or Connect
Styleforum › Forums › General › General Chat › Do you smoke marijuana?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Do you smoke marijuana? - Page 3

post #31 of 117
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kent Wang
Soviet communism wasn't potent? Sorry, LK, I think you're stretching here.
I mean in the sense of an organized political party within a nonautonomous political climate. For example, the American Communist party, what is that? For a Socialist party to have credence it has to be driven underground, legitimacy is absurd.
post #32 of 117
Quote:
Originally Posted by LabelKing
For a Socialist party to have credence it has to be driven underground, legitimacy is absurd.
Umm, isn't the point of socialist politics to, like, win elections, gain power, and then implement a socialist program? And wouldn't that necessitate legitimacy?
post #33 of 117
When communism is underground and out-of-power, it can be tempting because the odious consequences of communist policies thankfully do not befall society.
post #34 of 117
Quote:
Originally Posted by Manton
Umm, isn't the point of socialist politics to, like, win elections, gain power, and then implement a socialist program? And wouldn't that necessitate legitimacy?
Do you feel Socialism, that is to say Communism, as a general politic, is going to win many elections in a nation like America or perhaps Japan? In historical circusmtance the majority of nations that have had Communist systems have had them due to violent revolutions or some position of violence. Thus I feel that the Communist party as an entity that has authorization from the government is rather absurd.
post #35 of 117
Quote:
Originally Posted by Manton
Umm, isn't the point of socialist politics to, like, win elections, gain power, and then implement a socialist program? And wouldn't that necessitate legitimacy?

And that's exactly the paradox. And also one of the reasons communism in its "ideal" form is entirely unrealistic. To keep in power, communism necessarily had to emulate fascism, - this development rendered the high-minded ideals of communism pointless.

The point of communism isn't really to win elections: Communism traditonally claims to "inherit history", that is, after capitalism has burnt out, power would automatically fall into the communists' lap, by popular revolution or by sheer power vacuum.

This is like the discussions I had in my early student days...um...sorry, what's really in this cigarette?
post #36 of 117
Quote:
Originally Posted by LabelKing
Do you feel Socialism, that is to say Communism, as a general politic, is going to win many elections in a nation like America or perhaps Japan?
No. So what?

If your point is that persecuted parties work better as romantic refuges for outcasts and dreamers, fine. But most real socialists acutally believe they are right and would like to take power, if only it were possible.
post #37 of 117
Quote:
Originally Posted by Manton
No. So what?

If your point is that persecuted parties work better as romantic refuges for outcasts and dreamers, fine. But most real socialists acutally believe they are right and would like to take power, if only it were possible.
Real Marxists work for the advancement of robots.
post #38 of 117
Quote:
Originally Posted by Manton
No. So what? If your point is that persecuted parties work better as romantic refuges for outcasts and dreamers, fine. But most real socialists acutally believe they are right and would like to take power, if only it were possible.
Of course, that is my point. Persecuted parties are what makes politics change in a drastic manner. Conspiracy is the other impetus. The Communist Party as a legitimate, government condoned politic is rather absurd since it panders to almost nothing of an original diktat. I am not a Socialist or Communist so I have no direct experience with romantic refuges. As to "real Socialists" aren't they more or less dreamers as well? Much like those WTO protesters?
post #39 of 117
Quote:
Originally Posted by j
Real Marxists work for the advancement of robots.
For apparatchiks, which is less a distinction of robots and humans one would care to make.
post #40 of 117
Communists and socialists are two different animals. Socialists can and do achieve power through elections. As to this:

"The Communist Party as a legitimate, government condoned politic is rather absurd since it panders to almost nothing of an original diktat."

I have no idea what it means. More fodder for the Brown tenure committee?
post #41 of 117
Quote:
Originally Posted by Manton
Communists and socialists are two different animals. Socialists can and do achieve power through elections. As to this: "The Communist Party as a legitimate, government condoned politic is rather absurd since it panders to almost nothing of an original diktat." I have no idea what it means. More fodder for the Brown tenure committee?
Yes, I am aware of that distinction. Some of the Scandinavian nations are Socialist. To dissect the sentence, I meant that Communism as a government condoned body politic is absurd in the sense that it isn't true to its original intent and ideology.
post #42 of 117
Quote:
Originally Posted by LabelKing
Yes, I am aware of that distinction. Some of the Scandinavian nations are Socialist.

To dissect the sentence, I meant that Communism as a government condoned body politic is absurd in the sense that it isn't true to its original intent and ideology.


Chile has just elected a female socialist "president." Their government could now be considered socialist again.

Socialism is on the rise again throughout much of Latin America. The USA's influence and reputation in Latin America has been extraordinarily negative since Kissinger's era, and it is doubtful that will change anytime soon. It is an outright hatred of US politics and capitalism (and the carnage that it created) that has led to a recent surge in pro-socialist (and anti-US) politics in Latin America.

It's worth noting that the Latin American history of socialism differs quite strongly from that of the USSR and China. Most Americans are unaware of the history of socialism in Latin America however. And it is rarely, if ever, mentioned as an example of modern socialism in practice.

Also, you forgot to mention that most of western Europe was led by socialist ideals, and socialist governments, throughout much of the latter half of the 20th Century. It's interesting to note that when discussing historical examples of socialism, countries such as England, France and Denmark (for example) are rarely discussed. This is hardly a balanced, or even educated, view of modern socialism.
post #43 of 117
Quote:
Originally Posted by linux_pro

Also, you forgot to mention that most of western Europe was led by socialist ideals, and socialist governments, throughout much of the latter half of the 20th Century. It's interesting to note that when discussing historical examples of socialism, countries such as England, France and Denmark (for example) are rarely discussed. This is hardly a balanced, or even educated, view of modern socialism.

I don't really know enough about South America to discuss the political history there - but when it comes to Scandinavia and others, I think you also have to distinguish between socialism and social democracy as different approaches.

This is not mere semantics - the "democracy" bit relates to participating in elections, and working within and on the conditions of an existing political system.

Many European socialist/leftist groups have chosen to organise themselves as pressure groups or other associations rather than political parties, precisely because they don't want to be "corrupted" by participating in the existing sysems.
post #44 of 117
Well - back to cannabis - I just had a practical refresher course in how they do it in Amsterdam, and it actually seems to work well.

In reality, cannabis in all its forms and permutations is as available as alcohol, and priced at roughly $4 per joint. The five gramme maximum per customer is really pointless, as the "coffeeshops" are absolutely anywhere. The customers seem to be just regular people, with a certain overrepresentation of tourists and students or both.
post #45 of 117
Yes, the Amsterdam practice seems healthier than the smoke-till-you-drop-off-a-g-bong approach in the United States. Smoking joints casually like cigarettes is more common, and it is always funny to see a tourist try their first spacecake AND weed - and do nothing else.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: General Chat
Styleforum › Forums › General › General Chat › Do you smoke marijuana?