Capitalism

[PLAYER57832]

Its not my fault you're a person with no money.

I see, so you get credit for being born to parents who could support you ... and a child of poor parents only has himself to blame for not having enough food, decent shelter and poor education?

[ahunda]

surely, true capitalism [...] benefits those who generate the most labor.

You are aware, that this is pure capitalist propaganda ? A myth, that has nothing to do with reality whatsoever ?

Please show me a single person, that can earn millions or billions of dollars only by his own "honest work". It´s simply impossible. It´s possible only through the ownership of land and/or means of production (= capital), employing other people (who don´t own land and/or means of production and are therefore forced to sell their work power) and exploiting those peoples labour, or more friendly put: Earn a profit off the workers employed.

This of course turns your entire argument on its head, because it is actually the capitalists, who amount wealth through the work of others. And it was the early socialists, who propagated an end to this exploitation of the work of others.

But I am painfully aware, that Americans have a rather skewed idea of socialism. The welfare system for example has nothing to do with socialism in its original meaning.

As a matter of fact, the welfare system was introduced in Europe as a compromise, when the capitalists & power elites got scared by the workers movement, the growing popularity of socialist ideas among workers and the first successful socialist revolution on the continent (Russia).

They decided to buy the workers off, give them a piece of the cake (regulated working times & conditions, paid sick-leave, minimum wages, etc.) not because they liked the socialist ideas, but because they were horrified by them and wanted to prevent a real socialist revolution (that would have transferred land & means of production from private to public / collective ownership).

[thegreekdog]

surely, true capitalism [...] benefits those who generate the most labor.

You are aware, that this is pure capitalist propaganda ? A myth, that has nothing to do with reality whatsoever ?

Please show me a single person, that can earn millions or billions of dollars only by his own "honest work". It´s simply impossible. It´s possible only through the ownership of land and/or means of production (= capital), employing other people (who don´t own land and/or means of production and are therefore forced to sell their work power) and exploiting those peoples labour, or more friendly put: Earn a profit off the workers employed.

This of course turns your entire argument on its head, because it is actually the capitalists, who amount wealth through the work of others. And it was the early socialists, who propagated an end to this exploitation of the work of others.

But I am painfully aware, that Americans have a rather skewed idea of socialism. The welfare system for example has nothing to do with socialism in its original meaning.

As a matter of fact, the welfare system was introduced in Europe as a compromise, when the capitalists & power elites got scared by the workers movement, the growing popularity of socialist ideas among workers and the first successful socialist revolution on the continent (Russia).

They decided to buy the workers off, give them a piece of the cake (regulated working times & conditions, paid sick-leave, minimum wages, etc.) not because they liked the socialist ideas, but because they were horrified by them and wanted to prevent a real socialist revolution (that would have transferred land & means of production from private to public / collective ownership).

You'd have to ask whomever posted that phrase on Wikipedia, since that is where I got the phrase. I believe the phrase cites to a few books, presumably written by people who know more about economic theory than I do. Perhaps, though, you can convince them of their mistakes. Let me know how that works out for you.

[flashleg8]

They decided to buy the workers off, give them a piece of the cake (regulated working times & conditions, paid sick-leave, minimum wages, etc.) not because they liked the socialist ideas, but because they were horrified by them and wanted to prevent a real socialist revolution (that would have transferred land & means of production from private to public / collective ownership).

Quite correct, and well put.

[thegreekdog]

They decided to buy the workers off, give them a piece of the cake (regulated working times & conditions, paid sick-leave, minimum wages, etc.) not because they liked the socialist ideas, but because they were horrified by them and wanted to prevent a real socialist revolution (that would have transferred land & means of production from private to public / collective ownership).

I think it might be better said that as follows:

"They decided to buy the workers off, give them a piece of the cake (regulated working times & conditions, paid sick-leave, minimum wages, etc.) not because they liked the socialist ideas, but because they were horrified by the idea that someone other than themselves would have economic power and wanted to prevent the socialist revolutionaries from taking their place in government and in business (that would have transferred land & means of production from private and currently in power to private and revolutionary."

My point here is that, like in the Soviet Union or Cuba, there will still be wide class divisions. For example, would you have rather been the Soviet president or a Soviet steel worker? In a truly socialist system, it wouldn't matter. But, we all know that's not the case. The people in power currently will do everything they can to keep others from gaining power. The people that create socialist revolutions are more interested in their own power and their own wealth than collective ownership of land and means.

