Communities united?

[redflag32]

I wonder does any Republican socialist,not just members of the RSM have any idea as to how we are to get involved in the protestant community? How do we break that barrier,and which organisations or community groups could be approached? Maybe the drugs issue would be a start?

[FreeDerry81]

well both the protestant and catholic communities would have common ground on some issues, social issues which effect the youth of society such as the drugs problem redflag, building bridges with them on issues like this will help prevail a much better relationship with both sides. I would like to imagine anyway.

[Calv]

well both the protestant and catholic communities would have common ground on some issues, social issues which effect the youth of society such as the drugs problem redflag, building bridges with them on issues like this will help prevail a much better relationship with both sides. I would like to imagine anyway.

but how do people like yourself suggest this can happen when you support armed struggle at this present time? surely this is not going to help the Unionist/Loyalist community to want to build bridges with the Republican community.

[FreeDerry81]

armed struggle has nothing to do with drug problems which effect our society. Political views doesnt matter on these type of issues, we all need to unite as one community against this cancer of society and fight these vermin.

[Calv]

armed struggle has nothing to do with drug problems which effect our society. Political views doesnt matter on these type of issues, we all need to unite as one community against this cancer of society and fight these vermin.

if only

[KillinSnakes]

good topic, comrade.

question...

is the post-GFA economy still very segregated in the workplace?

[Erin_go_bragh]

armed struggle has nothing to do with drug problems which effect our society. Political views doesnt matter on these type of issues, we all need to unite as one community against this cancer of society and fight these vermin.


You cant turn round and attack British forces which loyalists deem their own then reach out too them with a olive branch on street cleaning schemes and such. Thats bloody wishful thinking.

[BunyipDude]

armed struggle has nothing to do with drug problems which effect our society. Political views doesnt matter on these type of issues, we all need to unite as one community against this cancer of society and fight these vermin.

Why are drug dealers "vermin"? Aren't they just poor Irishmen who were forced into poverty and squalor by the imperialism of British rule and unionist economic/political discrimination, and became so desperate to escape that they turned to drug-dealing? If you are a Republican Socialist, I would expect that you'd see an end to poverty (the condition that would make one of your countrymen turn to this "cancer") as the solution to the problem, rather than demonizing the dealers themselves.

[ciaranxavier]

Why are drug dealers "vermin"? Aren't they just poor Irishmen who were forced into poverty and squalor by the imperialism of British rule and unionist economic/political discrimination, and became so desperate to escape that they turned to drug-dealing? If you are a Republican Socialist, I would expect that you'd see an end to poverty (the condition that would make one of your countrymen turn to this "cancer") as the solution to the problem, rather than demonizing the dealers themselves.
.
you cant blame everything on imperialists. drug dealers are everywhere.

[quirk]

The drug problem is linked to capitalism and will not be solved until there is an end to capitalism and therefore the question arises what to do in the meantime? Do we tackle dealers or do we just let them do as they wish and in the process destroy our communities excusing this as a symptom of capitalism? I think for the benefit of the majority of the people it is our duty to tackle them in whatever way we can.

[BunyipDude]

The drug problem is linked to capitalism and will not be solved until there is an end to capitalism and therefore the question arises what to do in the meantime? Do we tackle dealers or do we just let them do as they wish and in the process destroy our communities excusing this as a symptom of capitalism? I think for the benefit of the majority of the people it is our duty to tackle them in whatever way we can.

Are drugs really "destroying" Northern Ireland?

I think the mentality you (and many other Republicans) have is a right-wing vigilante mentality.

[quirk]

They are destroying many working class area's and countless lives in the process. I don't have a vigilante mentality and believe the community need to organise to fight against this scourge as it is evident the cops are not taking action for one reason or another.

[belfast rep]

I wonder does any Republican socialist,not just members of the RSM have any idea as to how we are to get involved in the protestant community? How do we break that barrier,and which organisations or community groups could be approached? Maybe the drugs issue would be a start?

the is already some examples of this going on, i know SF and the RSM have different forums and contacts with loyalist,to examine issues.

