PDA

View Full Version : Why I stopped being a Communist & Why I became a Commie again



Social-Nationalist
Friday, September 10th, 2004, 01:15 PM
I deleted this message because I did not like how I worded some things, and I will rewrite it later.

walfiler
Friday, September 10th, 2004, 01:29 PM
Money is just a tool of force. The bolshevik jews didn't need it. But they took it back when the communism died.

Milesian
Friday, September 10th, 2004, 01:50 PM
Judeo-Communism and Judeo-Capitalism are flip-sides of the same materalistic, spiritually bankrupt coin.

Social-Nationalist
Friday, September 10th, 2004, 01:58 PM
Yes, Judeo-Communism and Judeo-Capitalism are flipsides of the same coin.

walfiler
Friday, September 10th, 2004, 02:08 PM
Communism is as good as capitalism in taking adventage of the people.

Bestio
Friday, September 10th, 2004, 02:20 PM
I became a communist again, when I learned that many Jews are capitalists
Seems to me you're wanderin' between anti-white systems , first communism , the capitalism , now red again ; how about turning to the greens?are there any jews over there too?:D


I realised through my own thinking that the reason for the collapse of many communist regimes and the continuing failure of the few remaining communist regimes still in power through defeat by capitalism, is due to the industrialist and internationalist nature of the communism of all of those countries,it failed , in my opinion because none system can survive where only a small amount of people work (those in the gulags...) , while the great majority are passive , work as less as possible and bureaucrats are parasites.

[B]
And the agrarian communism of Pol Pot's Khmer Rouge would have establish real autarky that would have solved all the problems of human existance, such as war, poverty, and crime. So this cancels out reason # 4.and this sound a christian-progressive thought , pure utopic ideals , like that of multiculturalist jews intellectuals who teach us we're all the same and we can get along with everyone...http://www.politicaonline.net/forum/images/smile/rolleyes.gif

Social-Nationalist
Friday, September 10th, 2004, 02:43 PM
Seems to me you're wanderin' between anti-white systems , first communism , the capitalism , now red again ; how about turning to the greens?are there any jews over there too?:D
1. I was never a capitalist. I was quite apolitical.
2. It is multiculturalism and racial interbreeding and jewry are bad for the white race, not capitalism or communism per se, though multiculturalism and racial interbreeding do occur in communist regimes (on the other hand, it has been fought against and detested in other communist regimes).

Social-Nationalist
Friday, September 10th, 2004, 02:55 PM
it failed , in my opinion because none system can survive where only a small amount of people work (those in the gulags...) , while the great majority are passive , work as less as possible and bureaucrats are parasites.
I agree that no system can survive in such situation, but this is not what caused the fall of soviet union, and this was not the case and is not the case in many communist regimes. The fall of the Soviet Union was caused by revisionism and the gradual restoration of capitalism after the death of stalin starting in the khrushchov era. bureacracy was a major problem in the former soviet union as well, but abolishing bureacracy is a contradictatory process, i.e., it can only be abolished through it, it cannot be solved through police methods, and the task of liquidating bureacrats was taken up by Mr. Stalin but the corrupting influence of the new judeo-bourgeoisie eventually won culminating in the death of stailn in 1953 through the use of poison.
another key problem is the parasitic lifestyle of all the city dwellers and the resulting conflict between the city dwellers and rural workers; this is why I am against industrialisation and industrialisation is the key problem both in socialist and in capitalist regimes, and is actually a poison of capitalism.

and this sound a christian-progressive thought , pure utopic ideals , like that of multiculturalist jews intellectuals who teach us we're all the same and we can get along with everyone...
I do not understand this sentence. Please rephrase it. Thank you.

Bestio
Friday, September 10th, 2004, 03:03 PM
1. I was never a capitalist. I was quite apolitical.OK :)


2. It is multiculturalism and racial interbreeding and jewry are bad for the white race, not capitalism or communism per sewell , I don't think so , in my opinion the end-game of capitalists is to treat man , women and children as objects , move'em wherever they need , like immigrant workers for instance , that's why they sponsor multiculturalism and mass immigration , capitalists don't give racial diversity its right value , they don't give US what we deserve , as whites.
White , mestizos , and jew capitalists allied together in order to support totally free movement of people (immigrants) around the world , so as to destroy our civilization , they allied together to support free movement of money too , so as to destroy our nations , capitalists aren't elected by anyone , they corrupt politicians to make more and more (individula) profits , our interests , as whites , westerners are hurt by their behaviour , no matter wether a capitalist is a jew or a white.