[THE ARMY]

To conclude...Capitalism isn't perfect. Communism isn't perfect. Though there are times and places where one form of economy should exist and times when the other should exist. There are positives and negatives to both. Though FUNDAMENTALLY Capitalism provides greater freedom while Communism provides greater equality. But is the freedom in a Capitalist society the freedom people want? Also is the equality in a Communist society what people want?

All in all what i really have to say is...

IF YOU DON'T LIKE THE WAY ITS SET UP, THEN WHY DON'T YOU GET THE HELL OUT AND CHOOSE A DIFFERENT SOCIETY TO LIVE IN?

Aha, try answering that one.

[Gillipig]

The "capitalism without limits" crowd are as stupid and unaware of human behaviour as communists. The do exactly the same thing as communists, that is; they ignore any proof that their system is retarded simply because the idea is so awesome. I challenge any "capitalism wins everything"-people to a debate.

It will be fun.

Unsupervised Capitalism is basically survival of the fittest, a lot of countries have had that as a role model for their society, since Darwin came up with the term! (no I'm not putting any blame on him!), and none of them was very inviting to me!
Unsupervised capitalism will lead to a cruel world, supervised capitalism will lead to a harmonic world!

[kiddicus maximus]

mod edit you calling something ignorant is as contradictory as "never say never"

Just because you can't afford anything better than a 1983 Chevy Nova for a house, don't take it out on the privileged. Its not my fault you're a person with no money.

That wasn't a flame. If you want to see one, try me again...

Fucking overbearing trigger-happy mods.

[captain.crazy]

mod edit you calling something ignorant is as contradictory as "never say never"

Just because you can't afford anything better than a 1983 Chevy Nova for a house, don't take it out on the privileged. Its not my fault you're a person with no money.

That wasn't a flame. If you want to see one, try me again...

Fucking overbearing trigger-happy mods.

tisk tisk... such a vulgar display!

[GabonX]

Anybody with average intelligence and average hearing can be a great musician if they spend 1,000 hours or more practicing.

Success is mainly a matter of effort and as a general rule if you have average potential in a field and you spend 1,000 hours doing it you will be very good. Most people never approach their true potential in anything.

I would argue that surroundings do not limit success because in a free society, which most capitalists advocate, a person can leave. It's a matter of walking.

Wow. Holy shit. I knew people like you existed but I never thought I would meet any.

[jonka]

... Great thread, Snorri. Well done.

... Communism has failed everywhere it's appeared. Don't push China back at me because China's recent success is based entirely on its acceptance of capitalism as its "money engine". Communist in most social respects, very capitalist economically.
...

I think the best example to counteract that would be early 20th century USSR and the 5 year plans, true they sacrificed a loss in consumer goods, but they greatly increased efficiency.

[jonka]

I think that you fail to see that those big corporations use the all powerful government as a tool to suppress competition by "regulating" business and making it harder for average people to get a leg up in an industry where there is already a monopoly. Try, if you will, to build your own car. You would never get it on the road because you couldn't get it past all of the stringent safety requirements. Thus, you only have three auto makers in America, thus, a stagnant industry that now teeters on the brink of collapse. It is the lack of diversity that will bring the big three down in the end, and look... see how they topple?

I don't think you would have much success in the auto industry if you are building your cars in your garage. Mainly though, the American car industry teeters on the brink of collapse not because there are only 3 maincompanies, but because of the success of foreign companies better technology. How do we fix the problem then? Smarter, better schooled designers, rather than having autoshops starting to produce pieces of junk for people to drive on.

[captain.crazy]

I think that you fail to see that those big corporations use the all powerful government as a tool to suppress competition by "regulating" business and making it harder for average people to get a leg up in an industry where there is already a monopoly. Try, if you will, to build your own car. You would never get it on the road because you couldn't get it past all of the stringent safety requirements. Thus, you only have three auto makers in America, thus, a stagnant industry that now teeters on the brink of collapse. It is the lack of diversity that will bring the big three down in the end, and look... see how they topple?

I don't think you would have much success in the auto industry if you are building your cars in your garage. Mainly though, the American car industry teeters on the brink of collapse not because there are only 3 maincompanies, but because of the success of foreign companies better technology. How do we fix the problem then? Smarter, better schooled designers, rather than having autoshops starting to produce pieces of junk for people to drive on.

American car companies built the cars that Americans wanted. Though, they had very short term vision when it came watching the market trends. Unless I am mistaken, foreign auto makers are also on the ropes. the political clout that the unions pull in Washington is the real reason that we are likely to see GM fall, then the others.