It is quite startling how many members of the protestant are seeking and getting advice from SF offices on every day matters.
it is also quite refreshing to see how members of that community not only discussing a united Ireland but also supporting it.

Loyalist/unionist are atually crying out to be helped in terms of community development.

there are groups like the Shankill womens centre who were steadfast in their support the Falls womens centre when it's funding was withdraw.
strangley another good group is the CTI, (in my opinion) who Margaret Ritchie took the funding off, contary to belief, they are critical of drug dealers etc and UDA members involved in criminality, and as individuals they are impressive and go totally against the stereotype.

there are others within the protestant community who are involved all sorts of 'cross community' groups. who not do have the confidence to publicise their activiites.
their is a number of former prisoner groups co - operating to look at different issues


armed action does nothing to assist this process, it leads to a seige mentality and the scare mongering that leads to further division

[Pádraig Mac Piarais]

armed action does nothing to assist this process, it leads to a seige mentality and the scare mongering that leads to further division


Unionist political and religious leaders along with the pro-British media are responsible for the scare mongering and siege mentality amongst the Protestant working class. They deliberately twist the intentions of Republican separatists. They are to blame for fuelling the fires of sectarianism, not armed struggle. I don't see why we can't reach out to our Orange brethren while still resisting the British? That said; I don't think any such engagement should involve Loyalist paramilitaries, unless of course they are willing to renounce their ways and apologise unreservedly for their crimes.

[Calv]

I don't see why we can't reach out to our Orange brethren while still resisting the British?

but these orange brethren you speak of support the crown and the union. what makes you think they will want to engage with Republicans when there are Republican paramilitaries who wish to continue using violence against the british forces?

[Pádraig Mac Piarais]

but these orange brethren you speak of support the crown and the union. what makes you think they will want to engage with Republicans when there are Republican paramilitaries who wish to continue using violence against the british forces?


I don't think they will, but that's their problem.

[belfast rep]

Unionist political and religious leaders along with the pro-British media are responsible for the scare mongering and siege mentality amongst the Protestant working class. They deliberately twist the intentions of Republican separatists. They are to blame for fuelling the fires of sectarianism, not armed struggle.
and no body said it was the armed struggle,that breeds sectarianism, but it does assist those doing the scare mongering rather than the republican message.
i have met protestants/loyalists/ unionist who say they are only hearing the republican message now
Many who have no problem with republican message but precieve armed action as an attack on their families and friends

I don't see why we can't reach out to our Orange brethren while still resisting the British?

you don't, i cannot see how you would see it otherwise

That said; I don't think any such engagement should involve Loyalist paramilitaries, unless of course they are willing to renounce their ways and apologise unreservedly for their crimes.
many do. but i do not believe we should put conditions on anyone.

[mickyk200]

The drug problem is linked to capitalism and will not be solved until there is an end to capitalism and therefore the question arises what to do in the meantime? Do we tackle dealers or do we just let them do as they wish and in the process destroy our communities excusing this as a symptom of capitalism? I think for the benefit of the majority of the people it is our duty to tackle them in whatever way we can.
While I have socilaist sympathies, capatalism although to blame for many of the problems in society. I don't think drugs are one of them. The People's Republic of China for example is the number one exporter of opium/herion, although the penelties for exporting something as petty as cannabis are death, that is no deterant.

[quirk]

While I have socilaist sympathies, capatalism although to blame for many of the problems in society. I don't think drugs are one of them. The People's Republic of China for example is the number one exporter of opium/herion, although the penelties for exporting something as petty as cannabis are death, that is no deterant.

When the Communist Party came to power in China in 1949 the county had the biggest drug problem in the world. Within 2 years that drug problem had been completely eradicated. Of course since the capitalist coup in China in 1976 drugs have once more become a massive problem for the masses of people.