On the other side communism is bad to us because it steal the souls of people , treat humans like objects (exactly like capitalists) , like numbers to move wherever the STATE need , whites can't survive in a communist state , they start to lose love for life , love for work , http://www.politicaonline.net/forum/images/smile/mad.gif , they deserve FREEDOM.

That's my opinion.

Social-Nationalist
Friday, September 10th, 2004, 03:10 PM
OK :)
well , I don't think so , in my opinion the end-game of capitalists is to treat man , women and children as objects , move'em wherever they need , like immigrant workers for instance , that's why they sponsor multiculturalism and mass immigration , capitalists don't give racial diversity its right value , they don't give US what we deserve , as whites.
White , mestizos , and jew capitalists allied together in order to support totally free movement of people (immigrants) around the world , so as to destroy our civilization , they allied together to support free movement of money too , so as to destroy our nations , capitalists aren't elected by anyone , they corrupt politicians to make more and more (individula) profits , our interests , as whites , westerners are hurt by their behaviour , no matter wether a capitalist is a jew or a white.
No, capitalism is motivated by one thing: profit. All of that is but a byproduct of the drive for profit, and may not even exist under capitalism, and has not existed under capitalism at times.

On the other side communism is bad to us because it steal the souls of people , treat humans like objects (exactly like capitalists) , like numbers to move wherever the STATE need , whites can't survive in a communist state , they start to lose love for life , love for work , http://www.politicaonline.net/forum/images/smile/mad.gif , they deserve FREEDOM.
How does it do any of this? Please be explicit. Always make an efford to substantaite. Thank you.

Bestio
Friday, September 10th, 2004, 03:13 PM
and this sound a christian-progressive thought , pure utopic ideals , like that of multiculturalist jews intellectuals who teach us we're all the same and we can get along with everyone...

I do not understand this sentence. Please rephrase it. Thank you.I was meaning that we are humans , not Gods , we'll never quit to make war , to feel hatred for someone , we'll never give up kill other humans , period.

Christians believe that when Jesus will come back again , this world will be cleared of all evils , in the same way communist believe (believed , now) that in a communist society all classes would have lived in peace together , with no violence.

Now , liberals are tellin'g us that a multicultural world is better than a homogenous nation , they're saying races can living all together in peace.

To me , all these 3 are pure utopies , the reality are different the way they told us , but they don't accept it , they keep deceive us.

Bestio
Friday, September 10th, 2004, 03:23 PM
No, capitalism is motivated by one thing: profit. All of that is but a byproduct of the drive for profit, and may not even exist under capitalism, and has not existed under capitalism at times.Yes!
Capitalism looks for the profit , it doesn't care at all about race!
therefore capitalism is a enemy to us whites , in California agrobusiness joined liberals , democratic and jews to sponsor mass immigration fro Mexico , why?
because of cheap labour , then they're fillin up California with milions of millions of mestizos , they took profit but lost race.:(

[B]
How does it do any of this? Please be explicit. Always make an efford to substantaite. Thank you.Ever wondered why so many millions people escaped from Cuba , North Korea and Eastern Europe communist states?
Moreover I've talked to people who lived under communist regimes , and they told me intersting things , evrey condo had its spies , one couldn't even say what he thought because of the fear to end in jail , there were queues to buy a small amount od food . . .
I'm not inventing.

Social-Nationalist
Friday, September 10th, 2004, 03:32 PM
I was meaning that we are humans , not Gods ,
I agree.

we'll never quit to make war ,
War is a byproduct of the drive for profit, is largely economically motivated; war is also a most destructive form of punishment. with the abolishment of profit-based system and with the abolishment of punishment, which is unnatural and destructive to the race in the long run, war would be far less likely to occur, but I will not rule out the possibility that it could occur nevertheless.

to feel hatred for someone ,
The masses only feel hatred for those who are antagonistic towards them, the city-dwellers, the bureacrats, the bosses, the bourgeoisie, the intellectuals, the jews, the criminals, etc. etc. etc. - with the liquidation of those who antagonise the masses, I say, hatred would be far less likely to occur. I am absolutely not against the hatred of enemies, and the masses are always right in their hatred and it must be encouraged, since far from being divisive, hatred tends to unite, and unity is the most sacred of all things society can strive for.

we'll never give up kill other humans , period.
who said otherwise?
Anyway, this, and a lot of what you said besides, does not follow from the premise 'man is not God'. please explicate the intermediate stages involved in the process of your concluding that such things are impossible.