This is all being orchestrated by our government, which has been infiltrated by socialists and communists.

[PLAYER57832]

IF YOU DON'T LIKE THE WAY ITS SET UP, THEN WHY DON'T YOU GET THE HELL OUT AND CHOOSE A DIFFERENT SOCIETY TO LIVE IN?

Aha, try answering that one.

Because people need jobs, have families and generally don't HAVE the option of just picking up and moving.

Further, just because people enjoy talking about ideal systems and pure ideology doesn't mean they in any way expect such systems to really work in the world.... a few fanatics do, but that's why they are called fanatics... they have fantastic imaginations.

[InkL0sed]

Anybody with average intelligence and average hearing can be a great musician if they spend 1,000 hours or more practicing.

Success is mainly a matter of effort and as a general rule if you have average potential in a field and you spend 1,000 hours doing it you will be very good. Most people never approach their true potential in anything.

I would argue that surroundings do not limit success because in a free society, which most capitalists advocate, a person can leave. It's a matter of walking.

Wow. Holy shit. I knew people like you existed but I never thought I would meet any.

I think he means Social Darwinists.

[captain.crazy]

For example, if I am interested in becoming a musician, I should put myself in a place where I can be around music and musicians as much as possible. If I like being a criminal, then I suppose that I can put myself around criminals to learn the trade. In either case, I, by the nature of my own decisions, and ultimately responsible for my own freedom.

And exactly how do you do that without money, without being born to a family that can give you those options?

I expect that people would do this the same way that I did. Finish high school. Weigh your options for getting a degree, as in join the military and get a G.I. bill, look into scholarships (usually funded by rich people and corporations), look into school loans and grants. Then you don't get lazy and squander your time in school drinking and partying. You study hard and work through.

You assume a lot.

I happen to think that science is a tool that will ultimately prove that God exists.

I agree.

And it has nothing to do with captialism. In fact, Christ was pretty socialistic.

I disagree at least in the governmental sense. Christ never intended morals to be forced upon a people at large, rather, the free will of individuals was the intended outcome. Socialism is antichristian in that it takes away the opportunity for the individual to make the choice to be good to his neighbors in their time of need.

Your models, in a perfectly predictable and controllable environment, are suitable. But when they are in such an environment as the economy, you are no better off trying to predict the weather. You will, at some point, make a mistake, and it will likely be colossal.

and the alternative is better?

By far. The laissez faire approach to economic policy is the natural corrective cycle of economic affairs. Literally, it means, "Leave us be!" The economic downturn would have hurt for a little while, but it would by now, already be on the mend because the bankrupt companies would already have been bought up and their assets would be doing someone some good somewhere in a much more productive environment. This is exactly most people aren't even aware that there was a little depression in 1921. It was just a blip on the screen.

See, that's where you are wrong. I do not need you to survive. You may need others to gather your food for you, fix your car for you, entertain you... but I don't. I can hunt, fish, forage... What you don't know is that I am a survivalist. I don't need you to survive. I don't need a government to take care of me. Ever since 911 I have been teaching myself how to survive. You could do it too, if you would just convince your self that you were man enough to do it.

Sorry, but I happen to know a good deal about this. There are several problem. Notably, there just are not enough wild resources to support more than a few individuals. That's why humanity invented farming and industry.

I am only talking about myself. I don't need you to survive because I have already taken the initiative to learn these kinds of skills. By and large, most people would rather huddle in athletic stadiums. I would rather put my small quarter acre yard to agricultural use and implement a garden and hunt and fish to sustain my self. There are also a myriad if "weeds" that are edible. You are incorrect on this, lots of people could do this if they wanted too.

In your "survivalist" scenario, those will be the strongest... those born with wealth, and a few with special skills in weaponry and the like.

Bullocks... Many "poor" people hunt and are good at it. Rich people are less likely to hunt.

Thirdly ... I am not "man" enough for anything ... but I am intelligent and resourceful enough for a good deal more than I suspect you have ever encountered. Specifically, I have kids.

I have kids too. And I will do them a far greater service by teaching them how to survive from the land than to rely on a government run handout.

[joecoolfrog]

I think that you fail to see that those big corporations use the all powerful government as a tool to suppress competition by "regulating" business and making it harder for average people to get a leg up in an industry where there is already a monopoly. Try, if you will, to build your own car. You would never get it on the road because you couldn't get it past all of the stringent safety requirements. Thus, you only have three auto makers in America, thus, a stagnant industry that now teeters on the brink of collapse. It is the lack of diversity that will bring the big three down in the end, and look... see how they topple?

