October Revolution Day!

I was waiting for someone to point that out. So far all I have read is a bunch of propoganda and assumptions from GM and some decent logic on the other side of the field. You can't discount human nature GM, it cannot be overcome without some massive global sift of perspective which would make us not really human anymore anyway. Socialism doesn't work well on its own because it doesn't play well with human nature. On the same token human nature alone would lead us back to monarchies and dictatorships so it can't be allowed to run rampant either. Any real democracy is socialist enough to keep capitalism in check, capitalism allows people to grow according to their nature.

 

No one answered the question . What were you waiting for them to point out?

 

That the comment of being the first to the moon doesn't make much sense depending on who Nikita's comment was directed at.

 

The threat of imprisonment and torture do wonders for making humans better people. After they shipped the "greedy" capitalists off to the gulags, everyone else fell over themselves to demonstrate how un-greedy they were.

It reminds me of Ahmadinejad claiming his nation had no homosexuals.

It's only when people are free to do anything that we truly see what they are like.

 

Ok you titans of thought, first tell me this instead of just being the liberal schmuck you are;;

How does socialism work against the human nature?

How did greed affect the soviet union?

How can you say communism does not work based on historic examples?

 

"Titan of thought" I like that. Also, I find it amussing you call us liberals as if it is a bad thing, when in fact liberals tend to be as close as you are going to get to socialism without actually being socialist.

As for socialism v. human nature, socialism would require everyone to want to be equals with each other if it was going to work perfectly. However, 25,000 years of evolution has a driven people and groups of people to want to tip the scales in their favor so they have a better chance of survivial. Greed and lust for power (the 2 main enemies of socialism) would not be driving forces in the world if they didn't help people pass on their traits to the next generation, but they are because they do help people pass on their traits and ensure the'r offspring's survival. Finally, people just have an inherent need to better themselves, whether it is morally, socially, or mentally; people want to improve themselves and among other thigns be unique. This goes against socialism at a fundemental level because socialism's goal is to drive everyone to be equal, when most people want to be unequal.

As for your last 2 questions I'm not much of a history buff, so I will let someone with more knowledge in that area argue with you.

 

Yay. Can I be a Titan too?

As I suggested earlier, the USSR forced "ungreedyness" with threats of torture, imprisonment, and/or death. So one could claim that the greed of the proletariat had little or no impact on the USSR. But I'm not sure how that is in any way relevant to your argument. Weren't you the one who claimed that they weren't greedy in the first place?

One could also call the leaders of the USSR greedy, in that they took all power for themselves, assassinated rivals, purged potential rivals, and so on.

I used to use that line of argumentation all the time. The simple answer to your question is that you can't. Every time communism has been tried it was in a post-war or post-revolution nation that was not industrialized not wealthy. Furthermore, the leadership of communist nations, in every case (and we can argue semantics about some like Castro or Kim Il-Sung later) was corrupt and abusive with their power leading to totalitarian states in most cases.

But here's the problem. Where's your evidence that communism can work?