How Maoist Revolution Wiped Out Drug Addiction in China (http://rwor.org/a/china/opium.htm)

[Pádraig Mac Piarais]

How Maoist Revolution Wiped Out Drug Addiction in China (http://rwor.org/a/china/opium.htm)


That's an excellent article. Well worth a read.

[BunyipDude]

When the Communist Party came to power in China in 1949 the county had the biggest drug problem in the world. Within 2 years that drug problem had been completely eradicated. Of course since the capitalist coup in China in 1976 drugs have once more become a massive problem for the masses of people.

How Maoist Revolution Wiped Out Drug Addiction in China (http://rwor.org/a/china/opium.htm)

That doesn't surprise me all that much...lest we forget the Opium Wars which were a humiliating experience for them. Combating the drug problem would be seen a symbolic victory in that respect.

Anyway, why do you think the PSNI isn't doing enough? In another topic, I suggested that Republicans should attempt to take the same kind of action against racist attacks by Loyalists against non-Catholic minorities, yet I was shunned for expressing this sentiment. It seems there is a double-standard here...

[ciaranxavier]

When the Communist Party came to power in China in 1949 the county had the biggest drug problem in the world. Within 2 years that drug problem had been completely eradicated. Of course since the capitalist coup in China in 1976 drugs have once more become a massive problem for the masses of people.

How Maoist Revolution Wiped Out Drug Addiction in China (http://rwor.org/a/china/opium.htm)

blaming drugs on capitalism is very naive. are you saying that people dont have a choice in the decisions they make?? is murder a capitalist invention too???

[quirk]

blaming drugs on capitalism is very naive. are you saying that people dont have a choice in the decisions they make?? is murder a capitalist invention too???

Did you read the article?

[ciaranxavier]

Did you read the article?

there was an article no i didnt. even then if i had i wouldnt be attributing drug abuse too capitalists. i dont like them anymore then you but blaming that on capitalists takes all the actual blame off the person abusing the drug. the fact of the matter is in any society people will choose to do drugs or will choose not to do drugs, although certain systems may lean someone towards one choice or the other ultimatly it is a persons choice.

[quirk]

there was an article no i didnt. even then if i had i wouldnt be attributing drug abuse too capitalists. i dont like them anymore then you but blaming that on capitalists takes all the actual blame off the person abusing the drug. the fact of the matter is in any society people will choose to do drugs or will choose not to do drugs, although certain systems may lean someone towards one choice or the other ultimatly it is a persons choice.

But drug dealers are capitalists. Drug's will only be wiped out with the end of capitalism and this can in fact be achieved as was shown in China.

[ciaranxavier]

But drug dealers are capitalists. Drug's will only be wiped out with the end of capitalism and this can in fact be achieved as was shown in China.

if any country was allowed to brutally supress its people the drug problem would be under control there as well. and i fail to see how drug dealers are capitalists. wouldnt they just be people taking advantage of the situation presented to them at the current time.

[quirk]

if any country was allowed to brutally supress its people the drug problem would be under control there as well. and i fail to see how drug dealers are capitalists. wouldnt they just be people taking advantage of the situation presented to them at the current time.

China didn't brutally suppress its people to solve the drug problem but dealt with it through mobilising the masses and using Maoist method's instead of the top down approach which has failed time and time again.

Drug dealers are capitalists. They are sell their product in order to make profits and don't care about the pain and suffering this causes.

[ciaranxavier]

China didn't brutally suppress its people to solve the drug problem but dealt with it through mobilising the masses and using Maoist method's instead of the top down approach which has failed time and time again.

Drug dealers are capitalists. They are sell their product in order to make profits and don't care about the pain and suffering this causes.

china has and still is brutally supressing anything that threatens its authority, drug dealers being one of those threats along with religion and revolutionary groups.


Drug dealers are capitalists. They are sell their product in order to make profits and don't care about the pain and suffering this causes

doesnt this refer to pretty much any company making money in this world or is this exclusive to drug dealers?

