Posted by Cherry7

You don't get the point I made, and if you read Marx you would. In his life he attracted those who made plans for socialism, exactly for the reason that socialism would come out of the struggle to end capitalism.

99% of his writings, all 3 volumes of Capital are about capitalism.

He did not say whether factories should be under workers control, a state plan, whether there should be some sort of market...

Whether farms should be State farms, co-ops, communes or small private holdings...


Name calling shows a rather low level of culture on your part...

Of course he didn't spelled out what color a lada should be. but to deny he ever wrote anything about communism, or how it should be structured, is well hilariously retarded.

So I have really no other choice but to call you a communist.. err retard.

[Coup]

Originally Posted by Cherry7

Name calling shows a rather low level of culture on your part...

"Begone uncultured swine!"



you're not very good at this communism thing at all are you?

[Cherry7]

The quote was
"Karl Marx may have been wrong about communism"

and that is what I disputed. He did not write a "plan for communism" which did not work and therefore he got it wrong.

He did no such thing, and he may a point of it.

If you read Isaac Deutschers trilogy on Trotsky he describes vividly the debate on how to built a new society and how little there was to go on in 1919...

Culture is not the property of the ruling classes, in trade unions rudeness to fellow workers is not allowed. But behave like an idiot if it suits you.

As you know nothing about me your remark is stupid.

[Paul Markham]

Originally Posted by Cherry7

The quote was
"Karl Marx may have been wrong about communism"

and that is what I disputed. He did not write a "plan for communism" which did not work and therefore he got it wrong.

He did no such thing, and he may a point of it.

If you read Isaac Deutschers trilogy on Trotsky he describes vividly the debate on how to built a new society and how little there was to go on in 1919...

Culture is not the property of the ruling classes, in trade unions rudeness to fellow workers is not allowed. But behave like an idiot if it suits you.

As you know nothing about me your remark is stupid.

So can you give us an example of where Communism works please.

Capitalism is by no means perfect, but it works. For some badly, for other OK, for a very few very well.

Communism worked for no one but the Autocrats at the top. When I first arrived here everyone thought that if you drove a decent car, you were a party official of Mafia. When we arranged a Christmas dinner for the family, Eva's parent arrived at the 4 star hotel saying they didn't belong in such a place.

They had been programmed to think that way by the so called "Peoples Party".

Give us one example of where Communism has worked. Or do you think we should all toss out a system that does work in favor of one that never worked?

"Culture is not the property of the ruling classes" It was in Communist countries.

[GatorB]

Originally Posted by DaddyHalbucks

Nice try, but it's the creeping socialism in the USA that is causing the problems.

It's funny how a country in which all the politicians are bought and paid for by the big corporations has a "creeping socialism" problem. Because we all know how big corps love socialism.

[Joshua G]

Originally Posted by GatorB

That IS the problem. The middle class CANNOT grow as long as the rich are hording money. 70% of our economy is consumer spending. Now when if you take $1 trillion and give it to the top 1% or you take that $1 trillion and give it to the bottom 50% guess who is actually going to spend it in way that will get the economy moving and create jobs? The bottom 50%. The idiot republitards thinks it's perfectly ok for the top 1% to have 95% of al the wealth because they "earned" it. Well guess what, even if you could make a case for that it's an unsustainable system and eventually they won't have any wealth either. It's not healthy for the economy for the top 1% to have that much money. If some dude has to earn "only" $1 bil a year instead of $2 bill well that guy will just have to learn how to live on "only" $2.8 mil a day.

Of course the repubs and the rich are in denial. Just like the rich were in denial about their situations in the late 18th century in France and early 20th century in Russia. How did that turn out for them? But as they say those that ignore history are doomed to repeat it.

i kinda agree, kinda dont. the economy is not zero sum, so the middle class can grow & the rich not grow if tax policy was punitive on the rich. but practically speaking you are correct, the middle class need the rich to create small businesses & corporations invest in new domestic operations.

the rich have numerous more options compared to 30 years back. they can build factories in china, can give money to madoff, can buy computers to replace cashiers, etc. the question is really, what is the solution when the rich think american workers are an inferior investment vs china.

on the govt level, they need to get away from this free trade bullshit & start leveling the playing field for american workers competing with chinese labor. End this crap where china manipulates its currency, slap some big tariffs on chinese iphones, steel, toys, clothes etc. restore progressiveness to the tax code instead of the regressive BS at the top. But the govt wont do that because its dependent on chinese cash to fill the gaping budget hole its not capable of closing.

The problem is i hear nothing from either party proposing anything other then tax cuts or infrastructure spending, 2 solutions that solved nothing. we're just fucked, unless your rich then your fucked in style.

