@sptnkmmnt Its just the result of the time. Communism has done a lot of harm and as an idology is non-tolerant (communism doesnt allow capitalists to exist within it but capitalism allows communism to exist in it).. Its a shame this got directed at countries rather than the ideals. but I guess its a representation of the times where these countries were communist. thankfully they have moved past those harmful ideologies.

@freemo hm...
I live in Russia. Mostly people here are not pleased to come out of socialism and became a capitalist society. At all.

We have learned in school about MacCarty and his repression policy in USA, about repressions against communists in Germany in 30th, so we grew up in opinion that capitalism is the evil ideolody, that makes people suffer.

And then the USSR was broken, and we had a chance to see capitalists society from inside.

It is more harmfull for many simple russian citizens than socialism was.

Hor countries that were not included in socialists community, red ones may bring suffering and chaos, yes. But here, in Russia we had more important things than we have now.

Of course, not every single person here have such thoughts, but this position is strong here. And grows while time flows by.

@sptnkmmnt I have no issue with socialism to a certain extent, its only communism that is the issue. ultimately it depends on how you are defining these terms.. People usually use welfare states as an example of socialism, I wouldnt call that socialism.

@freemo @sptnkmmnt terms were defined by Marx. It depends if you know what you are talking about or not.

@loweel

Thats not how language works. Definitions are refined, extended and changed over time.

Very few of the words we use today still have the same definition as when they were defined.

@sptnkmmnt

@freemo @sptnkmmnt

This is the song of the guy who forgot how to be competent, right?

So you are lecturing around about ideas of Marx, without having ever read anything of Marx, but who cares, at the end we "can redefine everything"...

@loweel

Nope, I never mentioned anything about marx. I talked about socialism and communism, and as I just reiterated I clearly was using modern day definitions and not archaic ones as Marx defined them.

@sptnkmmnt

@freemo @sptnkmmnt

ahahaha.

"Communism and Socialism" were introduced and invented by Marx and Engels. So now you know the communism and the socialism, but the ones invented by Marx....

Go ahead, is fun.

@loweel I'm well aware of the origin of the terms... what are you even arguing for?

@sptnkmmnt

@freemo @sptnkmmnt


no, you just make evident you have no clue what you are talking about. This is exactly the point.

When you have no clue that "communism" and "socialism" are definition coming from marx, and you say you can redefine them, then you just show you have no clue what you are talking about, not even close.
J-FFUZLLEINEsA.png

@loweel

lol show me where I said that those terms did not originate from marx as you claim.. ill wait...

@sptnkmmnt

@freemo @sptnkmmnt

You are welcome. Here the pic.

And no, "modern definition of" is not the new "I have no clue about".

@loweel

I can see you clearly arent very good at english (thats ok its a hard language)... Sorry to tell you but no where in that post did I make the claim that marx did not originally create the term socialism... try again.

@sptnkmmnt

@freemo @sptnkmmnt

still ridicolous. And now you try to demise using my second language. My english is still better than wour italian, your french and your german.

Said that, please name ONE author who redefined "socialism" and "communism" in "modern" terms, and name the differences with Marx.

Since you are sooooo competent, and you know what you are talking about, this should not be a problem, right?

Please.

@loweel

there is nothing shameful about struggling with english, it wasnt meant as an attack. I have no doubt your english is better than many of the languages I don't know.

I was being generous because either your english is too poor and you really thought something in the post I made was claiming marx didnt original the term socialism... or you can understand english perfectly fine and are just not very bright. I assumed it was the english.

So far I made no claims as to competence either way, **you** made a claim about me, something you have completely failed to back up...

If you arent even capable of understanding what little I have said so far why would I want to try to engage in further conversation is this is going to be the caliber of debate I can expect?

@sptnkmmnt

@freemo @sptnkmmnt

And now you are pathetic.

please, list the author and the books with a "modern" definition of "communism" and "socialism".

I'm waiting.

@loweel

I will happily answer that once you answer my question, or admit your were wrong.. When did I actually state that marx didnt originally coin the term socialism?

You said I made that claim so if you cant show me where I said it, which you have not done, or at least admit you were incorrect, then like I said I would have no reason wasting my time with someone who cant even understand something that simple or straight forward.

Get past that and show your actually worth talking to and I'll be happy to debate the finer points with you.

@sptnkmmnt

@freemo @sptnkmmnt

you POSED as you know a more "modern" definition of "socialism" and "communism" (which means they exist), because the ones from Marx are "archaic".

Now, it is clear that you never read Marx, and no, you just invented this "modern" definitions just to hide the fact YOU-HAVE-NO-CLUE-WHAT-YOU-ARE-TALKING-ABOUT.

That's it.

You are talking about something you have NO CLUE about, you NEVER read about, maybe to pose as a socialist is cool in your college. Socialism is the new cool t-shirt.

And, despite of your shakespeare-level of English (I have no doubt about your PhD in literature, like the one you have one in modern philosophy, I guess) you are even unable to google.

You should vote Trump. Your despise against competence is the same of them. Your phony way to discuss like you know what you are talking about, is the same of Trump.

Vote Trump. You belong to them, to the core.

@loweel @freemo @sptnkmmnt pretty agile approach to life!
proud to fail fast.

@freemo em... As it is in Marx theory - there were no communist state, it is impossible at all. When mankind will reach communism there must be no states at all, as I remember.

USSR (Union of Socialist Soviet Republics) was a socialistic state. Socialism by Marx is a first part of the way to communism, when a private property on major resources, plants and banks is over and all this stuff comes into worker's hands and workers do rule and own all this by delegating deputates to common representative soviet (some form of collective government).

So I don't understand ur point of view.

Probably words "socialism" and "communism" have some different meanings for you.

I will gratefully listen them if you have some time to explain further.

@sptnkmmnt Yes I'm aware of the original description provided by marx, but thank you for trying to explain that.

The words dont have any particular definition for me personally. I was voicing the fact that modern day people do, however, use those terms to mean different things (depending on who you ask). I usually use whatever definition is appropriate for the context of the conversation, usually adopting it to the person I'm speaking to so communication can proceed effectively. Definitions dont really matter to me beyond the ability to communicate.

@sptnkmmnt @freemo no, you never see what capitalism is. You see what russians are. It's different.

@loweel @sptnkmmnt Well yea you never really see what either are like.. Not much russian culture is shown other than some language.

@loweel @freemo this thing is too deep to be understood by me, sorry)