Any Leftist 'Radicals' Here?

[Ryder]

Interesting. However, there is absolutely no scientific proof that greed is part of "human nature"!

If you honestly believe that humanity is not intrinsically fallen then we will have to agree to disagree, as no further discourse of politics without this essential point would be of much value.

I would also challenge you to look through all history and marvel at how something not intrinsic to humanity appears so often, irregardless of political climate or any other factors.

 

[CCGirl]

If you honestly believe that humanity is not intrinsically fallen then we will have to agree to disagree, as no further discourse of politics without this essential point would be of much value.

I would also challenge you to look through all history and marvel at how something not intrinsic to humanity appears so often, irregardless of political climate or any other factors.

Then we agree to disagree!

Not sure what "intrinsically fallen" means??

 

[Ryder]

Basically just means man has evil tendencies in him naturally from birth.

If man didn't, I could see some of your ideas about communism making sense. But yeah, we'll have to disagree.

 

[Borealis]

No, that is capitalism. With communism, ALL people are free and the necessities of life provided. Capitalism, as evidenced by the few rich elite, hoards the capital and the workers are left to fend for themselves.

All people are free under communism? That would explain the constant tourism trade between the Soviets and the Caribbean. Oh, and of course the Chinese are free as well, right? Don't forget the North Koreans, who are free...to starve, while their psychotic leader sets off underground nukes to make himself feel special.

The claim that communism makes all people free is truly one of the most unbelievable I've ever seen on these forums. If communism is so bloody free, then why have so many people in the past hundred years risked their lives to escape it? I suppose that the people trying to get over the Berlin Wall were prevented from doing so for their own safety.

Capitalists hoard all the wealth? Strange that I, who would be considered poor by my income, have a car, a computer, decent furniture, a cellphone, a roof over my head, regular meals, a DVD player, a digital piano, plenty of clothing, a pet hamster (my son's), a growing collection of music (both CDs and sheet music), books galore, my son plays baseball every summer...and again, by our society's standards I am POOR. Yet amazingly I manage to get by and I continue to work to improve my standard of living. Under communism, I would not have that opportunity, because everything would be doled out by the state according to what people like you think I need. And frankly, you don't have the right to tell me what I need. I can figure that out for myself, and I can earn my own way in life. What I have, I've earned, as have many people in similar circumstances to my own.

I'm not rich, I probably never will be rich, but I'm not going to moan and whine about how other people have more than me, because I don't judge my life on how other people live theirs. I'm secure enough in my humanity and my life to accept that others will have more than me. I try to help those less fortunate than myself, but I don't have my hand out demanding that the rich people in town hand me what they've earned. If I need something, I'll earn it myself. I bought myself a piano after saving for two years, because I wanted to EARN it, not have it handed to me. Nobody gave it to me, and I wouldn't have it any other way. And next I'm going to save up to get my teeth fixed, to get myself a color laser printer (and save a huge amount on ink costs), and hopefully a CD-MP3 player to install in my car. Things that I want, things that I can strive for, and things that a communist society would not allow me to have because there aren't enough for everyone to go around.

Alright, they'd let me get my teeth fixed. Assuming I'd trust a communist society to have properly-trained dentists, which I frankly don't.

 

[Borealis]

Interesting. However, there is absolutely no scientific proof that greed is part of "human nature"!

Then don't complain that capitalism exploits humanity's greed.

 

[oldbetang]

Originally Posted by susanann
Originally Posted by susanann
I am one of the most leftest radicals here.
I dare you to find anyone more leftest or radical than myself.
I strongly believe and support most of what Thomas Jefferson(the most famous leftest radical in history) believed in and stood for.


..sounds pretty radical, and leftist to me.....Jefferson's ideas are very empowering to the common ordinary people, maximizes liberty to the citizens, severely limits the power and intrusion of the government.......... and definitely at odds and against with what bush and the current republicans are doing.




Well, Jeffersonian policies are certainly not middle of the road. His policies are not at all what the republican right wants and is doing. Not right. NOt middle.

Therefore, Jefferson of course was a leftist and wanted to empower "the common ordinary people".

I get the impression that you don't understand the distinctions between leftism and classical liberalism(modern conservatism).

Maybe this will help:

left
In politics, the portion of the political spectrum associated in general with egalitarianism and popular or state control of the major institutions of political and economic life.
Britannica Encyclopedia

leftism
support for political and social change:the advocating of liberal, socialist, or communist political and social change or reform.
encarta

"Government big enough to supply everything you need is big enough to take everything you have ... The course of history shows that as a government grows, liberty decreases."
-Thomas Jefferson-

A wise and frugal government, which shall leave men free to regulate their own pursuits of industry and improvement, and shall not take from the mouth of labor and bread it has earned - this is the sum of good government.
Thomas Jefferson

That government is best which governs the least, because its people discipline themselves.
Thomas Jefferson


To compel a man to subsidize with his taxes the propagation of ideas which he disbelieves and abhors is sinful and tyrannical.Thomas Jefferson

The democracy will cease to exist when you take away from those who are willing to work and give to those who would not.
Thomas Jefferson

Like I said, Jefferson could in no way be considered a leftist. Judging by his stated philosophy , were he alive today he would be considered a far right extremist.

