[Scotty]

Just found out that the American Communist Party (or American Democratic Socialists or something) is planning to demonstrate on my (normally moderately conservative) campus on Monday. Ironic that Communists can hide behind "free speech" when they aren't in power.

Contrary to well known examples China and the Soviet Union, communism does not hold oppression of free speech as a cornerstone of its socioeconomic building blocks to good living.

[Goober5000]

Contrary to well known examples China and the Soviet Union, communism does not hold oppression of free speech as a cornerstone of its socioeconomic building blocks to good living.

Considering that communism is primarily an economic philosophy, this is true.  However, like all totalitarian movements, communists value free speech when they are not in power but then suppress it once they gain power.

[The Dagger]

Would you prefer to go back to McCarthyism? Let them speak. Even if you can't agree with them, they may say something to make you reconsider stuff you take for granted. Considering different points of view is the only way to learn (even if you finally find those point of views totally wrong).

[Scotty]

Contrary to well known examples China and the Soviet Union, communism does not hold oppression of free speech as a cornerstone of its socioeconomic building blocks to good living.

Considering that communism is primarily an economic philosophy, this is true.  However, like all totalitarian movements, communists value free speech when they are not in power but then suppress it once they gain power.

The point is that it is neither unique to communism nor intrinsic to actual communism.  InsaneBaron obviously implied that he believed communism automatically and unequivocally meant restricting free speech.  I corrected him.  Hell, communism isn't even inherently totalitarian!

Socio-economic paradigms are not automatically politics.

[InsaneBaron]

Would you prefer to go back to McCarthyism? Let them speak. Even if you can't agree with them, they may say something to make you reconsider stuff you take for granted. Considering different points of view is the only way to learn (even if you finally find those point of views totally wrong).

You're correct regarding considering different points of view. I'm not saying they don't have a right to speak. I'm pointing out that clinging to that (legitimate) right while out of power looks pretty bad when you suppress it while in power.



@Scotty: Fair enough, if a communist country that tolerates free speech ever comes in to existence, I'll stop criticizing communism on that grounds. Regarding totalitarianism, I'd say state control of all property is pretty totalitarian.

[Scotty]

Communism doesn't mean state control of all property.  I feel like you've internalized this view of communism as everything that the Soviet Union did wrong and misattributed it to the underlying socio-economic base.  Common ownership of means of production, yes, but that's not an abolishment of personal property.

It's roughly the same (in terms of how wrong it is) to say that capitalism means that there is no public property or infrastructure.

[Goober5000]

Communism doesn't mean state control of all property.  I feel like you've internalized this view of communism as everything that the Soviet Union did wrong and misattributed it to the underlying socio-economic base.  Common ownership of means of production, yes, but that's not an abolishment of personal property.

In this sense, the theory of the Communists may be summed up in the single sentence: Abolition of private property.

Care to retract your statement?

[Scotty]

EDIT: thank you niffiwan, I think I will not.

My point, however, is that public (mis)perceptions about communism and actual tenets of communism are not generally congruous.

[niffiwan]

Er, how about quoting a bit more context from that passage (found with all of 15 secs effort using a search engine)

(apologies for butchering the formatting)

The distinguishing feature of Communism is not the abolition of property generally, but the abolition of bourgeois property. But modern bourgeois private property is the final and most complete expression of the system of producing and appropriating products, that is based on class antagonisms, on the exploitation of the many by the few. 
In this sense, the theory of the Communists may be summed up in the single sentence: Abolition of private property.
We Communists have been reproached with the desire of abolishing the right of personally acquiring property as the fruit of a man’s own labour, which property is alleged to be the groundwork of all personal freedom, activity and independence.
Hard-won, self-acquired, self-earned property! Do you mean the property of petty artisan and of the small peasant, a form of property that preceded the bourgeois form? There is no need to abolish that; the development of industry has to a great extent already destroyed it, and is still destroying it daily.
Or do you mean the modern bourgeois private property?
But does wage-labour create any property for the labourer? Not a bit. It creates capital, i.e., that kind of property which exploits wage-labour, and which cannot increase except upon condition of begetting a new supply of wage-labour for fresh exploitation. Property, in its present form, is based on the antagonism of capital and wage labour. Let us examine both sides of this antagonism

Not that I agree much with Communism anyway, but still, lets not strawman their position!

