[ralfy]

It did not work probably because Communism was never achieved.

In contrast, increasing levels of credit coupled with increasing production attracted most of the world's population, which was poor. Increased sales of goods and services in turn led to more credit created.

The results are described briefly here:

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfre ... g-collapse

[JV153]

It did not work probably because Communism was never achieved.

In contrast, increasing levels of credit coupled with increasing production attracted most of the world's population, which was poor. Increased sales of goods and services in turn led to more credit created.

The results are described briefly here:

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfre ... g-collapse

Neither was democracy. If you think you are free under this system then you're deluded... most people don't even think about democracy or communism in terms of their idealist foundations.

[ennui2]

They say all cynics are disillusioned idealists.

Perfect is the enemy of good. If all you do is fixate on how something hasn't lived up to its ideal, you'll just be miserable. Everyone since Plato knew that perfection can never be achieved in the real world.

[Cog]

It did not work probably because Communism was never achieved.

In contrast, increasing levels of credit coupled with increasing production attracted most of the world's population, which was poor. Increased sales of goods and services in turn led to more credit created.

The results are described briefly here:

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfre ... g-collapse

but of course if we did it your way communism would work this time wouldn't it? Lol

[ralfy]

Neither was democracy. If you think you are free under this system then you're deluded... most people don't even think about democracy or communism in terms of their idealist foundations.

I don't recall referring to democracy.

[ralfy]

but of course if we did it your way communism would work this time wouldn't it? Lol

And what way is that?

[Cog]

you tell me. You're the one that wants communism not me

[ralfy]

you tell me. You're the one that wants communism not me

Please point out where I said that I want Communism.

[Cog]

you tell me. You're the one that wants communism not me

Please point out where I said that I want Communism.

It did not work probably because Communism was never achieved

This implies that it would have worked if Communism was achieved thus expressing a preference for it doing so. If in fact, you don't support communism, then I congratulate you on your logic.

[ralfy]

you tell me. You're the one that wants communism not me

Please point out where I said that I want Communism.

It did not work probably because Communism was never achieved

This implies that it would have worked if Communism was achieved thus expressing a preference for it doing so. If in fact, you don't support communism, then I congratulate you on your logic.

It is not possible to have Communism on a large scale because complex human societies involve governments, money, and various social classes. Thus, they can only exist given state capitalism, mixed capitalism, etc.

Communism can only take place in small communities, and something inevitable as limits to growth are reached.

In contrast, capitalist systems that involve profit and competition can only be maintained if there are no such limits. Reality, of course, shows otherwise.

[radon1]

because complex human societies involve governments, money, and various social classes.

Do they have to, and if yes, then why?

(I suppose "governments" here meant "states". Government as an administrative function is not much of an issue).

[onlooker]

As per Ralfy posts the capitalist system contains the seeds of its own destruction in so much as an endless pursuit of profit and growth cannot be sustained perpetually in a close system like the Earth.

[ralfy]

because complex human societies involve governments, money, and various social classes.

Do they have to, and if yes, then why?

(I suppose "governments" here meant "states". Government as an administrative function is not much of an issue).

That has been the case throughout human history. The reasons have to do with complexities that require legal systems (e.g., private property), credit in terms of profit and incentive to expand, specialization, and more.

[Subjectivist]

As per Ralfy posts the capitalist system contains the seeds of its own destruction in so much as an endless pursuit of profit and growth cannot be sustained perpetually in a close system like the Earth.

Of course they can, provided the capital is not in the form of a corporation that perpetuates itself far past the normal human lifespan. For most of history a dedicated workaholic capitalist could amass a fortune within their lifetime. Then when they died the assets would be inherited, taxed and otherwise divided. Depending on the work ethic and sense of the inheritors they could live comfortably, grow their own fortune, or squander if all on riotous living like the Prodigal son did. In any case the wealth was redistributed pretty thoroughly when the person who amassed it died.

Now we have corporations like Disney, that has existed about fifty years after the creative genius who built the company died. They have so much wealth and power that they influenced the American government to change copywrite law to protect their control of Mickey Mouse as their trademark for 75 years after the death of Walt Disney.