Christians believe that when Jesus will come back again , this world will be cleared of all evils , in the same way communist believe (believed , now) that in a communist society all classes would have lived in peace together , with no violence.
This is absolutely not a belief of communists, since communists call for the abolishment of private property for resolving class antagonisms, and it is stated and proved in for example State and Revolution that class antagonisms are irreconcilable and can only be resolved therefore by liquidating the enemy class as a class (and according to me, as physical entities as well); thus in a communist society classes do not exist, and the belief that 'all classes would live in peace together' is contrary to communist thought.

communism is not utopian in the slightest, and your attack on communism is a patent strawman.

Bestio
Friday, September 10th, 2004, 03:41 PM
communism is not utopian in the slightest, and your attack on communism is a patent strawman.why didn't you answered this too ;) ?


Ever wondered why so many millions people escaped from Cuba , North Korea and Eastern Europe communist states?Next time you'll give up being commie again give me a call http://www.politicaonline.net/forum/images/smile/lol.gif

(and he called ME a strawman!http://www.politicaonline.net/forum/images/smile/eek.gif)

Social-Nationalist
Friday, September 10th, 2004, 03:42 PM
Yes!
Capitalism looks for the profit , it doesn't care at all about race!
therefore capitalism is a enemy to us whites , in California agrobusiness joined liberals , democratic and jews to sponsor mass immigration fro Mexico , why?
because of cheap labour , then they're fillin up California with milions of millions of mestizos , they took profit but lost race.:(
I agree with you entirely. I was only saying that it must be owned that the only drive of the capitalist is profit, not so much hidden agendas, and this drive has such intolerable byproducts as you describe.

Ever wondered why so many millions people escaped from Cuba , North Korea and Eastern Europe communist states?
Wrong. 600 people have left the DPRK since the end of the korean war over 50 years ago, and this is hardly any at all. Many were bribed by the U.S. to leave, paid 30,000 dollars, according to the U.S. government herself, although it was on inconspicuous terms.

Moreover I've talked to people who lived under communist regimes , and they told me intersting things , evrey condo had its spies , one couldn't even say what he thought because of the fear to end in jail , there were queues to buy a small amount od food . . .
This is an absurdity. I used to be in the communist movement. I know dozens of communists and their families who live or have lived in socialist countries who would protest the contrary.

Bestio
Friday, September 10th, 2004, 03:49 PM
I agree with you entirely. I was only saying that it must be owned that the only drive of the only drive of the capitalist as a capitalist is profit, not necessarily a hidden agenda, and this drive has such intolerable byproducts as you describe.Ok , at least on this subject we think the same thing.


Wrong. 600 people have left the DPRK since the end of the korean war over 50 years ago, and this is hardly any at all. Many were bribed by the U.S. to leave, paid 30,000 dollars, according to the U.S. government herself, although it was on inconspicuous terms.Well , you know , it wasn't so easy to leave a communist country , even vacations abroad weren't permitted , athletes took the chance to expatriate during olympic games . . .

Social-Nationalist
Friday, September 10th, 2004, 04:01 PM
Ok , at least on this subject we think the same thing.
Well , you know , it wasn't so easy to leave a communist country , even vacations abroad weren't permitted , athletes took the chance to expatriate during olympic games . . .
There is no evidence whatsoever that it is not permitted, but even if it is not permitted, it must be borne in mind that the north Koreans (and the south Koreans but to a far lesser extent) are racial nationalists, and they are prone to act accordingly.

?The following happened when Kim Jong Il was a student at Kim Il Sung University, One autumn day in 1960, during a lecture on Korean history, there was an argument on whether or not Koreans overseas could be considered a part of the Korean nation, since the Marxist-Leninist classics said that only when the foregoing conditions - common language, territory, economic life and psychology manifested in culture - were met could the people constitute a nation.