[Coup]

Originally Posted by Cherry7

As you know nothing about me your remark is stupid.

I know for a fact that you're still clinging to an ideology that has been a proven failure, killed millions needlessly, and now you're calling for a do-over?

That makes you a retard, retard.

[porno jew]

you can't see a solution because you've been brainwashed that any solution outside of making the obscene super-rich even more rich wont work.

Originally Posted by joshgirls

i kinda agree, kinda dont. the economy is not zero sum, so the middle class can grow & the rich not grow if tax policy was punitive on the rich. but practically speaking you are correct, the middle class need the rich to create small businesses & corporations invest in new domestic operations.

the rich have numerous more options compared to 30 years back. they can build factories in china, can give money to madoff, can buy computers to replace cashiers, etc. the question is really, what is the solution when the rich think american workers are an inferior investment vs china.

on the govt level, they need to get away from this free trade bullshit & start leveling the playing field for american workers competing with chinese labor. End this crap where china manipulates its currency, slap some big tariffs on chinese iphones, steel, toys, clothes etc. restore progressiveness to the tax code instead of the regressive BS at the top. But the govt wont do that because its dependent on chinese cash to fill the gaping budget hole its not capable of closing.

The problem is i hear nothing from either party proposing anything other then tax cuts or infrastructure spending, 2 solutions that solved nothing. we're just fucked, unless your rich then your fucked in style.

[Joshua G]

Originally Posted by porno jew

you can't see a solution because you've been brainwashed that any solution outside of making the obscene super-rich even more rich wont work.

who are you. area51? agent 488? same retard, new nik.

[Paul Markham]

I see a lot of failures here posting that it's all wrong, because they got it wrong.

There's nothing wrong with the system, the fault lies in your ability to take advantage of it.

[Cherry7]

Originally Posted by Paul Markham

So can you give us an example of where Communism works please.

Capitalism is by no means perfect, but it works. For some badly, for other OK, for a very few very well.

Communism worked for no one but the Autocrats at the top. When I first arrived here everyone thought that if you drove a decent car, you were a party official of Mafia. When we arranged a Christmas dinner for the family, Eva's parent arrived at the 4 star hotel saying they didn't belong in such a place.

They had been programmed to think that way by the so called "Peoples Party".

Give us one example of where Communism has worked. Or do you think we should all toss out a system that does work in favor of one that never worked?

"Culture is not the property of the ruling classes" It was in Communist countries.

For starters no state has ever claimed to be communist but "real existing socialism".

This states were very backward before being run by Communist parties, but as well as doing terrible things, they did succeed in doing some very positive ones.

They developed industry, build houses for all the population, yes poor quality, but the housed everyone not just the rich. The had universal eduction open to all, not to be bought by the rich, Health service, cheap cinema and theater.


When you say worked, for who does it work? Capitalism works for a small minority. Most of the pop it fails to fulfill their human potential.

Who can afford to go to the teat re in London with tickets a £60 ? For capitalism culture is just another way of making money.

Replacing capitalism with communism will happen because capitalism keep destroying itself in war and economic crisis. Remember that the Russian Revolution was the product of WW1 not just to the work of revolutionaries.

[CaptainHowdy]

[CHMOD]

Originally Posted by Cherry7

Karl Marx wrote nothing about communism, so how could he be wrong about it?

He believed that new societies and their economic structures grew out of the previous society.

To plan a society in abstract he called Utopian.

The forces to change feudalism grew up under it, the the merchants, which became the new capitalist class, and changed society into what they wanted. Pushing aside the aristocracy.

Marx believed the working class would be the agent of change to a new society based on social need and not private greed. He never said how this society would look.

<


You are mixing Karl Marx and Thomas More.

Of course Marx and Engels wrote about comunism.

1. Manifest of comunism party
2. Utopian comunism VS scientific comunism

[Paul Markham]

Originally Posted by Cherry7

For starters no state has ever claimed to be communist but "real existing socialism".

This states were very backward before being run by Communist parties, but as well as doing terrible things, they did succeed in doing some very positive ones.

They developed industry, build houses for all the population, yes poor quality, but the housed everyone not just the rich. The had universal eduction open to all, not to be bought by the rich, Health service, cheap cinema and theater.


When you say worked, for who does it work? Capitalism works for a small minority. Most of the pop it fails to fulfill their human potential.

Who can afford to go to the teat re in London with tickets a £60 ? For capitalism culture is just another way of making money.

Replacing capitalism with communism will happen because capitalism keep destroying itself in war and economic crisis. Remember that the Russian Revolution was the product of WW1 not just to the work of revolutionaries.

I have the feeling Capitalism isn't working for you. Being a loser under Capitalism or Communism isn't going to help you.