This is not how the system is supposed to work. We now have corporate personhood so if is entirely possible they will be able to keep their trademark as long as the corporation survives, no matter what law has to be changed to allow it.

[onlooker]

This is not to rebut but to confirm the postulation that the US was hijacked by International wealthy bankers and elite. As per the following: The date is February 21, 1871 and the Forty-First Congress is in session. I refer you to the "Acts of the Forty-First Congress," Section 34, Session III, chapters 61 and 62. On this date in the history of our nation, Congress passed an Act titled: "An Act To Provide A Government for the District of Columbia." This is also known as the "Act of 1871." What does this mean? Well, it means that Congress, under no constitutional authority to do so, created a separate form of government for the District of Columbia, which is a ten mile square parcel of land.

What??? How could they do that? Moreover, WHY would they do that? To explain, let's look at the circumstances of those days. The Act of 1871 was passed at a vulnerable time in America. Our nation was essentially bankrupt — weakened and financially depleted in the aftermath of the Civil War. The Civil War itself was nothing more than a calculated "front" for some pretty fancy footwork by corporate backroom players. It was a strategic maneuver by European interests (the international bankers) who were intent upon gaining a stranglehold on the neck (and the coffers) of America.

The Congress realized our country was in dire financial straits, so they cut a deal with the international bankers — (in those days, the Rothschilds of London were dipping their fingers into everyone's pie) thereby incurring a DEBT to said bankers. If we think about banks, we know they do not just lend us money out of the goodness of their hearts. A bank will not do anything for you unless it is entirely in their best interest to do so. There has to be some sort of collateral or some string attached which puts you and me (the borrower) into a subservient position. This was true back in 1871 as well. The conniving international bankers were not about to lend our floundering nation any money without some serious stipulations. So, they devised a brilliant way of getting their foot in the door of the United States (a prize they had coveted for some time, but had been unable to grasp thanks to our Founding Fathers, who despised them and held them in check), and thus, the Act of 1871 was passed.

In essence, this Act formed the corporation known as THE UNITED STATES. Note the capitalization, because it is important. This corporation, owned by foreign interests, moved right in and shoved the original "organic" version of the Constitution into a dusty corner. With the "Act of 1871," our Constitution was defaced in the sense that the title was block-capitalized and the word "for" was changed to the word "of" in the title. The original Constitution drafted by the Founding Fathers, was written in this manner:

"The Constitution for the united states of America".

The altered version reads: "THE CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA". It is the corporate constitution. It is NOT the same document you might think it is. The corporate constitution operates in an economic capacity and has been used to fool the People into thinking it is the same parchment that governs the Republic. It absolutely is not.
The Rothschild interests did succeed, through their agent Treasury Secretary Salmon P. Chase, to force a bill (the National Banking Act) through Congress creating a federally chartered central bank that had the power to issue U.S. Bank Notes. Afterward, Lincoln warned the American people:
"The money power preys upon the nation in time of peace and conspires against it in times of adversity. It is more despotic than monarchy, more insolent than autocracy, more selfish than bureaucracy. I see in the near future a crisis approaching that unnerves me, and causes me to tremble for the safety of our country. Corporations have been enthroned, an era of corruption will follow, and the money power of the country will endeavor to prolong its reign by working upon the prejudices of the people, until the wealth is aggregated in a few hands, and the republic is destroyed. "<http://www.servelec.net/lincoln.htm#4>4
Lincoln continued to fight against the central bank, and some now believe that it was his anticipated success in influencing Congress to limit the life of the Bank of the United States to just the war years that was the motivating factor behind his assassination.

[ennui2]

The Civil War itself was nothing more than a calculated "front" for some pretty fancy footwork by corporate backroom players.

Maybe YOU should be the one with the confederate flag avatar.

The Rothschild interests did succeed...

Oh, please, what's next, quoting the protocols of the elders of Zion?

http://www.thisisnotaconspiracytheory.com/series/

[Cog]

I suppose if conspiracy theories give people comfort in a confusing world, who am I to deny them that pleasure.