Yeah thats right..lets all believe what we want too believe - and see where that gets us..
2007-07-20 03:31:41
·
answer #1
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋
Collectivism means what it sounds like it means. All the individuals, their resources, their efforts, are pooled toward a single set of objectives.
Except that humanity comprises individuals each of whom has her own objectives.
To realize ANY collectivism, whether left wing or right wing, requires that you either convince all or substantially all of the individuals in your whole, which has never occurred and is highly unlikely - or that you forcibly impose your objectives on them, force them to become cogs in the state machine.
This is why the list does not stop at Stalin, it includes Pol Pot, Hitler, even Julius Nyrere. To list all collectivist dictators would use up more space than is allowed in an answer box.
The differences among these collectivist dictatorships were not that force was used, it was simply the style of force and the particular objectives that were imposed on the individual citizens.
In each case the governing theory is that the ends justify the means. But as noted the ends REQUIRE the means - - you cannot have the ends without the means.
The myth is that you can.
But they don't believe the myth. They didn't see a voluntary end to, or mere disclosure of, the use of transfats in NYC, did they? No, they have a BAN.
2007-07-20 10:39:33
·
answer #2
·
answered by truthisback 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
Stalinism was Fascism based on the dictatorship of Joseph Stalin. It was Bolshivism, not Marxism. Read DAS CAPITAL, by Karl Marx. He did not promote any kind of dictatorship.
Socialism is an economic theory which takes the monies from tax payers and distributes it for the good of all. It is not a "disgusting philosophy."
2007-07-28 10:14:48
·
answer #3
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Stalinism is support for the practices of Stalin.
Quoting Wikipedia:
Stalinism is the political and economic system named after Joseph Stalin, who implemented it in the Soviet Union. It includes an extensive use of propaganda to establish a personality cult around an absolute dictator, as well as extensive use of the secret police to maintain social submission and silence political dissent.
Socialism is the economic model where the govt owns the major resource production industries (farming, factories, etc.) It says nothing about how political decisions are made.
2007-07-20 10:32:19
·
answer #4
·
answered by coragryph 7
·
1⤊
0⤋
Jewish Activists Created Communism
http://www.rense.com/general76/commun.htm
As the Christian-persecuting federal hate bill dangerously waits in the Senate Judiciary Committee, the Jewish Forward says most of the American Jewish community has mobilized to get it passed. They are pressuring President Bush not to honor his pledge to evangelicals to veto it. (See, http://www.truthtellers.org/alerts/jewspressurebush.html -Jews Pressure Bush to Sign Hate Bill)
You may ask, "What's the problem? Jews are an infinitesimal one and a half percent of the American population. What can they do?"
Plenty. A Jewish population of exactly that percentage brought communism to Russia. The most murderous and anti-Christ system the world has ever known (having starved to death or slaughtered over 150 million) was overwhelmingly inspired and birthed by a tiny minority of Jews.
The Jewish Encyclopedia (Socialism, p. 418) frankly points out that "Jews have been prominently identified with the modern Socialist movement from its very inception." "Scientific socialism," or what we call communism, says the Universal Jewish Encyclopedia in its article on socialism, "originated in the combination of Jewish Messianic feeling with German philosophy" 1 Marx, of course, was Jewish. But, just as important, Jews at all levels, from high financiers like the Warburgs, Schiffs, and Rothschilds to rugged revolutionaries like Trotsky, Kamenev, Sverdlov, and Zinoviev, made the success of communism possible.
2007-07-24 17:57:19
·
answer #5
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
That philosophy is gone. Even the U.S. Liberals know you can`t give absolute power or executive powers to a leader over "We the People`s" oversight. But you can find conservatives that will give absolute power to a leader in times of fear to feel safe.
"Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety" Ben Franklin
2007-07-20 10:38:11
·
answer #6
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Considering it was in effect in the Soviet Union for 70 years abnd a form of it is still going on in North Korea and China right now, I'd say no. I will venture that today's Democrats/liberals are leaning that way and looking to revive that philosophy for the USA.
2007-07-20 10:32:05
·
answer #7
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
1⤋
no, stalinism was real. Just because you don't like socialism doesn't mean that something worse doesn't exist.
2007-07-20 10:34:46
·
answer #8
·
answered by pip 7
·
0⤊
0⤋