? In those days, scholars who dogmatically accepted the existing theories held that the Korean nation had been formed either in the 18th century when Korea was in the initial stage of capitalist development or in the period of Japanese imperialist colonial rule or even after liberation on August 15, 1945. Kim Jong Il criticized their dogmatic view based on the Marxist-Leninist Classics and said that the basic indexes of a nation are homogeneity of bloodline, a common language and a common territory; in particular, that bloodline and language are the most important in defining a nation, and that a nation is a solid group of people who are united with homogeneity of bloodline, language and territory.

?He went on to say that Korean nation has long lived in one territory, inheriting the same bloodline and speaking the same language, and it is a nation with a history of 5,000 years and with a splendid culture, and that expatriates, too, belong to Korean nation. A nation is a cohesive group of people that was formed historically and the largest unit of social life. A nation is not formed or broken up easily by a change in the social system. The formation of a nation conditions the appearance of social classes and strata. Even in a classless society the nation still exists. If one's bloodline and language are same, one belongs to one and the same nation, even though one's ideology, ideals and territory are different. This is his outlook on the nation.

?Our nation is a homogeneous nation descended from Tangun that has inherited only one bloodline for 5,000 years. Such a phenomenon is rare in the world. Homogeneity of bloodline is the most important characteristic of a nation. If we regard a common economic life as the main mark of a nation as held by previous theories, our fellow countrymen who live under the different economic systems of north and south Korea should be divided into a "bourgeois nation" and a "socialist nation", and several million Korean expatriates could not be regarded as part of our nation. Viewed from this angle, Kim Jong Il is the benefactor who has identified all the people in the north and south and the several million expatriates as belonging to one and the same nation. Language is another important factor defining a nation. Of the several factors defining a nation, territory and culture may be altered, but the homogeneity of bloodline and a common language cannot be changed. Since the people of north and south Korea have inherited the same bloodline and speak the same language, even though they have lived in different territories and under different economic conditions for more than 50 years since the country's division, they have a feeling of affinity and friendship. A common territory is not the same as the territory ruled by State power.

?The territorial definition of a nation means the land where fellow countrymen of the same bloodline and speaking one language have lived their lives from generation to generation. The territory of a national community might be occupied by foreign forces, but it cannot be lost; even a subject nation cannot abandon the land where their forefathers have lived.

?The main territory of Koreans is the land of 3,000 ri (One ri is 400 metres) where they have lived for 5,000 years. (5,000-ri means the total length of Korea's territory.) This land remained our nation's home in the 41-year period of Japanese colonial rule and cannot be land owned by Americans because they have occupied the southern part of our country for half a century. It is our nation's living space and nest today and will be forever in the future as in the past.

?A common culture needs to be viewed by taking bloodline and language as the common features. This is because the character, mentality and consciousness of a nation are unthinkable apart from communities based on blood and language.

?As seen above, Kim Jong Il's definition of a nation based on one's blood and language is correct and scientific. Kim Jong Il gave a wise answer to the question of our nation's formation. Criticizing the dogmatic view which fixed the time of the formation of our nation to the development of capitalism, he said: "Our people is a homogeneous nation who have inherited one bloodline, language and culture in one territory from olden times, and it is a wise nation with 5,000 years of history, a brilliant culture and splendid traditions." The question of a nation's founding is a basic one for the theory of the nation and is the starting point to systematize a nation's history.

?The Korean nation was not formed in modern society in the course of capitalist development. Our compatriots long lived in one territory having one blood, language and culture, and in the course of history they became a single nation. The beginnings of the nation's formation can be seen in clan society. With the emergence of the state, the clan became a special group settling in a certain region. In due course, this developed into a nation. This is a brief summary of his view on the formation of our nation. His Juche-oriented view of the features of our nation and of its formation presents a compass for people who were in the past obsessed with flunkyism and dogmatism to use their own brains and think independently about national questions.?

