What political ideology do you follow, if any?

  • Topic: News 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Dooga Blackrazor
  • Start date Start date

What political ideology do you follow?

  • Free Communism (Marxism, Marxist-Leninism)

    Votes: 3 9.4%
  • Libertarian Socialism (Anarcho-Communism)

    Votes: 4 12.5%
  • Permanent Socialism (Not Transitionary)

    Votes: 1 3.1%
  • Social Democratic Socialism or Social Democracy (specify)

    Votes: 4 12.5%
  • Social Capitalism (Liberalism, Neoliberalism, Trade Restrictions)

    Votes: 5 15.6%
  • Capitalism (Fiscal Conservatism)

    Votes: 4 12.5%
  • Anarcho-Capitalism (Objectivism)

    Votes: 4 12.5%
  • Authoritarianism (Theocracy, Fascism, Stalinism)

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • None

    Votes: 5 15.6%
  • Other (If other, please specify)

    Votes: 2 6.3%

  • Total voters
    32
Join the discussion
Registration is free. Start your own thread to ask a follow-up.
97 replies · 16K views
i like one that mixes all of those, it's more real, a no-name party.
none of today's --isms distinguise themselves that clearly.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Dooga Blackrazor said:
You say these things as if you have proof. Do you have some hidden knowledge no one else is aware of? If so, please share with me how, with all the variables in this complex world, capitalism will "never" fall?

I do have proof, and it's not exactly hidden knowledge. My proof is simple and I have stated it many times; people are too selfish to adopt communism on a large scale. This however requires further proof, and that burden lies on me. Now, since we cannot examine human nature like a piece of meat we have to rely on what we see it do. There is only one place to look for this and it is history. So, glancing back through the illuminating pages of time, we see corruption everywhere. In the so-called great civilization of Greece, the democracy of Athens was limited to citizens, which were a tiny part of the total population. The city was rampant with poverty, farmers basically became slaves through indentured servitude, etc. Pysistratus took over and became the first tyrant of Greece. He used murder, extortion and torture to achieve his goals. Even during the days of great thinkers like Plato, Aristotle and Xeno (let's not forget they murdered Socrates simply for dissenting with the status quo), Athens sucked up power and wealth into itself at the expense of other Greek city-states. The Peleponisian War, lasting 250 years, was the result; countless dead, impoverished, etc.
Sorry to rant, but all of history reads like this. No religion, state or institution has remained uncorrupted. Forget the nice, pleasent view of people that pervades American society. People are depraved, corupt, lustful, and selfish individuals and there is no reason to think they will suddenly change for the better. See, its not hidden, all you have to do is turn your head to look behind and you will see it screaming in your face. Sure it's depressing and people hate to think like that, but as an old saying goes, "knowledge is sorrow".

Now, about capitalism never falling, that is simply explained. There can only be two options, communism and capitalism. There is no inbetween, for socialism is limited capitalism. Therefore one of the two must exist, and since true communism is inherently immpossible capitalism is the only one left be sheer process of ellimination.
 
Dawguard said:
By not worked I mean that it has never produced the utopian society that it claims to create. Also, while I said that all forms of government are doomed to fail, some do work and last better then others. In my belief, any attempt to create communism will result in failure, while democracy and republics won't neccesarily violate human rights. Also, no matter what the form of government the idea of capitalism remains the same. In this regard capitalism will never fall and the cannot be said of its antithesis, communism.
I don't really understand it when people make this kind of distinction. As if the state and the economic system imposed by the state are not linked. It doesn't make any sense to me.
 
Dawguard said:
I do have proof, and it's not exactly hidden knowledge. My proof is simple and I have stated it many times; people are too selfish to adopt communism on a large scale. This however requires further proof, and that burden lies on me. Now, since we cannot examine human nature like a piece of meat we have to rely on what we see it do. There is only one place to look for this and it is history. So, glancing back through the illuminating pages of time, we see corruption everywhere. In the so-called great civilization of Greece, the democracy of Athens was limited to citizens, which were a tiny part of the total population. The city was rampant with poverty, farmers basically became slaves through indentured servitude, etc. Pysistratus took over and became the first tyrant of Greece. He used murder, extortion and torture to achieve his goals. Even during the days of great thinkers like Plato, Aristotle and Xeno (let's not forget they murdered Socrates simply for dissenting with the status quo), Athens sucked up power and wealth into itself at the expense of other Greek city-states. The Peleponisian War, lasting 250 years, was the result; countless dead, impoverished, etc.
You should read some Hobbes. He wrote this book called Leviathan. He makes some good arguments against the liberal idea that humans are individualistic.
 
The state and the ecenomic system are linked but not necesarily bound together. A republic can be capitalist, as can a democracy, dictatorship and monarchy. unfortunately the same cannot be said of communism; I know of no communist countries that are not dictatorships.
I'll see of I can get a copy of the book, it should provide some interesting insight.
 
Last edited:
Dawguard said:
The state and the ecenomic system are linked but not necesarily bound together. A republic can be capitalist, as can a democracy, dictatorship and monarchy. unfortunately the same cannot be said of communism; I know of no communist countries that are not dictatorships.
Actually you know of one that's a dictatorship (cuba), and a lot more that, while still totalitarian, weren't dictatorships. The USSR, for example, was not a dictatorship for most of it's history. It ceased to be a dictatorship with the death of Stalin, or arguably even the death of Lenin.
 
Smurf said:
Actually you know of one that's a dictatorship (cuba), and a lot more that, while still totalitarian, weren't dictatorships. The USSR, for example, was not a dictatorship for most of it's history. It ceased to be a dictatorship with the death of Stalin, or arguably even the death of Lenin.
All right, I'll admit they aren't dictatorships in the strict sense. As you said though they are totalitarian, which is nearly the same; for the people under it the effect is identical.
 
A gift economy could do better than capitalism. It all depends on the kind of people.