Should women have the right to vote?

[phk]

Only Muslim women shouldn't have the right to vote.

Only communists shouldn't have the right to vote.

Your logic can easily be turned against you.

Communism will liberate humanity.

Yeah, it's done such a good job of that so far...

Indeed.

No, it hasn't - that was sarcasm in case you couldn't tell. Communism's idea of liberation is forcing people to comply with it's ideals - by not granting freedom, but coercion. Enslavement doesn't bring about freedom, anyone with half a brain would realize that.

Dictatorship of the Proletariat is a million times more free than Dictatorship of the Burgoise.

Dictatorship of neither is preferable, which is why a capitalist democratic republic the best available form of government - no one group should have all the power. But to dispute your point, every communist country is ruled by an elite few who oppress their subjects.

Capitalism is Dictatorship of the Burgoise.

[John Dibble]

Only Muslim women shouldn't have the right to vote.

Only communists shouldn't have the right to vote.

Your logic can easily be turned against you.

Communism will liberate humanity.

Yeah, it's done such a good job of that so far...

Indeed.

No, it hasn't - that was sarcasm in case you couldn't tell. Communism's idea of liberation is forcing people to comply with it's ideals - by not granting freedom, but coercion. Enslavement doesn't bring about freedom, anyone with half a brain would realize that.

Dictatorship of the Proletariat is a million times more free than Dictatorship of the Burgoise.

Dictatorship of neither is preferable, which is why a capitalist democratic republic the best available form of government - no one group should have all the power. But to dispute your point, every communist country is ruled by an elite few who oppress their subjects.

Capitalism is Dictatorship of the Burgoise.

No, it is not. We are a capitalist society and a free society - people are free to better themselves and live dignified lives. In a communist society, all non-communist thought would be oppressed - here in our capitalist society, your thought is allowed, even though it is foolish. In a communist society you are nothing but a slave.

[TexasPatriot2024]

Now we are talking about giving women the right to vote? What next? Are we going to let them steal our factory jobs?

[phk]

Only Muslim women shouldn't have the right to vote.

Only communists shouldn't have the right to vote.

Your logic can easily be turned against you.

Communism will liberate humanity.

Yeah, it's done such a good job of that so far...

Indeed.

No, it hasn't - that was sarcasm in case you couldn't tell. Communism's idea of liberation is forcing people to comply with it's ideals - by not granting freedom, but coercion. Enslavement doesn't bring about freedom, anyone with half a brain would realize that.

Dictatorship of the Proletariat is a million times more free than Dictatorship of the Burgoise.

Dictatorship of neither is preferable, which is why a capitalist democratic republic the best available form of government - no one group should have all the power. But to dispute your point, every communist country is ruled by an elite few who oppress their subjects.

Capitalism is Dictatorship of the Burgoise.

No, it is not. We are a capitalist society and a free society - people are free to better themselves and live dignified lives. In a communist society, all non-communist thought would be oppressed - here in our capitalist society, your thought is allowed, even though it is foolish. In a communist society you are nothing but a slave.

Ever since capitalism got in bed with the state there's been no democracy/freedom in any governmental sense. Instead there is capital-parliamentarianism.

The trend toward monopoly that represents not liberty and justice for all, but liberty and justice for the wealthy 5%. It is the parliamentarianism of consumerism, commodification, spectacular society: these are the enemies of freedom! Not Communism

[John Dibble]

Ever since capitalism got in bed with the state there's been no democracy/freedom in any governmental sense. Instead there is capital-parliamentarianism.

The trend toward monopoly that represents not liberty and justice for all, but liberty and justice for the wealthy 5%. It is the parliamentarianism of consumerism, commodification, spectacular society: these are the enemies of freedom! Not Communism

Well that's what happens when you allow the government to get big - you get corruption. Communism is the ultimate big government, and it is ultimately very easy to corrupt. If power corrupts, absolute power corrupts absolutely.

And if you believe that communism is the friend of freedom, then I advise you go to North Korea(you know, that communist country), live there for a while, then come on these boards and tell us how it is. But wait, you wouldn't be able to do the last step - North Koreans aren't allowed to use the internet. Some freedom.

