What evidence would be required for you to abandon your religious belief

[ThePainefulTruth]

As a worldview (known as "dialectical materialism"), it affects views of science, culture, philosophy; literally everything.

Does calling it "dialectical materialism" make it any more important to "science, culture, philosophy or.....everything"? Materialism is materialism no matter how you modify it.

I'm currently thinking as to whether materialism is compatable with the big bang and quantum mechanics. nothing is sacred and everything is politicised.

Well yeah, look at Solyndra. But I gotta wonder how far we have to go to politicize QM or the Big Bang? How do either of those be shown to affect global warming, er, climate change, or the Big Bang?

it is unlike secular and individualistic ideologies in that it affects everything, rather than affecting one thing and not another. they are all inter-connected under an umbrella ideology. it is the difference between being a Christian believing in god, to a Cultural Christian who does not believe in god but still accepts the majority of christian beliefs or influences. I've stopped being a "true" communist (although I have my doubts I ever was one) to being a "cultural" communist who still accepts very large portions of the belief system as an identity.

???

You are right though, as it was a crude form of materialism that pulled me towards communism in the first place. I thought "science" had all the answers and that's what led me here.

How do you know science doesn't have all of the answer? Are you saying that science is wrong if it doesn't answer them all right here and now--like revealed religion. Does science have to have all the answers right NOW?

"it takes a great deal of courage to want to go what is percieved as "human nature". So courage is not the problem my freind. "

????

It is more that Marxism argues convincingly that freedom under capitalism is an illusion and that history is governed by laws which means communism is a necessary next step in human social evolution if we want to be more free.

Yet Marxism/socialism has killed more of its own citizens, by far in the 20th Century, than any other form of government.

Communism promotes sloth, capitalism promotes freedom and creativity.

 

[Laika]

"it takes a great deal of courage to want to go against what is percieved as "human nature". So courage is not the problem my freind. "

sorry. crucial missing word. lol.

Yet Marxism/socialism has killed more of its own citizens, by far in the 20th Century, than any other form of government.

Communism promotes sloth, capitalism promotes freedom and creativity.

not really. Communism is said to have killed somewhere between 50 and 100 million people in the course of the twenieth century. yet, 36 million people died from malnutrition in 2005 when there is enough food to feed the world perhaps twice over. yes, they won't all be from capitalist countries, but that kills more in three years that what communism did in seventy. the Nazis can be held responsible for about 40 million deaths from the war and the holocaust and it took them six years. we kill 36 million people are year and don't even blink. "Death by government" is considered evil because communism was 'unnatural' and therefore none of the death could be justified because no matter what they say- we always think the communists are wrong, but "death by market" is at best the necessary evil of the natural order. There is no clear moral highground from which to judge these people. it is far more difficult and complex than headline figures of death tolls.

???

"We must finish once and for all with the neutrality of chess. We must condemn once and for all the formula "chess for the sake of chess", like the formula "art for art's sake". We must organize shockbrigades of chess-players, and begin immediate realization of a Five-Year Plan for chess."(Nikolai Krylenko, 1930's)

Commies be crazy.

Does calling it "dialectical materialism" make it any more important to "science, culture, philosophy or.....everything"? Materialism is materialism no matter how you modify it.

Well yeah, look at Solyndra. But I gotta wonder how far we have to go to politicize QM or the Big Bang? How do either of those be shown to affect global warming, er, climate change, or the Big Bang?

Well, in the case of Quantum Mechanics and the Big Bang, it affects the question as to whether God exists or not; Communist ideology collapses if god exists because it means there is something beyond their control in the economic plan etc. In the case of climate change, it can be debated as to whether evironmental problems really are environmental problems, or are in fact economic problems due to the mis-allocation of resources. the former would lead to the conclusion that environmental problems are insoluable because of 'human nature', whilst the latter would not and make a case for economic reform. The interpretation of different scientific theories affects what we believe is possible.

 

[ThePainefulTruth]

not really. Communism is said to have killed somewhere between 50 and 100 million people in the course of the twenieth century. yet, 36 million people died from malnutrition in 2005 when there is enough food to feed the world perhaps twice over. yes, they won't all be from capitalist countries, but that kills more in three years that what communism did in seventy.