As for your knowledge of history, well that's a bad scar on your teachers.

After the Russian Revolution millions died of starvation and disease. That would of lived under the Czar. Under the Communist the country was bankrupt. Under Capitalism it's becoming a power house financially.

When Mao took over China he too killed millions by starving them, the Chinese Industry such as it was, was devastated. It was Capitalism that saved the country.

Yes things were cheap in Communist countries. That's because only party officials and Mafia had much money. The rest of the people were living on very very little.

You should of come here to Czech and seen what it was like in 1998. Ten years after the revolution it was still pretty poor. Today it's a totally different country, because of Capitalism.

Anyway keep dreaming you will make it under Communism, as you clearly failed under Capitalism.

[Cherry7]

Originally Posted by CHMOD

<


You are mixing Karl Marx and Thomas More.

Of course Marx and Engels wrote about comunism.

1. Manifest of comunism party
2. Utopian comunism VS scientific comunism

more than 6 mistakes in 4 lines, not bad....

I have actually read the books you can't even get the titles right.

[Cherry7]

Originally Posted by Paul Markham

I have the feeling Capitalism isn't working for you. Being a loser under Capitalism or Communism isn't going to help you.

As for your knowledge of history, well that's a bad scar on your teachers.

After the Russian Revolution millions died of starvation and disease. That would of lived under the Czar. Under the Communist the country was bankrupt. Under Capitalism it's becoming a power house financially.

When Mao took over China he too killed millions by starving them, the Chinese Industry such as it was, was devastated. It was Capitalism that saved the country.

Yes things were cheap in Communist countries. That's because only party officials and Mafia had much money. The rest of the people were living on very very little.

You should of come here to Czech and seen what it was like in 1998. Ten years after the revolution it was still pretty poor. Today it's a totally different country, because of Capitalism.

Anyway keep dreaming you will make it under Communism, as you clearly failed under Capitalism.

Are you speaking from experience ? No just what you have been told. You just believe what you read in the tabloids. As you have said many times your distrust for books.

So you would support the Czar and the continuation of the first WW on the Eastern front?

Well the Russian people refused and first put a social democrat in power and when he wanted to continue the war they put the Bolsheviks in power. This was not done by the communists, the Czar and the western powers in their war of colonies brought the system to a state of total collapse.

Then the western powers supported a civil war against the new workers' state.

So you can chalk those deaths up to capitalism, and add to it all the deaths in the 3rd world do to Imperialism from Ireland to China.

Then the wars in Korea Vietnam Iraq and Afghanistan and the deaths due to capitalism out-way the deaths caused in the struggle to overthrow it.

You obsession with being a "loser" or a "winner" revels more about your character than making any telling points with me.

I lived very happily in communist Poland and live happily in London.

[mchacal]

Originally Posted by Paul Markham

I have the feeling Capitalism isn't working for you. Being a loser under Capitalism or Communism isn't going to help you.

As for your knowledge of history, well that's a bad scar on your teachers.

After the Russian Revolution millions died of starvation and disease. That would of lived under the Czar. Under the Communist the country was bankrupt. Under Capitalism it's becoming a power house financially.

When Mao took over China he too killed millions by starving them, the Chinese Industry such as it was, was devastated. It was Capitalism that saved the country.

Yes things were cheap in Communist countries. That's because only party officials and Mafia had much money. The rest of the people were living on very very little.

You should of come here to Czech and seen what it was like in 1998. Ten years after the revolution it was still pretty poor. Today it's a totally different country, because of Capitalism.

Anyway keep dreaming you will make it under Communism, as you clearly failed under Capitalism.

[CHMOD]

Originally Posted by Cherry7

more than 6 mistakes in 4 lines, not bad....

I have actually read the books you can't even get the titles right.

I am sorry buddy, I have read them in french. I don't know the exact title in english.

I only speak 5 languages and I sometimes make misstakes when I write or speak
another language than my native one.

But tell me. Was it your only argument ?

[pornmasta]

[pornmasta]

Originally Posted by GGurls

blah I wanna see girls! lol

[SimonScans]

Originally Posted by Cherry7

Then the wars in Korea Vietnam Iraq and Afghanistan and the deaths due to capitalism out-way the deaths caused in the struggle to overthrow it.

A few numbers on deaths due to communism.

65 million in the People's Republic of China
20 million in the Soviet Union
2 million in Cambodia
2 million in North Korea
1.7 million in Africa
1.5 million in Afghanistan
1 million in the Communist states of Eastern Europe
1 million in Vietnam
150,000 in Latin America

I thinking being dead would be the ultimate definition of not "fulfilling their human potential"

[CaptainHowdy]

Where is the argument??