[ciaranxavier]

falun gong being one example of chinese opression i hope i spelt it right

[quirk]

china has and still is brutally supressing anything that threatens its authority, drug dealers being one of those threats along with religion and revolutionary groups.

I agree. China however is no longer a socialist state.

doesnt this refer to pretty much any company making money in this world or is this exclusive to drug dealers?

Yes.

[quirk]

falun gong being one example of chinese opression i hope i spelt it right

Again you must understand that there was a capitalist coup in China in 1976. Since then China has not been a socialist state.

[ciaranxavier]

I agree. China however is no longer a socialist state.



Yes.

and that is true that china is no longer a socialist state but is it not still opressing its people?

sorry can you explain your yes, i didnt quite get it.

[quirk]

I was replying yes to your question: doesnt this refer to pretty much any company making money in this world or is this exclusive to drug dealers?

The majority of these companies are indeed capitalist enterprises.

[ciaranxavier]

I was replying yes to your question: doesnt this refer to pretty much any company making money in this world or is this exclusive to drug dealers?

The majority of these companies are indeed capitalist enterprises.

ok just clarifying what you were saying yes too. but even if there werent drug dealers wed still have people finding ways to get and use these drugs.

[quirk]

ok just clarifying what you were saying yes too. but even if there werent drug dealers wed still have people finding ways to get and use these drugs.

I don't see how that would be the case and even if it was at first it would be on a much reduced scale and could be tackled and ultimately solved. It is true people might be able to grow cannabis but how for example would you suggest they get heroin or cocaine?

[ciaranxavier]

I don't see how that would be the case and even if it was at first it would be on a much reduced scale and could be tackled and ultimately solved. It is true people might be able to grow cannabis but how for example would you suggest they get heroin or cocaine?

lol i dont classify cannibus as a drug but heroin is easy if you know how to refine poppys. cocaine is also is if you know how to refine that plant as well.

[quirk]

lol i dont classify cannibus as a drug but heroin is easy if you know how to refine poppys. cocaine is also is if you know how to refine that plant as well.

Well I think cannabis is a drug in the same way coffee is and it would probably be legal under socialism. Do you really see people going through so much trouble to get these drug i.e. acquiring the plant and the knowledge and then refining it knowing the penalties for such behaviour. I can understand people experimenting when this stuff is readily available however I can't see them going to that much trouble. If they do however and give it to others they will be classed as drug dealers. If it was for personal use I am sure the masses would notice and appropriately struggle with the individual concerned.

[ciaranxavier]

Well I think cannabis is a drug in the same way coffee is and it would probably be legal under socialism. Do you really see people going through so much trouble to get these drug i.e. acquiring the plant and the knowledge and then refining it knowing the penalties for such behaviour. I can understand people experimenting when this stuff is readily available however I can't see them going to that much trouble. If they do however and give it to others they will be classed as drug dealers. If it was for personal use I am sure the masses would notice and appropriately struggle with the individual concerned.

if you compare it too coffee i agree.

Do you really see people going through so much trouble to get these drug i.e. acquiring the plant and the knowledge and then refining it knowing the penalties for such behaviour.

isnt it already being done? it wasnt until the last half a decade it became a billion dollar business what do you think was happening before then?

[quirk]

isnt it already being done? it wasnt until the last half a decade it became a billion dollar business what do you think was happening before then?

I think that that is something the people must and will deal with when the time comes. It will be much easier however in a society where drug dealers have been removed and all culture glamorising drugs has been eradicated. Socialism will also be a new level of society in which people are beginning to change and look at things in a different way. We will also be looking to change the things which lead people to drugs in the first place such as boredom for instance and eradicate other social problems like homelessness and prostitution which lead many people to drugs.

You really should read the article I posted earlier explaining how this happened in China. It is a short article and could be read in 5 minutes and explains much of this better than I can.

