[SUBMAN1]

Originally Posted by mrbeast

Communism that promotes the private ownership of business, encourages people to become rich on the profits and allows foreign businesses to invest and make money? Communism is based around the notion that the means of production and benefits there of should lie in the hands of those who produce ie the proleteriat. Chinese communism differs slightly from this cassical marxist interpretation with its emphasis on the peasantry. But foreign shareholders and investors are the complete antipathy of this. China has come to the conclusion (and probably correctly) that private enterprise is the best way of guarenteeing economic growth as a command economy is not responsive enough to economic markets and trends etc (the USSR found out about this the hard way). Thats not to say that there isn't government investment in Chinese capitalism, there is, in large amounts too, but thats not something unusual in a capitalist economy.

I'm not arguing as an advocate of China by any measure. The Chinese government likes to still keep a very firm control of chinese society and there are numerous human rights abuses. No doubt Chinese basketball players have little choice in their future career. Get found guilty of corruption and its not a spell in prison but a firing squad that mght greet you.

Don't think for a second that anything over there is not state controled. Part of the Communist agenda has always been to open both sides of the market to reap the benefits without the system. Case closed.

Well Chavez's opposition would say that wouldn't they. Chavez is still in power because hes popular. Infact hes more populist 'tub-thumper' than communist; the guy has his own TV chat show!

Don't blow this off as nonsense because you don't want to believe it. Wasn't it the UN where he stated that Communism is the way forward?

Subman, you can post links to as many right-wing blogs, forums and websites as you like. But they are proof of nothing except the internet is full of political blogs forums and websites. I could pobably post links to a bunch of left-wing sites which would say the total opposite.

Did you bother reading the Politically Correct lecture? Or are you simply blowing it off and stating your opinion? Seems you didn't read it and until you do, I consider you very much wrong here without an educated opinion. And no - you won't find a left based article on it because the left sweeps it under the rug and ignores the white elephant in the room. Read it already.

Putin is in the process of creating a very statist government and political system in Russia. This involves the strengthening of government control over some sectors. He is attempting to improve Russia's standing as a world power hence all the naval muscle flexing and provocative bomber flights, the internet attacks, the diplomatic spats with the UK and the use of energy resources to gain leverage over countries it regards as being in its sphere of influence.

But I've seen no evidence of a socialist state in creation at all. Authoritarian? Yes. Communist? No.

I guess you need to define Communism then since all aspects are put in place. An example of their democratic elections right now - A full outspoken communist or the head of the KGB? Sounds like democratic systems out there are pretty much gone.

By the way, the way communism works is that you do not need a central economy to still have communism - this is the part I know you don't understand. You can 'have' a market economy and still have communism. I think this is where you are a little fuzzy. You have lost sight of what communism actually is. That is your problem.

Marxism - this is the problem. You are embracing it without realizing it.

Subman your 1963 list of communist aims is not a difinative list its based on someones opinion of the aims of communism; their slant. Its heavily coloured by 1960s Cold War paranoia, is written from one point of view and one only. Some of its suggestions are ridiculous.

Hardly - this was written by the COmmunists of America, not by a US Senator. It is their wishlist, and it is still in effect today. They have achieved the majority of it. To say something from 1963 is no longer valid because of age is completely rediculous and short sighted on your part. THis is where i get you head buried in the sand view from.

Subman, just because you say it is so does not neccesarily make it so. Others have pointed this out before.

Your 'facts' come from biased and slanted sources that have their own agenda to push. Maybe it you who should open your mind and put things in perspective, for example communism taking over the world........not very likely.

I wish you were correct. Problem is, they are not slanted sources. I still have yet to see a single source you posted. I'll I get is your 'opinion'. We all have our opinions, and yours isn't holding any water.

Anyway, It starts with Socialism, and then turns to Communism. Its a beast that grows and gets bigger with time.

Anyway - have a good weekend. We can maybe dabble on the subject a little this weekend, but most likely Monday! I'll probably be off hunting beer this weekend however for a good portion of it!

-S