(Full Embodiment of National Independence - from Guiding Light General Kim Jong Il, Foreign languages Publishing House, Pyongyang, DPRK, 1997)

Nehaj
Friday, September 10th, 2004, 05:29 PM
I am not a communist, nor do I lament its passing away. But do consider the following statement for a moment:


In 1986 the Chinese Communist Party had 44 million members in 2.6 million local party branches. This meant that about 8 percent of China's adult population belonged to the party. or:


As the purges drew to a close by 1938, party membership [in USSR] had declined to 1,920,000.

Chinese figures keep inflating, but that can perhaps be discussed in another thread :D.



Communist party is an exclusive club. You are not born a communist. You are not made one at the ripe age of 7 days old. You do not buy a membership for $5.00 and become one.

Communism is not intended for everyone. It is difficult to grasp. It is a lifestyle reserved for the best: like a Brahmin, or a Spartan. If you are so bothered by the name communist, think of Plato's guardians.

Sadly, most of these so-called experts on communism are either a) those that never lived in a communist country, but are citizens of the 'enemy' states/followers of 'unfriendly' ideologies, or b) those who lived in a communist country, but were deemed not fit to become members of the party.

Now, when it comes to the role played by people of Jewish faith/race, well, this should better be left for another thread, too. Suffice to say, if you believe a Jewsih rabbi to be a god, The Son of The (Only) God, and have no problems with having the Old Testament comprise 90% of your 'Correct living' manual, 'justifying' Marx and Lenin shall be a breeze.

Anyhow, say communism failed. Miserably even. Say it was harmful, cruel, worthless piece of crap. A jewish conspiracy. All the worst things you can possibly of.

But keep one thing in mind: you can be a demorcrat one day, and a republican the next. A protestant in the morning and a catholic in the afternoon, but in all likelihood, you do not have what it takes to be chosen a communist.:rotfl

Milesian
Friday, September 10th, 2004, 06:03 PM
Now, when it comes to the role played by people of Jewish faith/race, well, this should better be left for another thread, too. Suffice to say, if you believe a Jewsih rabbi to be a god, The Son of The (Only) God, and have no problems with having the Old Testament comprise 90% of your 'Correct living' manual, 'justifying' Marx and Lenin shall be a breeze.

Kindly elaborate please :)


Anyhow, say communism failed. Miserably even. Say it was harmful, cruel, worthless piece of crap.

It did and it was. Reality attests to that ;)


But keep one thing in mind: you can be a demorcrat one day, and a republican the next. A protestant in the morning and a catholic in the afternoon, but in all likelihood, you do not have what it takes to be chosen a communist.:rotfl



True, I'm not gullible enough to allow myself to be chosen to be a Communist. I leave that for the those who are easily mesmerised by seductive, fancy-sounding arguments and catchy mantras.

Smash the Fascists! Mobilise now;) :D

Social-Nationalist
Friday, September 10th, 2004, 06:46 PM
Anyhow, say communism failed. Miserably even. Say it was harmful, cruel, worthless piece of crap.


Absurd.

First, you will do well to know what communism is. Communism is that stage of the development of society following socialism and preceding capitalism, and there is also 'primitive communism' which preceded ancient slave society, both characterised by the absence of private property and therewith class distinction and the state. It has never even been attempted, except in savage tribes. Now, the state is basically an instrument of repression whereby the ruling class (in capitalist society, the bourgeousie) remains economically dominant: it is the product and manifestation of conflict between classes, and without the existence of classes the state is superfluous and withers away of itself. Hence, there has not been a "communist country". For the world revolutionary process needs to reach a point at which the system of global capitalism has disintegrated; at which point global capitalism is replaced with global socialism. Global capitalism, however, continued to exists, and with it also antagonistic class contradictions. There were still two opposed classes in the world: the proletarian class and the bourgeois class.

'Communism' has not failed. It has not been put into practise, and no so-called 'communist state' has ever even claimed to be communist. Yes, it is true, socialism has suffered a defeat, but so what of it? To say put the blame entirely on socialism (or 'communism' as you so ignorantly put it) for the fall of socialist countries is a patent oversimplification.

Nehaj
Friday, September 10th, 2004, 06:59 PM
Kindly elaborate please For example. It is not necessary to discuss the negative traits commonly associated with Jews. But no matter how much one despises them, one cannot deny their strengths. Their ability to infiltrate and manipulate any society or organization is uncanny.