You need to match starvation with the countries. You'll find they're socialist in some form: communist, or fascist dictatorship/oligarchy. So many people starve because of the country's leadership keeps the food away from them because they're the "enemy", or because the just take it and sell it elsewhere. BTW, a good chunk of those starvation statistics from the 20th Century can be attributed to Stalin's intentional starvation programs--murder by any other name.

Total death by communist governments, not including war dead, is about 100 million, with 180 million total by all governments, mostly the others I mentioned. I don't think the NAZIs killed but about 12 million.

We kill 36 million people are year and don't even blink. "Death by government" is considered evil because communism was 'unnatural' and therefore none of the death could be justified because no matter what they say- we always think the communists are wrong, but "death by market" is at best the necessary evil of the natural order. There is no clear moral highground from which to judge these people. it is far more difficult and complex than headline figures of death tolls.

36 million a year, where, what are you talking about? And where is this "death by market" going on?

Well, in the case of Quantum Mechanics and the Big Bang, it affects the question as to whether God exists or not; Communist ideology collapses if god exists because it means there is something beyond their control in the economic plan etc.

You're not talking about God, God, if It exists, does not interact, ever. You're talking about religion with which governments have been forced to share power going back village chieftains and shamans.

In the case of climate change, it can be debated as to whether evironmental problems really are environmental problems, or are in fact economic problems due to the mis-allocation of resources. the former would lead to the conclusion that environmental problems are insoluable because of 'human nature', whilst the latter would not and make a case for economic reform. The interpretation of different scientific theories affects what we believe is possible.

Environment and pollution are one thing--which the US has gone a long way towards correcting, but the pollution from India,Iran and China makes its way all across the Pacific at times.

Global warming, on the other hand, is totally manufactured (via computer model variables), and is nothing but a ploy to redistribute US wealth, which could be done anywhere that capitalism is adopted. Look at China's phenomenal growth, which is due entirely to their movement to the political/economic right--first and foremost with protection of property rights. China's moving to the right, while Obama and the Democrats (with a lot or Republican help of late) are moving us to the fascist* left.

Fascism--a socialist system whereby the government controls the economy but doesn't own the means of production. Why do you think socialist government want an income tax, when other systems would be much more efficient and produce more government revenue? Because it removes controls whereby they can blackmail corporations (who are willing enough given the business advantages they receive), it keeps the up and coming from diluting the ranks of the elite super rich, and it maintains Big Brother's eyes in all of our lives in conjunction with the War on Drugs.

 

[Lyndon]

What utter garbage!! Fascism is socialism? You don't have a clue what socialism is, socialism feeds the highest percent of it subjects, capitalism by comparison does not do well at feeding its subjects, no matter what you say, or rather make up!!

 

[Augustus]

Global warming, on the other hand, is totally manufactured (via computer model variables)

"Yes, I understand your concern sir, but the truth is that your prolonged drought is simply a computer model variable. Please stop complaining that your cattle are dying, they definitely are not. They just look dead on the computer model. It is simply a socialistic trick to steal all of your money and give it to immigrants. Actually, the socialists probably redistributed your rain to foreigners anyway, that is why they have terrible floods these days."

 

[Laika]

You need to match starvation with the countries. You'll find they're socialist in some form: communist, or fascist dictatorship/oligarchy. So many people starve because of the country's leadership keeps the food away from them because they're the "enemy", or because the just take it and sell it elsewhere. BTW, a good chunk of those starvation statistics from the 20th Century can be attributed to Stalin's intentional starvation programs--murder by any other name.

Total death by communist governments, not including war dead, is about 100 million, with 180 million total by all governments, mostly the others I mentioned. I don't think the NAZIs killed but about 12 million.

Actually, about 1/3 of the total number of deaths under communism can be attributed to Mao's "Great Leap Forward" which lead to a famine and the deaths of 30 million people approximately. Stalins terror-famine in the Ukraine (known as the holomodor) killed about 8 million people. [edit: most of the figures of largely guess work]

36 million a year, where, what are you talking about? And where is this "death by market" going on?