[ciaranxavier]

I think that that is something the people must and will deal with when the time comes. It will be much easier however in a society where drug dealers have been removed and all culture glamorising drugs has been eradicated. Socialism will also be a new level of society in which people are beginning to change and look at things in a different way. We will also be looking to change the things which lead people to drugs in the first place such as boredom for instance and eradicate other social problems like homelessness and prostitution which lead many people to drugs.

You really should read the article I posted earlier explaining how this happened in China. It is a short article and could be read in 5 minutes and explains much of this better than I can.

send me in the right direction and i give you my word ill read it. and my question to you would be is a policy of ignorance towards drugs better then a policy of education?

[quirk]

send me in the right direction and i give you my word ill read it. and my question to you would be is a policy of ignorance towards drugs better then a policy of education?

No I would think that education is much better than ignorance.

Heres the link http://rwor.org/a/china/opium.htm

[ciaranxavier]

No I would think that education is much better than ignorance.

Heres the link http://rwor.org/a/china/opium.htm

so instead of ignoring the fact that drugs do and always will exist in some form or another wouldnt it be a better method to educate the people properly not trying to scare them, then too pretend the problem doesnt exist and that its fixed?

[quirk]

so instead of ignoring the fact that drugs do and always will exist in some form or another wouldnt it be a better method to educate the people properly not trying to scare them, then too pretend the problem doesnt exist and that its fixed?

Of course we shouldn't lie to the people or tell them that the problem is fixed if it isn't or ignore it ourselves. However we should always be trying to solve these problems once and for all and I do think that can happen. We can never be sure that some individual somewhere isn't going to be taking drugs which he is making himself and in that sense they could always be with us. However as an issue effecting all of society in the way that we see today - I think that can be ended as was proven in China after 1949.

Also under socialism it wont be just a case of educating people. People will be educating themselves through study and struggle. This is one of the ways in which socialism is qualitatively better than capitalism.

[ciaranxavier]

Of course we shouldn't lie to the people or tell them that the problem is fixed if it isn't or ignore it ourselves. However we should always be trying to solve these problems once and for all and I do think that can happen. We can never be sure that some individual somewhere isn't going to be taking drugs which he is making himself and in that sense they could always be with us. However as an issue effecting all of society in the way that we see today - I think that can be ended as was proven in China after 1949.

Also under socialism it wont be just a case of educating people. People will be educating themselves through study and struggle. This is one of the ways in which socialism is qualitatively better than capitalism.

okay but say you somehow manage to completely eradicate heroin, coke and the likes what are you going to do with mushrooms and peyote and those drugs, are you going to wipe out the mushroom as a species??

[quirk]

okay but say you somehow manage to completely eradicate heroin, coke and the likes what are you going to do with mushrooms and peyote and those drugs, are you going to wipe out the mushroom as a species??

No you wouldn't be able to. I am no expert on drugs but would I be right in saying that these kinds of drugs do not cause the same problems for society as the likes of Heroin? If so then they may well be legal although people would be educated on the dangers if there is any. Socialism wouldn't seek to wipe out drugs just for the sake of it but because of their adverse effect on society as a whole and it was these kind of drugs I was speaking of.

[ciaranxavier]

No you wouldn't be able to. I am no expert on drugs but would I be right in saying that these kinds of drugs do not cause the same problems for society as the likes of Heroin? If so then they may well be legal although people would be educated on the dangers if there is any. Socialism wouldn't seek to wipe out drugs just for the sake of it but because of their adverse effect on society as a whole and it was these kind of drugs I was speaking of.

yes its nowhere as bad as heroin, but it does cause hallucinations. i am a believer of the socialist system but i believe that it is impossible to succeed by itself. the incorporation of other systems is essential for socialism to survive. i mean in a "perfect" socialist society subject A could choose not to work and still get paid with a roof over their head and all the luxurys that subject B would have except subject B works his 8 hours a day and benefits equally. now eventually subject B will see subject A never working but still receiving and decide hes not going to work either. essentially creating a domino effect destroying society as a whole. this is one example why true socialism cant work on it own, though the theorys should be incorporated into every society.