I don't think you would have much success in the auto industry if you are building your cars in your garage. Mainly though, the American car industry teeters on the brink of collapse not because there are only 3 maincompanies, but because of the success of foreign companies better technology. How do we fix the problem then? Smarter, better schooled designers, rather than having autoshops starting to produce pieces of junk for people to drive on.

American car companies built the cars that Americans wanted. Though, they had very short term vision when it came watching the market trends. Unless I am mistaken, foreign auto makers are also on the ropes. the political clout that the unions pull in Washington is the real reason that we are likely to see GM fall, then the others.

This is all being orchestrated by our government, which has been infiltrated by socialists and communists.

You just have to assume he is a troll......the alternative doesn't bear thinking about really

[flashleg8]

All in all what i really have to say is...

IF YOU DON'T LIKE THE WAY ITS SET UP, THEN WHY DON'T YOU GET THE HELL OUT AND CHOOSE A DIFFERENT SOCIETY TO LIVE IN?

Aha, try answering that one.

The corrupt capitalist system will only be overthrown when the proletariat are awakened to their own exploitation. The Russian, Chinese and even Cuban system are unique to their set of conditions prior to and during the revolution. Their systems were not a final goal but merely a stepping stone to the final goal of a truly internationalist communist society. True socialism can only exist in an internationalist way. To answer your (rather naive) question, I wish to see a socialist society in MY country. Helping MY family. MY community. The class struggle should be undertaken everywhere the evils of capitalism exist, not just in the places where conflict seems imminent or the revolution seems nearer to hand. The current economic climate offers Marxists an opportunity to advance the education in the working classes we've not seen for the last decade.
To sum up: I am choosing a different society to live in. I just want it here where it can help me and my community and reflect our ethics, our values, created by us and for us. We do not wish to import another countries solution to the capitalist disease but to create our own.

[Bovver boy]

IF YOU DON'T LIKE THE WAY ITS SET UP, THEN WHY DON'T YOU GET THE HELL OUT AND CHOOSE A DIFFERENT SOCIETY TO LIVE IN?

Aha, try answering that one.

Well, It's quite simple.

These champagne sociailists' points of view are quite simply the decadent, bourgeious musings of addled teenage-rebels. Only within a free, civilised society such as the UK/USA/Canada/australia - or quite simply the western capitalist world, would these opinons be tolerated as a part of their 'human rights' - whereas if they were born within a country that enacts their utopian socialist paradise, they would of course have no basic human rights, free speech, and live in total misery.

Of course - they do not wish to live in these types of countries, simply because their bellies are full in this country, and they are allowed their insignificant, niave, 6th-form opinons. They love to empathise with the 'class stuggles' from the comfort of their armchair, scoffing at the prospect the could enact that in this country.

To summarise - if these teenage communist rebels had the slightest whiff of hardship that is inevitable with any communist revolution, they'd go crying back to their mummies and daddies :

'oooh not weally, i never, meant it, pwease dont make me go into the field and pick potatoes!! I want to play my PS3!! WAAAAAH WAAAAH'

[captain.crazy]

All in all what i really have to say is...

IF YOU DON'T LIKE THE WAY ITS SET UP, THEN WHY DON'T YOU GET THE HELL OUT AND CHOOSE A DIFFERENT SOCIETY TO LIVE IN?

Aha, try answering that one.

The corrupt capitalist system will only be overthrown when the proletariat are awakened to their own exploitation. The Russian, Chinese and even Cuban system are unique to their set of conditions prior to and during the revolution. Their systems were not a final goal but merely a stepping stone to the final goal of a truly internationalist communist society. True socialism can only exist in an internationalist way. To answer your (rather naive) question, I wish to see a socialist society in MY country. Helping MY family. MY community. The class struggle should be undertaken everywhere the evils of capitalism exist, not just in the places where conflict seems imminent or the revolution seems nearer to hand. The current economic climate offers Marxists an opportunity to advance the education in the working classes we've not seen for the last decade.
To sum up: I am choosing a different society to live in. I just want it here where it can help me and my community and reflect our ethics, our values, created by us and for us. We do not wish to import another countries solution to the capitalist disease but to create our own.

It amazes me that you are so brainwashed that you cannot see right in front of you that it is the socialist infiltration that has caused this in our country.