"Malnutrition can be identified as an underlying cause for shortened life.[4] 70% of childhood deaths (age 0-4) are reportedly due to diarrheal illness, acute respiratory infection, malaria and immunizable disease. However, of these childhood deaths, 56% can be attributed to the effects of malnutrition as an underlying cause.[5] The effects of malnutrition include increased susceptibility to infection,[6] musculature wasting, skeletal deformities and neurologic development delays.[7] According to the World Health Organization, malnutrition is named as the biggest contributor to child mortality [8] with 36 million deaths in 2005 related to malnutrition.[9]"

Wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_causes_of_death_by_rate#Malnutrition

I wish I had a better source honestly. but there really isn't a "headline" figure for deaths under capitalism because of problems of defining what capitalism is and the nebulous nature of "intent" which is diffused by the free market. If you want to pick a statistic out of thin air and attribute it to capitalism (nebulously defined as it is), this is where you'd have to start. the same process is at work with communism. Ultimately, the statistics are nonesense as it depends how you define "capitalism" and "communism" and what they can and cannot be held responsible for. My point is, capitalism kills just the same as communism does and means the two are morally eqivilent, regardless of how many they kill respectively. The same "natural laws" were violated on both sides of the Iron curtain.

You're not talking about God, God, if It exists, does not interact, ever. You're talking about religion with which governments have been forced to share power going back village chieftains and shamans.

I find that an extremely bold assertion. If there is a god, to line between natural and supernatural phenemenoa could well be blurred, especially if hypothetical "God X" is omnipresent/omnipotent, etc.

Environment and pollution are one thing--which the US has gone a long way towards correcting, but the pollution from India,Iran and China makes its way all across the Pacific at times.

Global warming, on the other hand, is totally manufactured (via computer model variables), and is nothing but a ploy to redistribute US wealth, which could be done anywhere that capitalism is adopted. Look at China's phenomenal growth, which is due entirely to their movement to the political/economic right--first and foremost with protection of property rights. China's moving to the right, while Obama and the Democrats (with a lot or Republican help of late) are moving us to the fascist* left.

Fascism--a socialist system whereby the government controls the economy but doesn't own the means of production. Why do you think socialist government want an income tax, when other systems would be much more efficient and produce more government revenue? Because it removes controls whereby they can blackmail corporations (who are willing enough given the business advantages they receive), it keeps the up and coming from diluting the ranks of the elite super rich, and it maintains Big Brother's eyes in all of our lives in conjunction with the War on Drugs.

China is still ruled by the communist party and therefore is a communist country. It's economic policy is referred to as "Socialism with Chinese Characteristics", and Deng Xio Peng was denounced by Mao as a "capitalist roader" during the Cultural Revolution (something Mao actually got right).

Communism does not exclude the use of the market economies to achieve their ends, as this happened under Lenin with the "New Economic Policy" (approximately 1922-28), there were periods of relative economic liberalisation under Khruschev with greater emphasis on market mechanisms, and finally there was Gorbachevs attempt at "restructuring" the economy to include co-operatives under Persteriokia. Yugoslavia also had decentralised economic systems based on co-operatives and a market economy.
Nikoli Bukhanin tolds peasants in the USSR to "enrich yourselves" much to the embarassment of the communist party; he was also a proponent of the kind of market socialist economics that may well be going on in China, but was denounced by Stalin (who also supported the New Economic policy) when they formed the "right opposition".

Keep in Mind that Karl Marx was also a supporter of Free Trade because he thought it would destroy capitalism quicker- so communism doesn't fit in a traditional "left-right" political spectrum.

Communists will do anything to build communism including using a market economy to achieve economic growth. The end state of Communism refers to abundance of material goods and the freedom it represents as well as common ownership of the means of production. Sometimes they suspend the goal of common ownership if they think they can grow the economy by private enterprise. So communism refers (at its most basic) to rule by communists. Communist ideology can be re-interpreted in a huge number of different ways.

As the above should indicate, the simplistic right/left political spectrum does not do justice to just how varied the definition of "socialism" is. equating Fascism with Socialism is a product of a Cold War slander, in which National Socialism, Fascism and Communism were considered to be the same. This was done TOTALLY irrespective of the ideologies involved based on the assumption that any form of "socialism" was a dellusion perpetrated by the government to fool the people. Whilst there are similarities in what they did, the "why" of it is completely different. Communists weren't dangerous because they were corrupt; they were dangerous because they were utterly sincere in their beliefs. being corrupt implies you have a capacity for self-preservation.

I'll leave the climate change stuff alone on this one, but I strongly disagree with your view.

 

[ThePainefulTruth]

What utter garbage!!

Thanks for your well thought out assessment.

"Yes, I understand your concern sir, but the truth is that your prolonged drought is simply a computer model variable.