 

[CCGirl]

Then don't complain that capitalism exploits humanity's greed.

I never have! Capitalism expoits humanity!

All people are free under communism? That would explain the constant tourism trade between the Soviets and the Caribbean. Oh, and of course the Chinese are free as well, right? Don't forget the North Koreans, who are free...to starve, while their psychotic leader sets off underground nukes to make himself feel special.

<snip>

The fact that these nations are what you believe to be communism is amazing! Read the Maifesto, brush up on your Engels, then when you are ready, we can talk!

(Hint: for communism to succeed, there is no more state)

 

[ACougar]

The world it is changing, I don't think it need to be that way anymore. Americans can begin to reduce the amount of thier consumption, as the 3rd world steps it up and eventually comes up to par utilizing technologies like solar and wind, bio-fuels, and a host of other technologies.

Imagine a global Middle class of 6 Billion people. Imagine widespread use and even dominance of green, sustainable technologies.

Absolutely right.

The standard of living for the whole world cannot be raised without lowering the standard of living in the first world.

That is to say there are only a finite amount of resources to go around.

Global equity can only mean a much poorer America.

It just isn't politic to say this boldly. Better to pretend the resources of the Earth can be extended arbitrarily.

Or to put things differently:

Americans: You cannot live the way you do unless there is a jackboot at the throat of third world peasants.

 

[CCGirl]

The world it is changing, I don't think it need to be that way anymore. Americans can begin to reduce the amount of thier consumption, as the 3rd world steps it up and eventually comes up to par utilizing technologies like solar and wind, bio-fuels, and a host of other technologies.

Imagine a global Middle class of 6 Billion people. Imagine widespread use and even dominance of green, sustainable technologies.

This is what commmunism is all about! There are enough resources on this planet for all to live a comfortable existance. Capitalism stops social progress. It needs cheap labour.

 

[ACougar]

This is what commmunism is all about! There are enough resources on this planet for all to live a comfortable existance. Capitalism stops social progress. It needs cheap labour.

Capitalism has a tendancy to follow the path of least resistance, if labor is not protected by the State it will be exploited. At the same time it also drives progress in a way that communism doesn't. It is all about competition which is after all a good thing, provided we all remember to treat each other like human beings first.

Greed is apart of who we are, it's as natural as the wind and properly harnessed and controled it can be beneficial for everyone. Human beings are going to have to eveolve for at least a few dozen more generations before anything like communism is even remotly possible.

 

[AlanGurvey]

All people are free under communism? That would explain the constant tourism trade between the Soviets and the Caribbean. Oh, and of course the Chinese are free as well, right? Don't forget the North Koreans, who are free...to starve, while their psychotic leader sets off underground nukes to make himself feel special.

Stalinism big shoop de woop.

Spartacism, you should look it up

 

[AlanGurvey]

The claim that communism makes all people free is truly one of the most unbelievable I've ever seen on these forums. If communism is so bloody free, then why have so many people in the past hundred years risked their lives to escape it? I suppose that the people trying to get over the Berlin Wall were prevented from doing so for their own safety.

It's funny, that only really occurs in Stalinism and Maoism. Where are the people who fled the 'evil horror' of Rosa? Of Spartacism? Of Allende? Of Democratic Marxism?

Every theory if applied wrong will have it's wrong points, please stop falling back on this 50's nonsense.

 

[AlanGurvey]

(Double post)

 

[AlanGurvey]

Things that I want, things that I can strive for, and things that a communist society would not allow me to have because there aren't enough for everyone to go around.

Lets not paint everything with how it was interpreted in the past...Or shall I do the same thing to the bible?

 

[AlanGurvey]

If you honestly believe that humanity is not intrinsically fallen then we will have to agree to disagree, as no further discourse of politics without this essential point would be of much value.

So we must take up the federalist view on man?

 

[susanann]

The world it is changing, I don't think it need to be that way anymore. Americans can begin to reduce the amount of thier consumption

America has one of the highest population growth rates in the world. Consumption in America is increasing, not reducing. As America's population passes 400 million, then 500 million, etc. it will require much more of the worlds resources than it has in the past.

 

[susanann]

Originally Posted by susanann
I am one of the most leftest radicals here.
I dare you to find anyone more leftest or radical than myself.
I strongly believe and support most of what Thomas Jefferson(the most famous leftest radical in history) believed in and stood for.