The leftist "liberals" (which is a misnomer in the worst way because they want nothing to do with liberty) walk through this land blathering on and on about how entitled everyone is when in fact, you only wish to win the ideological war for people's minds so that you can control their very lives. They claim that they can deliver on excellent housing for everyone, the elimination of crime and health care for everyone. Unfortunately, what you will really deliver are shacks, lack of freedom and second rate health care that will encourage death for those that are too much of a drain on everyone else, since it would be "better" for the people at large.

You claim how lovely that the community is in china, and yet, they have slave labor and such a lock jaw approach to keeping freedom from the individual that they murder executives who fail, or over reach what it is that the government thinks to be their "fair due" for a job well done. Lovely Cuba is a slum and the dogs that wait for Castero to die are so ready to change Cuba into something else. Russia collapsed (though, one would wonder how that could be true, since they still exist and operate with the same goal, to rival the American way of life.) The totalitarian Communist regimes of the world all equate to tyranny. Power always rests in the top of the governments and that power always corrupts the people that preside over the system.

The problem with the capitalist system in America is that liberals (many disguised as conservatives) are at the helm, and they can't put aside their Kanzian economics long enough to see that they are the problem. A free and natural economy, where there are no lobbiest in the government ear chanting the mantra of political favor for the allure of campaign contributions are allowed, keeps the power where it really belongs, in the hands of the people.

[flashleg8]

IF YOU DON'T LIKE THE WAY ITS SET UP, THEN WHY DON'T YOU GET THE HELL OUT AND CHOOSE A DIFFERENT SOCIETY TO LIVE IN?

Aha, try answering that one.

Well, It's quite simple.

These champagne sociailists' points of view are quite simply the decadent, bourgeious musings of addled teenage-rebels. Only within a free, civilised society such as the UK/USA/Canada/australia - or quite simply the western capitalist world, would these opinons be tolerated as a part of their 'human rights' - whereas if they were born within a country that enacts their utopian socialist paradise, they would of course have no basic human rights, free speech, and live in total misery.

Of course - they do not wish to live in these types of countries, simply because their bellies are full in this country, and they are allowed their insignificant, niave, 6th-form opinons. They love to empathise with the 'class stuggles' from the comfort of their armchair, scoffing at the prospect the could enact that in this country.

To summarise - if these teenage communist rebels had the slightest whiff of hardship that is inevitable with any communist revolution, they'd go crying back to their mummies and daddies :

'oooh not weally, i never, meant it, pwease dont make me go into the field and pick potatoes!! I want to play my PS3!! WAAAAAH WAAAAH'

I really don't know who you are talking about but I assume that comment is aimed at me. You know nothing about me at all and for your information I'm most certainly not a "teenage-rebel"! (though no disrespect intended to teenagers who are educating themselves in socialism). It really shows something of your mindset that you consider others to be like yourself.

Communist and socialist parties and movements exist in every nation on the earth, "western capitalist world" and developing/industrialising nations alike. I simply do not believe that you enjoy the "freedoms" you think you do. How free is our press? Not very, who owns/controls the media? Capitalists. How democratic are we? Not much. Who controls/funds politics? Capitalists? Who controls and runs business? Capitalists. Who controls the apparatus of the state? Capitalists. You talk of human rights, what about the right to work, to eat, to live and work in dignity? I suggest that it is in fact you that is sitting in your armchair stuffing your face from the sweat of another’s misery.

[flashleg8]

Sorry for the double post.

The leftist "liberals" (which is a misnomer in the worst way because they want nothing to do with liberty) walk through this land blathering on and on about how entitled everyone is when in fact, you only wish to win the ideological war for people's minds so that you can control their very lives. They claim that they can deliver on excellent housing for everyone, the elimination of crime and health care for everyone. Unfortunately, what you will really deliver are shacks, lack of freedom and second rate health care that will encourage death for those that are too much of a drain on everyone else, since it would be "better" for the people at large.

Again I must only point to the only examples we have of socialist society’s to refute you. No homelessness, healthcare for all (if you think Cuba’s healthcare is "second class" then you are sorely mistaken), and zero unemployment.

You claim how lovely that the community is in china, and yet, they have slave labor and such a lock jaw approach to keeping freedom from the individual that they murder executives who fail, or over reach what it is that the government thinks to be their "fair due" for a job well done.