Even the climate crisis mongers have not attempted to link global warming drought. Indians were forced out of this area by a much more severe drought before Columbus. Droughts of one degree or another are occurring all over the world all the time. Anybody, with this media, can claim anything and won't get any serious fact checking. Global warming is also the cause of and increase in hurricanes as well as decreases not to mention ice ages being caused by global warming. They call it climate change so they can double the exploitation of created crises.

Actually, about 1/3 of the total number of deaths under communism can be attributed to Mao's "Great Leap Forward" which lead to a famine and the deaths of 30 million people approximately. Stalins terror-famine in the Ukraine (known as the holomodor) killed about 8 million people. [edit: most of the figures of largely guess work]

China's figures are included in the communist total. Y'know, people here get so exercised because they can't really be made to connect to the liberal propaganda they like to nurse.

"Malnutrition can be identified as an underlying cause for shortened life.[4] 70% of childhood deaths (age 0-4) are reportedly due to diarrheal illness, acute respiratory infection, malaria and immunizable disease. However, of these childhood deaths, 56% can be attributed to the effects of malnutrition as an underlying cause.[5] The effects of malnutrition include increased susceptibility to infection,[6] musculature wasting, skeletal deformities and neurologic development delays.[7] According to the World Health Organization, malnutrition is named as the biggest contributor to child mortality [8] with 36 million deaths in 2005 related to malnutrition.[9]"

Wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_causes_of_death_by_rate#Malnutrition

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_causes_of_death_by_rate#Malnutrition

I don't dispute those figures, they fit with what I said.

I wish I had a better source honestly. but there really isn't a "headline" figure for deaths under capitalism because of problems of defining what capitalism is and the nebulous nature of "intent" which is diffused by the free market.

Yet you make the accusation. There's not even any anecdotal stories I can think of. And they even talk about hunger here in the US which is total BS except for parent abuse or sloth. Look at Lyndon's and Augustus' totally unfounded arguments they feel the need to repeat to justify "their side".

If you want to pick a statistic out of thin air and attribute it to capitalism (nebulously defined as it is), this is where you'd have to start. the same process is at work with communism. Ultimately, the statistics are nonesense as it depends how you define "capitalism" and "communism" and what they can and cannot be held responsible for. My point is, capitalism kills just the same as communism does and means the two are morally eqivilent, regardless of how many they kill respectively. The same "natural laws" were violated on both sides of the Iron curtain.

Capitalism does require a government administered rule of law. A lot of anarchy is termed "capitalism", even though anarchists are hard to differentiate when rioting against capitalist entities like the G-7 or whatever the number is now. But socialism is its own rule of law, its own watchdog. That never works. except for the elite.

I find that an extremely bold assertion. If there is a god, to line between natural and supernatural phenemenoa could well be blurred, especially if hypothetical "God X" is omnipresent/omnipotent, etc.

The question isn't omnipotence, it's divine intervention, including especially revelation, for which there is no evidence, throughout history, except for the hearsay of "God's prophets" who are all human and fallible.

China is still ruled by the communist party and therefore is a communist country. It's economic policy is referred to as "Socialism with Chinese Characteristics", and Deng Xio Peng was denounced by Mao as a "capitalist roader" during the Cultural Revolution (something Mao actually got right).

Yet there's legal private property protection and a stock market! Some communism, no matter their protestations. No, we're still much freer here, but we're moving in opposite directions in that regard.

Communism does not exclude the use of the market economies to achieve their ends, as this happened under Lenin with the "New Economic Policy" (approximately 1922-28), there were periods of relative economic liberalisation under Khruschev with greater emphasis on market mechanisms, and finally there was Gorbachevs attempt at "restructuring" the economy to include co-operatives under Persteriokia. Yugoslavia also had decentralised economic systems based on co-operatives and a market economy.

Departing communist principles for expediency is an admission of the failure of communism, which is government ownership. Vietnam is doing the same thing. And as capitalism grows, individual freedom increases in tandem--slowly, but it's there. As a refresher, here's Marx's and Engles' 10 points necessary for a communist government.

1. 
   
