Dude, I'm pretty sure you just comitted thought crime.

And, I don't really keep up on Canada, but isn't their head of the exective branch a queen? who is also the queen of England? well at least right now it is.

lol, don't you dare say that Canada is a monarchy! Or even Britain for that matter. The queen of england is only symbolic - a figurehead. She has no power. If the Prime Minister of England says "let's go to war" and the Queen of England says "uh, no". Guess what happens? The country goes to war - of course if the parliament agreed. It is a democracy.

I know it's a democracy, but she is the queen of england and canada at the same time, right?

Anybody here read 1984 by Orwell? Good book-probably my favorite-I think it indicates where Soacilism will eventually lead us- sure there's no crime and everybody is happy but thats because they dont know anybetter they've all been brainwashed so bad that when the government says ur happy they just are, this is demonstrated very vividly in the scene where there is a metting in the city center where they are parading prisoners of a country they have been at war with(there's only 3 countries) then mid speech the speaker "corrects himself" and states that he had said the wrong country they had been at war with and the prisoners where actually from the other country- then the crowd just accepted it and acted like the war had always been with that country and the other had always been there ally- very creepy
sry bout the long post

The Soviet Union is a prime example of dicatorial communism. The idea behind communism was a "society without money, without a state, without property and without social classes" or something like that so it would eliminate supposedly greed. Cuba and China's the only ones left to be Communists. Look where it's got them.

I wouldn't say Communism sucks, the 3 countries i mentioned above became corrupt which is may they failed(failing). The basic ideals such as how economic(trading -> import/exports) would be determined, a fair and balenced(democratic type) governing party with checks and balences, and so on would need to be refined and dealt with.

I read 1984 a few years ago. I would say that's a worst case senario. I was almost thinking that those other other countries did not exist, probably the underground either. Just another type of control so the government knows who to watch out for. I mean, for a country to be at war, gives them logical right to keep strict power over it's people(martial law) so to say. Instead of them not being at war, in which the people might actually start thinking why their life sucks and their govt isn't doing anything.


Just my 2 cents.

Communism is the top 10% controlling everything,and the rest of th ppl get screwed.
American Communism is the church + the republicans controlling everything, and everybody else gets screwed.
Not much difference there.

I'm just here to set you guys strait. Communism and socialism are purely democratic. Stalinism, the kind of socialism exhibited in the Soviet Union, was not democratic. But in their forms as put down by Marx, Engels, Lenin, and Gramsci, is entirely Democratic and egalitarian. Those of you who only look at the American propagandized version of history will obviously fail to see that. Even when Marx said the word dictatorship he meant it only in the sense that a social democracy will only serve the interests of the lower classes. As for violent revolution, that was the course of change in the late nineteenth century. Now we have routes for peaceful change such as demonstrations, elections, etc. So they were simply "victims of their time" when they said that violent revolution was the only course of change. When it comes to "Big Brother," you Americans have secret police state where you are watched without knowing about it. At any time you are outdoors, you had better suspect yourself of being watched. Cuba , on the other hand, is a success story for the third world. Castro has been delayed in bringing in democracy because of America's constant efforts to destabilize the Cuban government and economy. He has thus had to sacrifice rights for the sake of security. That is not a move I necessarily agree with, but is understandable considering the circumstances. Socially Castro has been a godsend to his people. Before the Revolution, Cuba had one of the lowest literacy rates and one of the highest poverty rates in the western hemisphere, as well as an almost nonexistent or inaccessible health care system. Now they have the Third highest literacy rate in the western hemisphere, a much more equal distribution of wealth, and basic health care is provided to all people, something even the great and invincible America has yet to grant its citizens. their economy grew by more than eight percent last year, much faster than the American economy. All this from a country that had ninety percent of its business interrupted by the American embargo after the Revolution. In an economic point of view, true communism as Marx designed would also not put a damper on the creativity and ingenuity of its citizens. If you wanted to be a doctor, or a lawyer, or an inventor nothing would stop you from becoming that and getting the higher education necessary just because you wouldn't be made more than anyone else. It would make you happy so you would do it because that's what you want to do. And even under communism you have to work so that way you can make your contribution to society. Without work you wont get paid. No pay for voluntary unemployment. The economics of Marxism are totally sound. As for political parties, there is no reason why parties that promote alternative ideas such as capitalism will not be allowed to exist and function. The basic nature of government will not change, but instead of serving the rich corporate interests, it would serve the interests of the previously exploited peoples. As for the government becoming corrupt with wealth, the government would not just sit on the money like the rich do. It would be able to use the profits as either a source of income other than taxes, or just give everybody in the country a slice of the GDP as their salary. So do your reading and you will be able to find the real answers, rather than just swallowing the government's elitist propaganda.

Without freedom of speech, thought, and deed, even a paradise is still a prison, and castro is the warden.

All those are guaranteed in communism. The only right you don't possess is the right to accumulate wealth and use it to oppress your brothers.

In reply to truthspreader,

I think a million russians, and about a billion chinese would totally disagree with you on that last thought.

ehh.. i still think communism sucks. i think anyone in the world should have the right to accumulate wealth if he works hard and earns it. why should one man work his ass off and get the same thing as another man who doesn't work hard at all? that is NOT fair at all. if a man wants to work hard he should earn what he deserves.

ya know.. communism reminds of dirty hippies,at least in one aspect. and you all know how much i hate hippies. they all preach about equality. equality is some dream that no one will ever attain. give it up already and work on goals that can be achieved. (i know hippies are all about the peace no war thing too, but communists generally are not. that's why i didn't mention that.)

In reply to Fleshwound,

I agree with you on that first thought. As far as hippies go I believe they had some good ideas, but
they went about trying to achieve them in the wrong manner.

hehe.. i really don't see any merit to hippies ideas. doing drugs and sleeping around isn't too cool..neither is treating the vietnam vets like they are crap. but that is a whole other topic.

How dare you make such a moronic statement and then go on to call us uneducated or simply swallowing propoganda.

In reply to Fleshwound,

I was talking about some of their ideas on peace;
and as far as sleeping around and drugs go, I don't see much difference in todays society.

P.S. I support vietnam vets 100%.