The unique position China is in as a socialist nation trying to compromise with the west is not one I support. But the problems in China are not due to socialism but capitalism. Compromise with capitalism is impossible. It has merely lead to the exploitation of the works by the West. I agree they have slave labour. Slaving for YOU. Making YOUR clothes. YOUR consumer goods. YOUR machines. If you want to eliminate slavery (wage slavery) pay an acceptable price for the goods you buy.

Lovely Cuba is a slum and the dogs that wait for Castero to die are so ready to change Cuba into something else.

The smooth (and bloodless) transfer of leadership to Raul shows the wishful thinking of the US reactionaries is shown up again. You've been saying this for 50 years. Wake up. Socialist Cuba is here to stay.

Russia collapsed (though, one would wonder how that could be true, since they still exist and operate with the same goal, to rival the American way of life.)

I don't understand you here at all. Russia collapsed through to the direct efforts of the western imperial powers. The USSRs goal was the equality and liberty of ALL the workers. Different from your "get rich quick" American dream.

[captain.crazy]

Sorry for the double post.

The leftist "liberals" (which is a misnomer in the worst way because they want nothing to do with liberty) walk through this land blathering on and on about how entitled everyone is when in fact, you only wish to win the ideological war for people's minds so that you can control their very lives. They claim that they can deliver on excellent housing for everyone, the elimination of crime and health care for everyone. Unfortunately, what you will really deliver are shacks, lack of freedom and second rate health care that will encourage death for those that are too much of a drain on everyone else, since it would be "better" for the people at large.

Again I must only point to the only examples we have of socialist society’s to refute you. No homelessness, healthcare for all (if you think Cuba’s healthcare is "second class" then you are sorely mistaken), and zero unemployment.

You claim how lovely that the community is in china, and yet, they have slave labor and such a lock jaw approach to keeping freedom from the individual that they murder executives who fail, or over reach what it is that the government thinks to be their "fair due" for a job well done.

The unique position China is in as a socialist nation trying to compromise with the west is not one I support. But the problems in China are not due to socialism but capitalism. Compromise with capitalism is impossible. It has merely lead to the exploitation of the works by the West. I agree they have slave labour. Slaving for YOU. Making YOUR clothes. YOUR consumer goods. YOUR machines. If you want to eliminate slavery (wage slavery) pay an acceptable price for the goods you buy.

Lovely Cuba is a slum and the dogs that wait for Castero to die are so ready to change Cuba into something else.

The smooth (and bloodless) transfer of leadership to Raul shows the wishful thinking of the US reactionaries is shown up again. You've been saying this for 50 years. Wake up. Socialist Cuba is here to stay.

Russia collapsed (though, one would wonder how that could be true, since they still exist and operate with the same goal, to rival the American way of life.)

I don't understand you here at all. Russia collapsed through to the direct efforts of the western imperial powers. The USSRs goal was the equality and liberty of ALL the workers. Different from your "get rich quick" American dream.

Your lies will not work here. Lets not forget how Lennon killed (murdered) countless Russians to seize power from the people for political control. Lets remember that Hitler's Nazi party promised nationalism for all and demonized Jewish people to gain support. Your socialist education programs are the reason that Americans are so dumb, and so willing to take the government tit.

Capitalism is a process that was designed in nature, and would work beautifully, were it not for your kind of "everything for everybody" approach to winning minds. Be responsible for your self, your beloved socialist government can't do it for you.

[flashleg8]

Your lies will not work here. Lets not forget how Lennon killed (murdered) countless Russians to seize power from the people for political control.

? The October revolution was actually pretty bloodless. The civil war afterwards was another matter (started by the reactionary "whites"). The countless Russian dead were those who fought in the senseless capitalist war (first world war). That is the true crime.

Lets remember that Hitler's Nazi party promised nationalism for all and demonized Jewish people to gain support.

What! You sir are a fool if you think the Nazis have anything to do with Communism or Socialism. Hitler murdered tens of thousands of German communists in his death camps and if you think nationalism has any place in socialism you are badly mistaken. Fascist parties are polar opposites to communists.

Your socialist education programs are the reason that Americans are so dumb, and so willing to take the government tit.

I cannot comment on your education system but if you think it is "socialist" you would die of heart failure if you came to Europe!

[joecoolfrog]

I wonder if Captain Moron has actually visited any of these countries that he presumes to know so much about ?
I certainly wouldnt have enjoyed living in a communist state but neither would I relish his 'utopian' Capitalist nightmare, soft Capitalism with a human face is what most people want and thats what most of us here are lucky enough to enjoy.