   • Eliiminate private land ownership and rent as applied to public property.
   • Institute a heavy progressive or graduated income tax.
   • Abolish the right of inheritance.
   • Confiscate all properties owned by emigrants and rebels.
   • Establish a national bank where all money and loans are owned by the federal government and constitute a monopoly.
   • Nationally centralize the control of communication and transportation by the federal government.
   • Place ownership of factories and "instruments of production" in the hands of the federal government, cultivate the wastelands, improve the soil thereof according to a formed plan.
   • Everyone will be liable to work and labor. Industrial and agricultural armies will be formed, especially in agriculture.
   • Combine agriculture and manufacturing, eliminate the soverienty of town/state and federal government by distributing the population more evenly over the face of the country.
2. Free public education for all children, the elimination of children performing factory work, and combine education and manufacturing.

Yeah, free indoctrination. We certainly know about that. To each according to his need, from each according to his ability. He left it to American democrats to found the principle of political correctness. What "politics" is that d'ya think.

Keep in Mind that Karl Marx was also a supporter of Free Trade because he thought it would destroy capitalism quicker- so communism doesn't fit in a traditional "left-right" political spectrum.

How can there be free trade if nobody owns anything. Free trade meant between communist governments and other countries.

Communists will do anything to build communism including using a market economy to achieve economic growth.

I'm repeating myself, but if they do anything that isn't communistic, then it isn't communistic--by definition.

The end state of Communism refers to abundance of material goods and the freedom it represents as well as common ownership of the means of production.

Yeah, "the end state" indeed. Utopia.

Sometimes they suspend the goal of common ownership if they think they can grow the economy by private enterprise. So communism refers (at its most basic) to rule by communists.
Communist ideology can be re-interpreted in a huge number of different ways.

In philosophy they call it rationalization. I call it lying to yourself.

I'll leave the climate change stuff alone on this one, but I strongly disagree with your view.

Because the climate criers have no foundation, at least for human caused "climate change"

 

[Lyndon]

More dribble. Socialist countries like Sweden provide the most equal basic services, food, place to live etc, for ALL of its citizens, unregulated capitalism provides the greatest inequality, and for the one hundredth time socialism has nothing to do with communism. Get used to it and stop spreading lies.

 

[Laika]

Yet you make the accusation.

A human failing in defence of false pride.

Departing communist principles for expediency is an admission of the failure of communism, which is government ownership.

Communists don't have principles held in abstraction from their actions; they believe in the unity of theory and practice. There ethics are expediency and their willingness to experiment with any approach is considered 'scientific'. Communism is not held to a utopian goal invented in the mind of men, but the product of natural laws. from their perspective, they are realising the laws of nature/history, and their cruelty and brutality is a means of accelerating the path to communism. They'll take the "slow" route by market too if it suits their purposes.

 

[ThePainefulTruth]

A human failing in defence of false pride.

Communists don't have principles held in abstraction from their actions; they believe in the unity of theory and practice. There ethics are expediency and their willingness to experiment with any approach is considered 'scientific'. Communism is not held to a utopian goal invented in the mind of men, but the product of natural laws. from their perspective, they are realising the laws of nature/history, and their cruelty and brutality is a means of accelerating the path to communism. They'll take the "slow" route by market too if it suits their purposes.

IOW, the only difference between communism and Islam is what you're submitting your selfhood to--the state or Sharia. In either system, freedom is only an abstract obstacle to the victory of group-think.

 

[Laika]

IOW, the only difference between communism and Islam is what you're submitting your selfhood to--the state or Sharia. In either system, freedom is only an abstract obstacle to the victory of group-think.

Can you explain to me how you can equate Communism and Islam?

 

[ThePainefulTruth]

Can you explain to me how you can equate Communism and Islam?

Submission of self to the socialist state or the theocratic state. Islam means submission, and they both require submitting the self at the cost of your freedom and sense of self-worth and identity. Of course both also have their elites to whom the rules don't apply. Power is what it's all about, and control is maintained via the source of that control, the legal/moral double standard.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

To answer the OP:

None that any human could present to me at the present state of scientific advancement.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

What utter garbage!! Fascism is socialism? You don't have a clue what socialism is, socialism feeds the highest percent of it subjects, capitalism by comparison does not do well at feeding its subjects, no matter what you say, or rather make up!!

Yeah, and Fascism is not left-wing, either. Lol. As well as "communist state" being an oxymoron. If it's communist, there is no state.

 

[ThePainefulTruth]

To answer the OP:

None that any human could present to me at the present state of scientific advancement.

There is something science is very close to doing, finding Jesus' bones.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

There is something science is very close to doing, finding Jesus' bones.

