you have posted whose definition of communism?

Post #82,974 by boxley 2/20/03 3:29:15 PM Reply	you have posted whose definition of communism? So all the people who claim to be communists arnt, according to you. Very good. Well the opinion I expressed was that there is a move towards communism as defined by all the countries that claim they are/were here in this country. You seem to think that there never was a communist state (except for the first french revolution, there wasnt) However we here in the United states are heading directly to a police state that will mirror the abuses of the Soviet system except with worse health care and welfare. The groups who are organising the peace marches want the same thing as the Bush administration. A totilitarian state if you wish except that they want to run it, not the republicans. Your original question is that there is no reason to fear the brand of communism they espouse. Maybe not fear their ownership of the ship of state but the aims they wish to acheive is being moved forward by the US government. what the fuck ever thanx, bill will work for cash and other incentives [link\|http://home.tampabay.rr.com/boxley/resume/Resume.html\|skill set] questions, help? [link\|mailto:pappas@catholic.org\|email pappas at catholic.org] \ufffdOmni Gaul Delenda est!\ufffd Ceasar
Post #83,022 by Brandioch 2/20/03 7:04:43 PM Reply	The "dictionary's" definition. So all the people who claim to be communists arnt, according to you. That's right. Nor are the people who claim to be "alien abductees" actually abducted by aliens. Nor are the mobsters who claim to be "legitimate businessmen" actually legitimate. And I could go on and on and on. Like I said, the stupid people believed them. However we here in the United states are heading directly to a police state that will mirror the abuses of the Soviet system except with worse health care and welfare. Will we have mandated 5 year plans for our factories? I don't think so. What we are doing is heading for Fascism. Another flavour of Totalitarian Socialism. The problem that arises when you don't accurately define what you're talking about is that it becomes very easy to disprove. The groups who are organising the peace marches want the same thing as the Bush administration. Possibly. Possibly not. Your original question is that there is no reason to fear the brand of communism they espouse. And what brand is that? Maybe not fear their ownership of the ship of state but the aims they wish to acheive is being moved forward by the US government. Yes, more about "them" and what "they" are doing. I don't care what they would LIKE to happen. I have not VOTED for them for public office.
Post #83,024 by boxley 2/20/03 7:10:22 PM Reply	Dictionary eh? [link\|http://www.m-w.com/cgi-bin/dictionary\|http://www.m-w.com/cgi-bin/dictionary] Main Entry: com\ufffdmu\ufffdnism b : a totalitarian system of government sounds like the republicans to me. thanx, bill will work for cash and other incentives [link\|http://home.tampabay.rr.com/boxley/resume/Resume.html\|skill set] questions, help? [link\|mailto:pappas@catholic.org\|email pappas at catholic.org] \ufffdOmni Gaul Delenda est!\ufffd Ceasar
Post #83,028 by Brandioch 2/20/03 7:31:46 PM Reply	And this is what is called "smack down". [link\|http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=communism\|dictionary.com] The FIRST definition given: A theoretical economic system characterized by the collective ownership of property and by the organization of labor for the common advantage of all members. I will notice that you have "b. " in front of your defintion. Doesn't that imply an "a. "? Let me just post the ENTIRE entry for that word on the site you quoted. 1 a : a theory advocating elimination of private property b : a system in which goods are owned in common and are available to all as needed 2 capitalized a : a doctrine based on revolutionary Marxian socialism and Marxism-Leninism that was the official ideology of the U.S.S.R. b : a totalitarian system of government in which a single authoritarian party controls state-owned means of production c : a final stage of society in Marxist theory in which the state has withered away and economic goods are distributed equitably d : communist systems collectively Hmmmmm. I wonder why you had trouble posting that. Hmmmmmmmmm..........
Post #83,034 by boxley 2/20/03 8:23:20 PM Reply	zing, hook line and sinker if you noticed Capitalised does NOT agree with your definition, thank you for admitting you were wrong about the USSR, : a doctrine based on revolutionary Marxian socialism and Marxism-Leninism that was the official ideology of the U.S.S.R. anything else I can do for you today? <huge fscking grin> thanx, bill will work for cash and other incentives [link\|http://home.tampabay.rr.com/boxley/resume/Resume.html\|skill set] questions, help? [link\|mailto:pappas@catholic.org\|email pappas at catholic.org] \ufffdOmni Gaul Delenda est!\ufffd Ceasar
Post #83,046 by Brandioch 2/20/03 9:10:48 PM Reply	"Define communist, then tell me what Bush is up to" You may notice that was the whole of your initial post on this subject. if you noticed Capitalised does NOT agree with your definition, thank you for admitting you were wrong about the USSR, Okay, so you want to get into a pissing contest on whether it was capitalized or not? Well, I think you should look at your initial post on the subject. : a doctrine based on revolutionary Marxian socialism and Marxism-Leninism that was the *official ideology* of the U.S.S.R. Yes, that is one definition of "Communism". You might wonder why they included the phrase "official ideology". No, you wouldn't wonder. You'd just parse for phrases. So, if I said (as I did) that the USSR government claimed to be Communist, then that would make their "official ideology" Communism. Not their "actual" ideology. Their "*official*" ideology. Kind of like what our "official" reasons are for invading Iraq.
Post #83,192 by mmoffitt 2/21/03 1:59:44 PM Reply	You'd probably agree, then... that the old Soviet definition of "Capitalism" is a valid description. Capitalism: A socio-economic system in the last stages of decay. No? Then stop corrupting the definition of Communism. Go to the source, read the Manifesto. My 2. bcnu, Mikem Osama bin Laden's brother could fly in US airspace 9/15/01, but I had to wait for FBI and CIA background checks, 'nuff said?
Post #83,202 by boxley 2/21/03 2:55:02 PM Reply	No question s/Communism/Capitalism both are failed economic models in the last stages of decay. Piracy is the only model that works but only in frontier areas. Harder to find these days.I have read the manifesto and determined that the threat differential to my person was rather high. no thanx, bill will work for cash and other incentives [link\|http://home.tampabay.rr.com/boxley/resume/Resume.html\|skill set] questions, help? [link\|mailto:pappas@catholic.org\|email pappas at catholic.org] \ufffdOmni Gaul Delenda est!\ufffd Ceasar

Welcome to IWETHEY!