[quirk]

yes its nowhere as bad as heroin, but it does cause hallucinations. i am a believer of the socialist system but i believe that it is impossible to succeed by itself. the incorporation of other systems is essential for socialism to survive. i mean in a "perfect" socialist society subject A could choose not to work and still get paid with a roof over their head and all the luxurys that subject B would have except subject B works his 8 hours a day and benefits equally. now eventually subject B will see subject A never working but still receiving and decide hes not going to work either. essentially creating a domino effect destroying society as a whole. this is one example why true socialism cant work on it own, though the theorys should be incorporated into every society.

That is not the case. Everyone will be required to work under socialism.

[ciaranxavier]

That is not the case. Everyone will be required to work under socialism.

then that is not true socialism you are speaking of communism.

[quirk]

then that is not true socialism you are speaking of communism.

Socialism is still class society. There still exists a state and class antagonisms. How do you figure that in socialism that people won't have to work. That was not the case in any existing socialist societies and it wont be the case in any future ones.

[ciaranxavier]

Socialism is still class society. There still exists a state and class antagonisms. How do you figure that in socialism that people won't have to work. That was not the case in any existing socialist societies and it wont be the case in any future ones.

because theyve all incorporated other systems into their ideologies. no past or present power has been a true socialist society. and a true socialist society cannot work without incorporating some other ideologies into it system.

[quirk]

because theyve all incorporated other systems into their ideologies. no past or present power has been a true socialist society. and a true socialist society cannot work without incorporating some other ideologies into it system.

Socialism is not formed in isolation but is born out of capitalism and of course will have many of the problems and class antagonisms left over. It will however seek to eradicate these and in the process move to a higher stage which is called communism. To think that it can just be built in a vacuum is utopian.

[Pádraig Mac Piarais]

As quirk said; drug dealers are capitalists and, like any capitalist, the accumulation of capital from selling their commodity allows them to expand their enterprise. In the case of the drug trade, an illegal and underground market, this means they can purchase more weapons, enlarge their gang or (as is the case in some parts of the world) gain influence over the political and judicial systems of a country. And just like any other business this also means they can reach a greater number of people and push their commodity on them.

As I see it; this is the main problem with drugs in society today. These people are only able to behave in such a criminal fashion because:

1) The substances they're selling or pushing are for the most part illegal

2) The organisation of society under capitalism allows them to become more powerful

Under Socialism I think it would be logical for nearly all banned substances to be legal. For a start; the improved quality of life for many people would make them less likely to abuse drugs like heroin, crack cocaine, cocaine, solvents or crystal meth and so on. Since drug dealers would have no market to operate in they would be unable to push these drugs on the vulnerable in society.

I think it's also important to make a distinction between these destructive and addictive substances and other illegal drugs such as cannabis, LSD, DMT, magic mushrooms and so on. I suppose it would be preferable if people didn't use these either, but since they're largely only used for personal recreational use; widely available education would be the best way to combat abuse.

There's my two cents....

[ciaranxavier]

Socialism is not formed in isolation but is born out of capitalism and of course will have many of the problems and class antagonisms left over. It will however seek to eradicate these and in the process move to a higher stage which is called communism. To think that it can just be built in a vacuum is utopian.

lol i dont believe communism is the higher stage, the collapse of the USSR should be proof enough of that. personally IMO the only two governments i believe that have succesfully incorporated socialism into its existing structures are cuba and sweden. though both are still lacking in some ways.

[ciaranxavier]

As quirk said; drug dealers are capitalists and, like any capitalist, the accumulation of capital from selling their commodity allows them to expand their enterprise. In the case of the drug trade, an illegal and underground market, this means they can purchase more weapons, enlarge their gang or (as is the case in some parts of the world) gain influence over the political and judicial systems of a country. And just like any other business this also means they can reach a greater number of people and push their commodity on them.