..from your own quotes Jefferson sounds pretty radical, and leftist to me.....Jefferson's ideas are very empowering to the common ordinary people, maximizes liberty to the citizens, severely limits the power and intrusion of the government.......... and definitely at odds and against with what bush and the current republicans are doing.

Jeffersonian policies are certainly not middle of the road. His policies are not at all what the republican right wants and is doing. Not right. NOt middle.
Therefore, Jefferson of course was a leftist and wanted to empower "the common ordinary people".

I get the impression that you don't understand the distinctions between leftism and classical liberalism(modern conservatism).

Maybe this will help:

left
In politics, the portion of the political spectrum associated in general with egalitarianism and popular or state control of the major institutions of political and economic life.

Like I said, Jefferson could in no way be considered a leftist. Judging by his stated philosophy , were he alive today he would be considered a far right extremist.

Jefferson was the epitomy of leftism.

Jefferson did more to empower the common people than anyone else in the history of the world. It was Jefferson who took the power and privileges away from a few individuals, eliminated tradition, and gave power to the people/individuals.

Jefferson was totally against everything about right wingers. Jefferson was the most leftist person in American history.

It was Jefferson who attacked the far right, got rid of the traditionalists, and eliminated inequalities and privileges.

You need to better understand what leftists and rightists are all about, as well as understanding how radical leftist Jefferson was. Only a radical leftist (such as Jefferson) would advocate having a revolution every 20 years. You cant get more leftist than that.

Maybe this will help:


"A simple, if vague, definition of "far right" is someone deemed too right-wing to be accepted in the nation's mainstream right-wing political parties. "Far right" ideologies and movements often advocate substantial intervention, typically government intervention, in society in order to protect or promote inequalities or privileges, especially those inequalities or privileges that are viewed as "traditional". It is often associated with hardline nationalism. In the modern world, the term far right is applied to those who support authoritarianism, usually involving a dominant class (which may be aristocratic or defined along racial or other lines), and/or an established church

This is in contrast to the left-wing, who advocate intervention in favor of "equality", and give little or no authority to "tradition".
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Far-right

 

[TheReasoner]

I am late in this thread. But yeah, I guess by US standards I am a leftist "radical"

 

[susanann]

Capitalists hoard all the wealth?

It is virtually impossible for anyone to hoard wealth under capitalism. Capitalism promotes competition unlike any other system.

Under capitalism all wealthy people are under constant threat of losing their businesses, customers, workers, and their markets so they have to please customer and worker alike. Under capitalism no business gets any special breaks from government or anyone else.

Under capitalism all businesses have to pay higher wages in order to attract and keep workers. Under capitalism if any worker was abused or underpaid he would be totally free to quit and work for a competitor, or start his own company. Under capitalism it would make no sense to build a factory on the other side of the world from where its customers were.

There are no barriers to entry in capitalism, there are no barriers to the free movement of labor or capital, and the government does not restrict in any way. Anyone could start an automobile company and put gm and ford out of business, or for that matter, Donald Trump, Microsoft or GE.

 

[TheReasoner]

It is virtually impossible for anyone to hoard wealth under capitalism. Capitalism promotes competition unlike any other system.

Oh yeah [sarcasm]that's why there's no gap between the rich and the poor in capitalistic countries[/sarcasm]

Under capitalism all wealthy people are under constant threat of losing their businesses, customers, workers, and their markets so they have to please customer and worker alike. Under capitalism no business gets any special breaks from government or anyone else.

And this is good how? Maybe certain innovative businesses should get some support. For example some high-tech businesses, or other businesses like old style smithies, or wood carvers, knitters and so on who cannot survive on what they make, but still take care of an important part of our history and heritage.

Under capitalism all businesses have to pay higher wages in order to attract and keep workers. Under capitalism if any worker was abused or underpaid he would be totally free to quit and work for a competitor, or start his own company. Under capitalism it would make no sense to build a factory on the other side of the world from where its customers were.

Capitalism and "free trade" is the reason we have sweatshop labor. If there is a surplus of potential employees then the employee's rights will plummet. Especially if the task they do require little or no training. It is simply better economically to get new people rather than giving rights to the current employees.

There are no barriers to entry in capitalism, there are no barriers to the free movement of labor or capital, and the government does not restrict in any way. Anyone could start an automobile company and put gm and ford out of business, or for that matter, Donald Trump, Microsoft or GE.

The barrier is created by the system itself. If you have no start capital you cannot start. Noone can start an automobile company from scratch today. Cars are far too advanced for an average joe to pull that off. You must be rich to do such a thing. Very rich. And get a huge loan atop that.


What's more, capitalism encourages consumerism which harms this world. If polluting is legal and cheaper than cleaning up, they will pollute. A capitalistic business will do whatever it can to earn more money. In many instances this means it is done at the expense of the people and nature.