Parasitic symbiont's relationship with a host, however, is a complex one. And believe it or not, the host is not the only one that is affected and has to change. Nor is the union exclusively harmful to the host.


It did and it was. Reality attests to that Yes, but you are missing the point.



True, I'm not gullible enough to allow myself to be chosen to be a Communist. I leave that for the those who are easily mesmerised by seductive, fancy-sounding arguments and catchy mantras Well, I was being a prick, and it serves me right. What I was trying to say is, and please help me and stretch your imagination: You can think Catolicism to be the best thing since the sliced bread, or you can think it the worst abomination to ever rear its ugly head upon the face of this planet. But whatever you think of it, the fact remains: it is not easy becoming a bishop or a pope. Or, better still, a member of the Jezuit order.

Communist party is an order, a caste, if you wish. In its first reincarnation (so to speak), and on the European soil, it did not fare very well. Also, chances are, it will never raise to prominence again.

Anyhow, I was only trying to point out the people who bash communism are likely no different from people who proclaim Jesus to be a Jewish rabbi etc., in their effort to discredit Christianity. O Ye of Little Faith crowd, if you know what I mean.

Dr. Solar Wolff
Saturday, September 11th, 2004, 06:54 AM
This is an outstanding thread. I only wish it were required reading in Ameircan schools. I am going to try to go back and give everyone involved rep points.

Prince Eugen
Saturday, September 11th, 2004, 09:55 PM
I'm anticommunist but i hate capitalism more.Ex communists countries had strong state ,strong military and it was more patriotic than capitalists are!They don't tolerate with homosexuality like our democratic sociates!
I believe that internationalism and pacifism was only for export to make more weak the ''western'' sociaties!
And as Alain deBenoit (the founder of New Right) wrote:I prefer to wear a Red's Army uniform than to eat harmburgers at Bruklin!
A communist with nationalistic ideas is more possible to become N.S than a democrat bourgeour with some ''patriotic'' ideas!

Abby Normal
Sunday, September 12th, 2004, 06:14 AM
I eagerly anticipate commenting upon Ix's rewording of his original post. Intriguing, as always!

Nonkonformist
Sunday, September 12th, 2004, 12:51 PM
The topic is a good point to show, what mass hypnosis, mind control and information gaps in human brains can do!

If there´s no ego-boost any more, it all will lead to self-deception.

Milesian
Sunday, September 12th, 2004, 08:45 PM
For example. It is not necessary to discuss the negative traits commonly associated with Jews. But no matter how much one despises them, one cannot deny their strengths. Their ability to infiltrate and manipulate any society or organization is uncanny.

Without a doubt. That such a small ethnic group has had such an incredible impact (for better or worse) on the world and has seemingly be able time and again to aquire power and wealth far out of proportion to their numbers, certainly speaks of something quite extrordinary. Whether they have achieved all this on their own efforts is debatable though



Yes, but you are missing the point.

Yes perhaps. Still valid though ;)



Well, I was being a prick, and it serves me right. What I was trying to say is, and please help me and stretch your imagination: You can think Catolicism to be the best thing since the sliced bread, or you can think it the worst abomination to ever rear its ugly head upon the face of this planet. But whatever you think of it, the fact remains: it is not easy becoming a bishop or a pope. Or, better still, a member of the Jezuit order.

Hmmm...I thought your point was to say that it was easy to become a Catholic or Protestant or whatever, but it takes a special type of person to choose to be a Communist? Perhaps I got the wrong end of the stick.
I don't think it is necessarily true though. It's quite easy to choose to be just about anything, Choosing the correct path for the correct reasons though is something that eludes most people :)


Communist party is an order, a caste, if you wish. In its first reincarnation (so to speak), and on the European soil, it did not fare very well. Also, chances are, it will never raise to prominence again.

Judging by how feminism, Political Correctness, etc has so thoroughly pervaded western society then I'm not sure that Communism and it's associated ideologies faired so badly after all. Sometimes I wonder if perhaps it was Communism that covertly won the Cold War after all (if there was ever truly such a thing anyway :) )
Ultimately though, the outcome was boringly predictable. One materialistic ideology verses another. The winner was materialism. No suprise there.


