Which of these goals do you disagree with?
1. Abolition of private property in land and application of all rents of land to public purpose.
2. A heavy progressive or graduated income tax.
3. Abolition of all rights of inheritance.
4. Confiscation of the property of all emigrants and rebels.
5. Centralization of credit in the hands of the state, by means of a national bank with state capital and an exclusive monopoly.
6. Centralization of the means of communication and transportation in the hands of the state.
7. Extension of factories and instruments of production owned by the state; the bringing into cultivation of waste lands, and the improvement of the soil generally in accordance with a common plan.
8. Equal obligation of all to work. Establishment of Industrial armies, especially for agriculture.
9. Combination of agriculture with manufacturing industries; gradual abolition of the distinction between town and country by a more equable distribution of the population over the country.
10. Free education for all children in government schools. Abolition of children's factory labor in its present form. Combination of education with industrial production, etc. etc.
I hate to plagiarize. They're easy to look up. I give my full permission for you to copy my work. Never hurts to educated people. Just curious which of the Ten Planks of Communism you have already bought into to overturn our great nation of ours.
Oh, I know. A little won't hurt. I'm sure that many nations would agree, along with the people they left alive. And some of them are worthy of consideration ALONGSIDE competition, like public school. But when Public School gains the power to shut down private school, to refuse home schooling, to end private education... . Are we there, yet? No. Do you think I think we are? I love that argument that since we aren't there yet, how DARE you argue against it. Kind of silly, that one. Or the argument that "You don't know what communism is". All I'm doing is quoting Karl Marx. HE doesn't know what Communism is? I've read his book. I've read Mao's. Have you? You should. You really should be aware of what we are facing.
It's time to choose what you really support, folks. You can't hide from it any longer. Some have already chosen, and just haven't come to terms with the fact. The one's that have? Those I respect, on either side. They're the ones who rarely call names, or close their eyes, or otherwise play playground games over the issue. They're too busy REALLY paying attention to what the other side does.
Correction, the work on this page only. My other work you'll have to ask about.
Two fun notes: KGB documents released during the latter part of the Twentieth Century not only confirm all that McCarthy feared, but more. And we turned a blind eye on it for fear of being called names.
Oh, it's true, we have many such institutions (someone didn't read my post well), and in fact, I can name FAR more.
Karl Marx had some good ideas. I still utterly oppose socialism and communism (yes, don't be silly, of course they are different things).
It still makes me smile to realize how many socialists and communists get upset for my daring to post the words of their leaders and idols. How DARE I show the world what we are facing!? Funny. Folks, educated yourselves. Read their works. You'll learn what you are really supporting and THEN you can explore these ideas and tread the line between social justice, and socialism, safely.
That's all I'm doing. Amazing that upsets some. Telling.
Asked By: mckenziecalhoun - 8/10/2009
Well just to say Im very informed about communism and socialism, and actually have problems with almost all of those goals.
The idea that it is making everyone equal is a nice thought, but fact of the matter is that its a bad idea to concentrate the power of running the country in even fewer hands. Secondly, the government has to be the most inefficient source with money. You know its always in debt. At least businessmen know how to make money to stimulate an economy. I realize capitalism has its problems (consumerist culture, abuse to 3rd world countries, stressful lifestyle), but it is way better than communism. Look at every country that ran a communist system. For example, before communism Russia used to be the breadbasket of Russia. Now it barely produces enough food to support itself. North Korea is the same. Is that the equality you profess? Everyone is poor as hell. That sounds more like a monarchy.
The quick and simple reason is that in a communist system there is no inspiration for people to work their hardest. In America, people are creative and hard-working so they can further themselves. In the communist system, they only do so to further the state. And in the end the capitalist approach is far superior.
I will address each issue you brought up quickly.
1. In my opinion this gives the government to much power and also limits creativity in housing and therefore individuality.
2. I agree with this one, but it should be applied in a capitalist economy.
3. I agree with this one because it causes a society based on merit over wealth.
4. Definetely not. I am under the opinion immigration should be allowed for a free movement of labor to stimulate competition.
5. In a socio-economic system, it is never a good idea to let one body control both money and political power. It can only lead to corruption.
6. Again this allows the government to control thought and ability to spread it. Not a good idea.
7. If you look at the history of it, centralized farms did worse than the original single farmers in Russia. Definetely a fail.
8. It sounds nice, but there is no true inspiration behind this work.
9. If there was an even population spread around all of America for example, there would be no given area with great population density. High population density generally results in smarter people due to the easy spread of ideas and information.
10. I agree with the concept of free education for children, as long as its high quality and abolishing child labor. And its even more clever to give kids skills for the the jobs they may have in the future, instead of a broad spectrum of information they can never truly master.
Answered By: Alex R - 8/10/2009