[Goober5000]

Er, how about quoting a bit more context from that passage (found with all of 15 secs effort using a search engine)

The context is useful, but it simply reaffirms the point that I quoted.  Note that according to the Manifesto, it is not necessary to abolish non-bourgeois property because it has already been destroyed!

EDIT: thank you niffiwan, I think I will not.

Follow the logic.  If neither the bourgeois nor the proletariat control private property, who then is left to control it?

My point, however, is that public (mis)perceptions about communism and actual tenets of communism are not generally congruous.

Have you examined your own perceptions with this point in mind?

[Scotty]

Follow the logic.  If neither the bourgeois nor the proletariat control private property, who then is left to control it?

Realize that the logic results from flawed assumptions.  If I build myself a shed, that is my personal property.  I built it, it is mine.  That's the kind of property that has 'already been destroyed'.

If I put my mark on something, my effort into something, my interest into something, it is mine and it is my personal property, according to that particular document.

[BirdofPrey]

So in other, random, non-serious news.  We were joking at work we should make a kitchen cover band named Chef Mike and the Liquid Oven (Chef Mike is a joke name for the microwave and the liquid oven is a deep fryer)

[Scourge of Ages]

So in other, random, non-serious news.  We were joking at work we should make a kitchen cover band named Chef Mike and the Liquid Oven (Chef Mike is a joke name for the microwave and the liquid oven is a deep fryer)

"350° for Teacher"
"Griller"
"Under Pressure Cooker"

[Klaustrophobia]

I'd buy that album

[Klaustrophobia]

A couple weeks ago I checked on bestbuy.com for the trade in value of a 3DS XL as I was considering buying the new one.  It said $80.  A little less than I was hoping for, but enough that I decided to go ahead and trade up.  Since nintendo has a ridiculous account system, had to buy the new one first.  I finally had time to go take the other one in today, with my single day off in the month-long span of 12s we're in.  Four dollars.

Wut?  Even the customer service dude was floored by that.  What the eff happened?  The first time I looked it up was already considerably after the release of the new one.  That shouldn't be the reason why.  The CS guy also looked up the trade in at gamestop for me and found $70 ($50 cash).  Teh fuk?  Gamestop does me little good.  I was going to use the trade-in for a laptop (whose price also rose $100 in that same time period).

And the shoe store I went to for new work boots that I desperately need had next to no stock due to some strike somewhere.  What a waste of a day off.

[Scourge of Ages]

Well, Klaustrophobia, your first and second mistakes were thinking of bestbuy and gamestop, two notoriously unfriendly traders. What you'll want to use is Ebay or Amazon.

For ebay, you can sell and ship yourself as long as you have paypal, a printer, and a post office close enough. More work, but best return.
Amazon also has a trade-in program: https://www.amazon.com/gp/tradein/popovers/render-popover.html?ie=UTF8&name=howToTradeIn
It seems like it requires the same, except an Amazon account instead of paypal.

Can't help with the boots thing.

EDIT: Seriously, though, $4??? There are no situations where a functioning thing should be that little. Truly nuts. Even for a "good" condition, the online estimator says it's only $25. Pirates and thieves the lot of them!

[Klaustrophobia]

Best Buy was the best offer I found, other than gamestop's $100 pre-order thing (that you can't transfer with, cuz you need both).  Even the indie used game stores around here were only going to pay like $55.  I really don't want to have to deal with selling it myself.  Might look into amazon.

[z64555]

And the shoe store I went to for new work boots that I desperately need had next to no stock due to some strike somewhere.  What a waste of a day off.

Look at getting a pair of Duleth pigsuede boots. They've got some anti-some treads that work OK on foodservice flooring, and very good in the mud/wet sand.

[Colonol Dekker]

Last day at work in the prison service.  Move up north later in the month.  Two very very tough men came up to me and said they'd miss me 'guv'. I told them to f*cking man up and get out of my sight.   

[An4ximandros]

The person that did the old Doctor Who Anime finished a Star Wars one... and it IS GLORIOUS!