As I see it; this is the main problem with drugs in society today. These people are only able to behave in such a criminal fashion because:

1) The substances they're selling or pushing are for the most part illegal

2) The organisation of society under capitalism allows them to become more powerful

Under Socialism I think it would be logical for nearly all banned substances to be legal. For a start; the improved quality of life for many people would make them less likely to abuse drugs like heroin, crack cocaine, cocaine, solvents or crystal meth and so on. Since drug dealers would have no market to operate in they would be unable to push these drugs on the vulnerable in society.

I think it's also important to make a distinction between these destructive and addictive substances and other illegal drugs such as cannabis, LSD, DMT, magic mushrooms and so on. I suppose it would be preferable if people didn't use these either, but since they're largely only used for personal recreational use; widely available education would be the best way to combat abuse.

There's my two cents....


Under Socialism I think it would be logical for nearly all banned substances to be legal. For a start; the improved quality of life for many people would make them less likely to abuse drugs like heroin, crack cocaine, cocaine, solvents or crystal meth and so on. Since drug dealers would have no market to operate in they would be unable to push these drugs on the vulnerable in society.

lol so if the improved quality of life would stop the drug use why are millionaire rock stars still shooting heroin or snorting coke??? thinking like that is going to put you further from solving the drug problem which is education and controlling distribution.

I think it's also important to make a distinction between these destructive and addictive substances and other illegal drugs such as cannabis, LSD, DMT, magic mushrooms and so on. I suppose it would be preferable if people didn't use these either, but since they're largely only used for personal recreational use; widely available education would be the best way to combat abuse.

i do agree with this statement however.

[quirk]

lol i dont believe communism is the higher stage, the collapse of the USSR should be proof enough of that. personally IMO the only two governments i believe that have succesfully incorporated socialism into its existing structures are cuba and sweden. though both are still lacking in some ways.

Communism was never reached in the USSR. What existed was socialism. Communism can only be achieved on a world scale and not in one country.

[ciaranxavier]

Communism was never reached in the USSR. What existed was socialism. Communism can only be achieved on a world scale and not in one country.

russia was the closest thing this worlds seen to communism and in no way was socialism, socialism is about the people not the opression of entire nations to further one nations goals. and this world scale i hear so much socialists talk about is a huge joke. first off its unachievable on the scale you speak of and second off we have to prove to the people socialism can work through one country first.

[Pádraig Mac Piarais]

lol so if the improved quality of life would stop the drug use why are millionaire rock stars still shooting heroin or snorting coke??? thinking like that is going to put you further from solving the drug problem which is education and controlling distribution.


I'm afraid 'rock stars' don't feature in my considerations, or any other wealthy people for that matter. However, I reject the idea that quality of life is determined by the amount of wealth one possesses. What I was referring to was the improved standard of living for workers. With a roof over their head, free health care, free transportation etc. all guaranteed and secured under the new system; many of the unnecessary strains imposed upon people by capitalism will be removed and so therefore stress would be greatly reduced which, I believe, would amount to a higher quality of life.

[quirk]

russia was the closest thing this worlds seen to communism and in no way was socialism, socialism is about the people not the opression of entire nations to further one nations goals. and this world scale i hear so much socialists talk about is a huge joke. first off its unachievable on the scale you speak of and second off we have to prove to the people socialism can work through one country first.

I don't think we have been anywhere near communism at any stage however it would be my opinion that the highest peaks of socialism reached was not in the Soviet Union but rather in China during the GPCR. Yes socialism is about people and not oppression and that is hat was strived for in the USSR and China. Why is it unachievable on a world scale? If Socialism can be achieved in one country then why not in two, If in two then why not in four, If in four then why not in eight and so on? As to having to prove to people that it works you have a point in that this is a massive struggle which has to be waged both in showing the achievements of socialist societies in the past and making more achievements while building socialism in the future.