Anyhow, I was only trying to point out the people who bash communism are likely no different from people who proclaim Jesus to be a Jewish rabbi etc., in their effort to discredit Christianity. O Ye of Little Faith crowd, if you know what I mean.

Well, once upon a time the right of the political spectrum was largely the domain of reactionaries, conservatives and traditionalists who were usually supportive of Christianity (of whatever persuasion or denomination), but these days it's adherents are likely to be even more hostile to it than the clergy-hating Reds of old :| . In this now, the extreme left and extreme right both have much in common. Much to the delight of the group formerly known as "The Chosen", I'm sure :D

Abby Normal
Monday, September 13th, 2004, 01:03 AM
Judeo-Communism and Judeo-Capitalism are flip-sides of the same materalistic, spiritually bankrupt coin.Ad hominem attacks against the inventors or advocates of an ideology may be correct in suspecting their motives for promoting the ideology, yet they do nothing towards invalidating the ideology itself. When one compares the tenets of Communism and Capitalism with the conventional notions of what the 'Jewish worldview' consists of, it becomes clear that Communism, as a concept, is not in the least 'Jewish', yet the same cannot be said for Capitalism -- after all, any neo-Nazi worth his salt can tell you that Jewish communities typically thrive in individualistic societies in which each person may pursue his or her own selfish agenda. (The fact that Marx was Jewish yet Smith was not simply serves as an ironic side-note ;) ).

Dr. Solar Wolff
Monday, September 13th, 2004, 04:33 AM
Ad hominem attacks against the inventors or advocates of an ideology may be correct in suspecting their motives for promoting the ideology, yet they do nothing towards invalidating the ideology itself. When one compares the tenets of Communism and Capitalism with the conventional notions of what the 'Jewish worldview' consists of, it becomes clear that Communism, as a concept, is not in the least 'Jewish', yet the same cannot be said for Capitalism -- after all, any neo-Nazi worth his salt can tell you that Jewish communities typically thrive in individualistic societies in which each person may pursue his or her own selfish agenda. (The fact that Marx was Jewish yet Smith was not simply serves as an ironic side-note ;) ).

Neither Capitalism nor Communism are especially Jewish. Jews use "isms" and nationalities at their pleasure and dispose of them when they are done with them like and old pair of underwear. This is what happened in the final days of the Soviet Union.

Jews thrive in low percentage in prosperous economies. They could care less how individualistic they are or not. Jews want a concentration which allows them their "Jewish community" yet they want to remain in dilution to the point where they are not coming into economic conflict with one another. I say "economic conflict" for their form of commerce which involves their in-group sucking the life out of the host group. It must be very difficult for Jews to become millionaires in Isreal.

Milesian
Monday, September 13th, 2004, 09:32 AM
Ad hominem attacks against the inventors or advocates of an ideology may be correct in suspecting their motives for promoting the ideology, yet they do nothing towards invalidating the ideology itself.

It depends on one's outlook, I suppose.
The fact that it is materialistic and spiritually bankrupt automatically invalidates it for me ;)


When one compares the tenets of Communism and Capitalism with the conventional notions of what the 'Jewish worldview' consists of, it becomes clear that Communism, as a concept, is not in the least 'Jewish',

It could be said that it was a view favoured by athiestic Jews, that is one possibility.
Another is that it is an ideology designed for the goy to live by, but not for the Jews themselves. Hence in Communist countries, the Christian Churches found themselves persecuted yet synagogues at many times found their fortunes rather favourable. It may be necessary to shake the faith of the gentiles (see - Isaac Luria), but nothing to stop the Jews practising their faith quietly :)


yet the same cannot be said for Capitalism -- after all, any neo-Nazi worth his salt can tell you that Jewish communities typically thrive in individualistic societies in which each person may pursue his or her own selfish agenda.

Indeed, the Jews have traditionally done well in both Communist and Capitalist societies.


(The fact that Marx was Jewish yet Smith was not simply serves as an ironic side-note ;) ).

I'm not sure that it is simply ironic. From Marx to Beria, the Jews have always been over-represented at the highest levels in Communism. But it's true that the Jews have always found non-Jews willing to co-operate in both ideologies.. Whether through self-interest or delusion. I tend to view Capitalism as a perverted form of a normal society, whereby the normal drive for success is taken to an extreme of greed where profit and wealth becomes everything.