Did Castro Reject Communism

[Pliny]

Nope. Communism is an economic system. In the USSR, it was combined with authoritarian governance. India had free and fair elections along with a complete state planned economy until the 70s.

Yuk! Yuk!

Communism is an economic system? Yes, one where the State attempts to control the economy entirely.

Are you thinking of how the State withers away to anarchy?

Considering you've already failed to define what socialism is miserably, you're obviously no expert.

I don't think so. It never really did become what Marx had planned but it was a revolutionary movement to install the totalitarian socialist state where everyone was made equal. It never worked. It turns into a dictatorial regime because socialists know they have to get rid of all competition and their greatest competition is generally found within other socialist ideologues, not excluding those within their own ranks. Once the socialist Mensheviks were elected it wasn't long before the revolutionary Bolshevik's took over.

Of course, the Federal Reserve had been created and it was time to establish....the League of Nations.

The international Communist movement was started in Russia, financed by American bankers. Constitutionnal Monarchies were to be removed from all of Europe and replaced with democratic republics.

I don't recall ever saying I was one but your mistaking me as an expert is somewhat of a compliment.

Pure communism existed in states like the USSR the way pure capitalism exists today. Both are theories that aren't practicably implementable. The difference is the amount of people trying to implement communism has fallen dramatically.

Capitalism is about economy. Economies have always existed among groups of people. That some wish to control them or use them means it becomes distorted. Now you have all kinds of distortions passing off as capitalism.

As much as governments like to take credit for good economies and blame people or other entities for bad economies they really are nothing more than pilferers today and pillagers of yesterday.

The black market was heavily influenced by the government. It was encouraged for factory managers in order that they could meet their quotas. High state officials got all their goods on the black market. It was highly manipulated to make sure that only those loyal would actually have access. Wrong again.

Yes, everyone turned a blind eye to the black market - even government wanted in but not "officially" - that would have been an admission of failure....oops that admission finally came about in 1989, wasn't it? Could you check my facts for me.

[bloodyminded]

Capitalism is about economy. Economies have always existed among groups of people. That some wish to control them or use them means it becomes distorted. Now you have all kinds of distortions passing off as capitalism.

How could any human system conceivably be devised in some pure form, never to t be "distorted" by the complexities of human behaviour? I mean, how can you even think of them--capitalism and human society--as separable entities?

If only it weren't for pesky human beings, capitalism would work perfectly.

Edited September 27, 2010 by bloodyminded

[nicky10013]

Yuk! Yuk!

Communism is an economic system? Yes, one where the State attempts to control the economy entirely.

Are you thinking of how the State withers away to anarchy?

A state planned economy is still an economy. Like I said, India while it had a complete state controlled Soviet style economy, yet they managed to hold fair, open and competitive elections, they had freedom of the press and freedom of religion. That kind of (completely) contradicts your entire argument. India had just as much freedom as we did. How do you square that with your fallacious ideology?

I don't think so. It never really did become what Marx had planned but it was a revolutionary movement to install the totalitarian socialist state where everyone was made equal. It never worked. It turns into a dictatorial regime because socialists know they have to get rid of all competition and their greatest competition is generally found within other socialist ideologues, not excluding those within their own ranks. Once the socialist Mensheviks were elected it wasn't long before the revolutionary Bolshevik's took over.

Of course, the Federal Reserve had been created and it was time to establish....the League of Nations.

The international Communist movement was started in Russia, financed by American bankers. Constitutionnal Monarchies were to be removed from all of Europe and replaced with democratic republics.

I don't recall ever saying I was one but your mistaking me as an expert is somewhat of a compliment.

I clearly never mistaked you for an expert. That was the entire point of the statement.

As for your thoughts on Mensheviks and Bolsheviks and competition, this is actually not true. After the coup, the Bolsheviks actually absorbed quite a few Mensheviks. Then, the real competition, like any other form of authoritarianism, was internalized. The party ate itself as Stalin came to power, then came the purges. Your history is wrong.

As for the rest, it's borderline racist trash. The notion that the communist movement was funded by American bankers has been a charge by anti-semites for decades.

Capitalism is about economy. Economies have always existed among groups of people. That some wish to control them or use them means it becomes distorted. Now you have all kinds of distortions passing off as capitalism.

As much as governments like to take credit for good economies and blame people or other entities for bad economies they really are nothing more than pilferers today and pillagers of yesterday.

What bloodyminded said.

Yes, everyone turned a blind eye to the black market - even government wanted in but not "officially" - that would have been an admission of failure....oops that admission finally came about in 1989, wasn't it? Could you check my facts for me.

Who denied that communism failed?