[quirk]

lol i dont believe communism is the higher stage, the collapse of the USSR should be proof enough of that. personally IMO the only two governments i believe that have succesfully incorporated socialism into its existing structures are cuba and sweden. though both are still lacking in some ways.

It was socialism which existed within the USSR and not communism and also it didn't collapse but there was a revisionist coup after the death of Stalin. What collapsed was state capitalism/social imperialism. Sweden is an imperialist country and Cuba while having some of the things which you would expect in a socialist society is not socialism. I think you are mixing up what socialism and communism is. Lenin makes it clear:

"From the moment all members of society, or at least the vast majority, have learned to administer the state themselves, have taken this work into their own hands, have organized control over the insignificant capitalist minority, over the gentry who wish to preserve their capitalist habits and over the workers who have been thoroughly corrupted by capitalism — from this moment the need for government of any kind begins to disappear altogether. The more complete the democracy, the nearer the moment when it becomes unnecessary. The more democratic the "state" which consists of the armed workers, and which is "no longer a state in the proper sense of the word", the more rapidly every form of state begins to wither away.

"Then the door will be thrown wide open for the transition from the first phase of communist society [Socialism] to its higher phase [Communism], and with it the complete withering away of the state.

Vladimir Lenin
The State and Revolution
Chpt 5. The higher phase of Communist Society

[Takeshi]

I'm afraid 'rock stars' don't feature in my considerations, or any other wealthy people for that matter. However, I reject the idea that quality of life is determined by the amount of wealth one possesses. What I was referring to was the improved standard of living for workers. With a roof over their head, free health care, free transportation etc. all guaranteed and secured under the new system; many of the unnecessary strains imposed upon people by capitalism will be removed and so therefore stress would be greatly reduced which, I believe, would amount to a higher quality of life.

The people of north korea are really living the stress free, high life.

[quirk]

The people of north korea are really living the stress free, high life.

What has that got to do with this debate. North Korea isn't a socialist state.

[KillinSnakes]

china has and still is brutally supressing anything that threatens its authority, drug dealers being one of those threats along with religion and revolutionary groups.

Yep... they've handed out longer prison sentences to hardline communists who've passed out leaflets condemning the capitalist roaders than other dissidents.

[ciaranxavier]

I'm afraid 'rock stars' don't feature in my considerations, or any other wealthy people for that matter. However, I reject the idea that quality of life is determined by the amount of wealth one possesses. What I was referring to was the improved standard of living for workers. With a roof over their head, free health care, free transportation etc. all guaranteed and secured under the new system; many of the unnecessary strains imposed upon people by capitalism will be removed and so therefore stress would be greatly reduced which, I believe, would amount to a higher quality of life.

and what i was stressing is people who dont need improvements in their standards of living still choose to do drugs.

[ciaranxavier]

The people of north korea are really living the stress free, high life.

neither will you americans fighting these needless wars.

[ciaranxavier]

Yep... they've handed out longer prison sentences to hardline communists who've passed out leaflets condemning the capitalist roaders than other dissidents.

???? what are you getting at.

[Pádraig Mac Piarais]

and what i was stressing is people who dont need improvements in their standards of living still choose to do drugs.


And? So what?

[Puddies]

???? what are you getting at.He's saying that the present-day Chinese state is capitalist, not communist. You have to understand that the Chinese Revolution ended in 1976, it has not been a socialist state since.

Demonstrators at Tienanmen Square were protesting against the introduction of market reforms which was in essence capitalist restoration. They were also singing the Internationale.

[KillinSnakes]

He's saying that the present-day Chinese state is capitalist, not communist. You have to understand that the Chinese Revolution ended in 1976, it has not been a socialist state since.

Demonstrators at Tienanmen Square were protesting against the introduction of market reforms which was in essence capitalist restoration. They were also singing the Internationale.

You're right, that's what I was saying.

Most of China's brutal, inhumane policies have been since the capitalist restoration there.