Yeah, no it isn't.

 

[ThePainefulTruth]

Yeah, and Fascism is not left-wing, either. Lol. As well as "communist state" being an oxymoron. If it's communist, there is no state.

National socialism (government control of business) is left-wing and socialism by definition. And communism must pass through the state to get to the stateless utopia. And for that to happen, 100% of us must stop being evil and lusting after power. Good luck with that, by our nature, it will ALWAYS break down. God descending to rule the Earth is more likely.

 

[ThePainefulTruth]

Yeah, no it isn't.

Whatever.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

National socialism (government control of business) is left-wing and socialism by definition.

Not this garbage again. They called themselves that to appeal to the working class and to try to get people from the leftist parties to join. But they weren't actually socialists. They had the leaders of the more socialist faction killed during the Night of the Long Knives.

In practice, the Nazi government had a quite cozy relationship with big business (Krupp, IG Farben, IBM, etc.) and they massively looted the areas they occupied and used extensive slave labor. None of that has anything to do with socialism. In fact, Nazism actually doesn't have a defined economic theory. Hitler really didn't care, as long as things got done. He was pragmatist, not a theorist or an idealist.
http://shoqvalue.com/the-nazis-were-leftists-lie

Italian Fascism had corporatism which was a way for the Fascists to bring about class collaboration, in their thinking. Basically, industry and workers would form trade unions/corporations to settle disputes and this was to be overseen by the government. But that's not socialism, either. It's still capitalism.

Also, socialism is not government control of business. It's worker control of the means of production. In other words, it's a form of direct democracy where workplaces are democratically managed by worker-owners.

And communism must pass through the state to get to the stateless utopia.

That's Marxist theory. Not all communists are Marxists and communism existed before Marx. Marxism is just a theory about how communism could come to pass. I'm an anarcho-communist but not a Marxist. Marxism was wrong about a number of things and is outdated.

 

[ThePainefulTruth]

Not this garbage again. They called themselves that to appeal to the working class and to try to get people from the leftist parties to join. But they weren't actually socialists. They had the leaders of the more socialist faction killed during the Night of the Long Knives.

So what. There could be 20 local Nazi parties and every leader would want to be the king Nazi. And if abiding by the definition of socialism, in this case that government controls business, is garbage, then you just don't like it cause Hitler is so universally hated. You can't call yourself National Socialists and then have nothing socialist to point to.

In practice, the Nazi government had a quite cozy relationship with big business (Krupp, IG Farben, IBM, etc.) and they massively looted the areas they occupied and used extensive slave labor. None of that has anything to do with socialism.

If it's the government enslaving people, it is socialism, whether it communism or fascism. Take a look at the Chicoms or Vietnam, N. Korea, Cambodia...... Or is communism not socialism.

In fact, Nazism actually doesn't have a defined economic theory. Hitler really didn't care, as long as things got done. He was pragmatist, not a theorist or an idealist.
http://shoqvalue.com/the-nazis-were-leftists-lie

So what, it's what he did. In fact, the US is well on the highway to fascist hell right now. And as with Germany, businesses here aren't going to turn down corporate welfare, especially when it comes with favorable legislation.

Italian Fascism had corporatism which was a way for the Fascists to bring about class collaboration, in their thinking. Basically, industry and workers would form trade unions/corporations to settle disputes and this was to be overseen by the government. But that's not socialism, either. It's still capitalism.

Also, socialism is not government control of business. It's worker control of the means of production. In other words, it's a form of direct democracy where workplaces are democratically managed by worker-owners.

That's Marxist theory. Not all communists are Marxists and communism existed before Marx. Marxism is just a theory about how communism could come to pass. I'm an anarcho-communist but not a Marxist. Marxism was wrong about a number of things and is outdated.

It isn't capitalism if the government is calling the shots, including micromanaging every facet of business. It's national socialism.

The greatest victory of communism, was that it forced the west to adopt the methods of mass indoctorination against their own population, thereby betraying the very principles of free thought on which it was built. Sadly my freind, you are repeating gutter propaganda,

You repeat essentially what I've said (though we did it on our own), then call it gutter propaganda, and double down when you criticize my thought processes. And it's so easy to say that "you are the only person who can give up your freedom". A few thousand lost establishing a government with an equal rule of law for all is much better than individuals not giving up their freedom on the way to the gulag or the gallows, for years or decades.