Does Julian Assange play Cantr?

[Gran]

Anyway, I don't really see how you infer the necessity of Fashist means from what you just said. Since the proletariat comprises of the vast majority of any country's population, I see no reason why you couldn't establish its "dictatorship" by democratic means. Even if "any means necessary" includes totalitarianism, I don't see why it should be a necessary mean.

Menshevik, please. It's just the structure of class conflict posited by marxism. If you're not into Marx, then the point is that there's no point. Marxism-bolshevism craves for the blood of the burgoiesie.

The motivation behind this is not the creation of a strong state (which seems to be the idea behind collectivism)

Collectivism is not about creating a strong state at all. Collectivism is putting stress on the group rather than the individual needs. If that means a strong state, it's a consequence.

but to improve the living conditions of the average individual (for entirely egoistic reasons).

The perceived need of the worker is individual, but the point of communism is that need is recurring, generalized and imposed on his whole class due to the capitalistic exploitation. The needs of the workers are not isolated, but socially relevant. Then the reasoning follows into the pursue of unity among the working classes as to change their overall situation. Because change will only be achieved through unity, it's crucial that the collective entity they represent be their prioritary guidance in their actions - the individual is eclipsed by the collectiveness.

According to Wikipedia's header definition it might be even less so (in its final stage).

The final stage of the revolution has never been reached and I suspect it won't be reached until a post-scarcity society is reality. It's just imagination. And marxist, also.

Now, I must confess that I suspect you're a Clausmunist, fisherman. Wearing red without being marxist, desire to bring happiness to the honest working classes without being a revolutionary. If the round-faced bearded man that comes to your mind when you think "generosity" isn't Karl Marx, then HO HO HO you can hop on the sleigh!

I can guarantee it's so far the best type of communism.

[KVZ]

I still not understand why defenders of the communism think that if large company if run by state would be much better to society than large private corporation. It would be the same or even worse. We had communism in Poland, and I know how it worked. Those large state run companies, had monopoly on large segments of market also, it was even worse than monopoly of the large corporation in means of market prices and so on. Not saying also that such state companies was not effective, as no-one who leads such national company cares so much about their profits because this is not his own company, some have too much workers than needed who did nothing, so it is very less effective.

I also noticed that it is easier to person who never lived in communist state to defend principles of communism than to people who actually lived in such society and know how it worked on their own experience. Sic!...

[gejyspa]

The problem with all poliltico-idealogical systems -- communism, fascism, capitalism, socialism -- is that people (in general) look out for their own self-interests. And even if many/most of the people do not, there will always be a few who will be able to "game the system"-- whether its becoming a dictator, controlling a huge corporation, having disproportionate political influence, etc. And those few don't really care who is put down while they benefit themselves. Altruistic systems don't work unless EVERYONE is altruistic. We see that even in-game in cantr, and OOC in cantr (Witness the hacker-- Everyone here was helping one another, but one bad apple can take down their enjoyment for two months. Translate that into real world poltics).

So the best we can hope for is a system where we harness that self-interest in some way to help benefit everyone, and put enough checks and balances on it so that no one can get too much influence without everyone knowing what they are doing, and being able to put a stop to it.
(Unfortunately, would-be revolutionaries/dictators can often convince enough other people of the supposed justice of their cause to get their dirty work done for them, and undermine any system. I'm reminded here of a Jewish midrash (~="legend") about On the son of Pelet during the rebellion of Korach (Numbers 16ff). The rabbis of the Mishnah wondered why he is mentioned as a leading member of the rebellion in Numbers 16:1, but not 16:12. So what they said was initially, On was big on toppling the "dictatorship" of Moses, but his wife said to him, "Idiot! So, right now, you have to obey Moses. If Korach is successful, you'll have to obey him. And if the rebellion is not successful, you will probably be killed. What do YOU get out of it?" Realizing the wisdom of her words, he quit the revolution. Women are smarter about these things than men.)

[danizappa]

Not all of human action is about "what do you get?" Unbalanced and unfair regimes like the communist ones, and all others we have witnessed over history get established because being a man, being a woman is not only about "what do you get?". People sacrificed their lives for what they belived, and they could stand still and do nothing. So I think is terrible to say "what do you get?" and be indiferent, even tough in some cases, pherhaps in the case of that legend, it is actually the best thing to do to preserve your confort.

[gejyspa]

I'm not saying that "what do you get out of it" should be a universal motivator. But it is obvious that On WAS motivated by it, since he joined the revolution in the first place because of his perceived oppresion by Moses. And, like it or not, enlightened self-interest is a motivator of the vast majority of humanity, even to the extent of self-sacrifice (for example, if the person believes that they will inherit a place in Heaven for their martyrdom. ) And, as I explained below, all it takes is ONE person with self-interest in mind to screw p millions of others.

[danizappa]

It takes one...

[Diego]

Not all of human action is about "what do you get?" Unbalanced and unfair regimes like the communist ones, and all others we have witnessed over history get established because being a man, being a woman is not only about "what do you get?". People sacrificed their lives for what they belived, and they could stand still and do nothing. So I think is terrible to say "what do you get?" and be indiferent, even tough in some cases, pherhaps in the case of that legend, it is actually the best thing to do to preserve your confort.