Once again, I mention that in our country you have the right to a dissenting opinion. No communist country has ever allowed it, because they know communism can't last without oppression.

Face it, capitalism has steadily increased the standard of living for the vast majority of the population, not just the wealthy. Communist countries only bring about equal poverty and equal mediocrity - not one in history has ever done anything otherwise. If truly they were bastions of freedom people wouldn't attempt to flee them.

[phk]

Ever since capitalism got in bed with the state there's been no democracy/freedom in any governmental sense. Instead there is capital-parliamentarianism.

The trend toward monopoly that represents not liberty and justice for all, but liberty and justice for the wealthy 5%. It is the parliamentarianism of consumerism, commodification, spectacular society: these are the enemies of freedom! Not Communism

Well that's what happens when you allow the government to get big - you get corruption. Communism is the ultimate big government, and it is ultimately very easy to corrupt. If power corrupts, absolute power corrupts absolutely.

And if you believe that communism is the friend of freedom, then I advise you go to North Korea(you know, that communist country), live there for a while, then come on these boards and tell us how it is. But wait, you wouldn't be able to do the last step - North Koreans aren't allowed to use the internet. Some freedom.

Once again, I mention that in our country you have the right to a dissenting opinion. No communist country has ever allowed it, because they know communism can't last without oppression.

Face it, capitalism has steadily increased the standard of living for the vast majority of the population, not just the wealthy. Communist countries only bring about equal poverty and equal mediocrity - not one in history has ever done anything otherwise. If truly they were bastions of freedom people wouldn't attempt to flee them.

That doesn't state my views correctly at all. I'm for Communist Republicanism based in the democratic principle of the mass-line: proletarian democracy "from the masses to the masses" rather than bourgeois democracy, the dictatorship of the bourgeoisie. You should read the second chapter of Lenin's Proletarian Revolution and the Renegade Kautsky for more on this question of democracy. Basically, Lenin argues that everything functions in relation to classes. The gist is that the State is an instrument for the repression of class contradictions (cf. The State and Revolution). We live in a Bourgeois Dictatorship (in which the institutions and apparatuses of the State serve the dominant class - the bourgeois minority - at the expense and exclusion of the proletarian majority) that has expanded to take the shape of a reactionary intercommunal Empire. This superstructural formation is dialectically determined by the economy, by the relations of production within the capitalist mode of production. A Communist Republic would be the inverse of this: Proletarian Dictatorship, in which the institutions and apparatuses of the State serve the proletarian majority at the expense and exclusion of the bourgeois minority. This means limiting bourgeois right and empowering the masses through a progressive change in (and enforcing the change in) the relations of production, and as Lenin says, this is "a million times more democratic."

[John Dibble]

That doesn't state my views correctly at all. I'm for Communist Republicanism based in the democratic principle of the mass-line: proletarian democracy "from the masses to the masses" rather than bourgeois democracy, the dictatorship of the bourgeoisie. You should read the second chapter of Lenin's Proletarian Revolution and the Renegade Kautsky for more on this question of democracy. Basically, Lenin argues that everything functions in relation to classes. The gist is that the State is an instrument for the repression of class contradictions (cf. The State and Revolution). We live in a Bourgeois Dictatorship (in which the institutions and apparatuses of the State serve the dominant class - the bourgeois minority - at the expense and exclusion of the proletarian majority) that has expanded to take the shape of a reactionary intercommunal Empire. This superstructural formation is dialectically determined by the economy, by the relations of production within the capitalist mode of production. A Communist Republic would be the inverse of this: Proletarian Dictatorship, in which the institutions and apparatuses of the State serve the proletarian majority at the expense and exclusion of the bourgeois minority. This means limiting bourgeois right and empowering the masses through a progressive change in (and enforcing the change in) the relations of production, and as Lenin says, this is "a million times more democratic."

Lenin said a lot of things. That doesn't change that he was a tyrant, just like every other leader of communist countries. Communism doesn't work, so any form of communist government can not last without oppression. As soon as your proposed system proves a failure, the people will either vote it out of power in favor of free market reforms which historically provided higher standards of living or the leaders will end democracy and oppress all opposition.

EDIT - move this debate here, it's off topic.