The only noble purpose of any action if to benefit the actor. Everything else is an impotent assault on the Law of Identity.

[Alladinsane]

Living in Florida, its so common (well, it happens with some regularity) to see small 'boats' made out of old tires, bleach bottles, and other crazy items as people try to cross 90miles of high current and heavily sharked waters just to escape the communist utopia of cuba. If they can get 'feet dry' we keep em, but we do our darnedest to keep them from being able to touch our soil. Its not quite the same as our southern border with mexico because there they seem to be fleeing an economy while the Cubans are fleeing a government.

These people (the ones I have met) are proud! They actually want to return there, or bring more of the family in some cases (those boats gives 'anchor baby' a whole new meaning). They have lived under communism and don't want to see it again. In general, they are the most conservative voting of the hispanic demographics.

I have theories on what life might be like under other govts, I don't seek it, but its interesting dialectic. When I have had the chance to people who did not theorize, but had to live under different ones...they all seem to agree that they have the most opportunity to gain the things they want here in the USA. These are not all material things either, they want to be able to live safely without the fear of a 3am Ford Falcon pulling up (read about chile if this is a vague reference); they do want to be able to advance based on the fruits of their own labor etc. I don't know about theory, but when I get it straight from many horses mouths...be it circumstantial hearsay or whatever, I still tend to believe.

Capitalism with all its flaws and is the worst form of government there is, except for every other form that has been tried. (Churchill I believe).
-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=

But wasn't this thread about Julian Assange? (sp?)

[Joshuamonkey]

That's interesting. I've wondered why the US doesn't just take over the place, it being so close and small. Then again, violence is often a bad thing.

This thread has turned into being about politics in general, which I think is an okay turn.

[dryn]

Capitalism with all its flaws and is the worst form of government there is, except for every other form that has been tried. (Churchill I believe).

He was talking about Democracy.

[Alladinsane]

Capitalism with all its flaws and is the worst form of government there is, except for every other form that has been tried. (Churchill I believe).

He was talking about Democracy.

You're right, it was a misquote and I apologize for that.


I think KeVez had a very clarifying quote concerning gvts and it was spot on to what I was trying to say about the Cuban 'problem' we have.

I also think that Gejyspa's post, the very next one by the way, captured an economic system whether he intended that or not. The 'what can I get' mentality was well explained by Adam Smith. I still consider him the most influential economist I have ever read with Milton Friedman (sp?) being up there as well.

[berserk9779]

I don't think that the US has a "cuban problem"

I do think that Cuba has an "US problem"

With the embargo and all they don't even have a chance of getting things right.

[Alladinsane]

I wasn't referring to the politics of the matter as far as how those who practice statecraft operate.

My reference was to the Cubans who have been willing to risk everything (not that they had much) even their own lives to get to the shores of Florida. They really want to escape that communist "utopia" and we face it on a fairly regular basis. Heck, the local news doesn't even cover it as much as they used to...its a" 'yawn' another swimmer" type attitude, check page 6 or something. The cubans here are extremely proud of their heritage and country though and most fully intend to return some day, at least they have hope.

Regarding the embargo...I agree that its hurting them. Though there are nations all over the Caribbean that they could trade with, but we are the big rich kid on the block. The funny thing is that we (USA leaders) are clinging to the outdated premise that if we make their lives miserable enough that they will rise up and oust the government. I am more on your side of this (I think); I believe that we should lift the embargo and trade freely with them. Once they get a taste of what they can access through this, they will resist more when the current govt (whichever Castrozombie is in charge, him or his brother) tries to take these things away from them and plunge them into the despair that makes them want to brave the straights of Florida. If we want to ignite revolution, I think that would be the way.

And so we have come full circle in just two paragraphs. Socrates would be dizzy.

Be well

[berserk9779]

You'll never know if they flee communism or the misery caused by a 50 year long embargo.

[Alladinsane]

Well, I think I do know...I have talked to them sir/madam. Its hard to beat a direct confession that was not taken under duress. Its probably both, but they don't always know it.

But I do believe that the embargo has affected them poorly, but so what? As I said, there are no US ships blockading their ports preventing vessels from any european nation, and south american nation, any central american nation etc...they are free to trade with any of them. You could name over 200 countries that they are free to trade with and ONE that they cannot. They change their stance towards the USA, then the lanes may open. That probably involves a change of leadership though; some could say that its economic blackmail...but they are free to not trade with us too, so its equal except for trading power, but did I mention 200 other countries? I really like the cigars from there and know (actually knew) a guy who could get them for me, I didn't ask how. He wasn't going to canada to get them, thats for sure, but beyond that, I didn't want to know. But there would be a big market for their cigars, their agricultural products, and other stuff if the embargo were lifted. I think we should lift it, but don't see it happening any time soon.

But back to the original sentence...they are really not aware of the embargo until they get here. Their state run media does not tell them alot except that Americans are evil and its a crime to want (attempt) to migrate elsewhere. Why do their athletes, every year, request asylum usually when they are in another country etc? They find out about the embargo when the get here usually (btw...these are some of the finest, hard-working people I have met in recent years) and their reaction is not to favor lifting the embargo ( I disagree, but we can be civil) but to figure out ways they can get their families left behind out of that place.

So I respectfully say that in many to most cases why they and what they flee, just ask one of them.

Be well