I'm not going to argue further with you
Coca Cola ripping the lifes out of those south-americans, Adidas exploiting asian children, the war in Irak, ..
BEfore: USA terrorising and expoiting Cuba, USING WW1 and WW2 to make profit, and I have more if you want.
Capitalism is not about morality, it's not about philosophy, it's all about money, and my ears don't like hearing what I just said.
Sure, but that's just a list. That's not any proof. Got any figures? Articles? Haven't heard the profiteering from the World Wars before, you're welcome to go for that.
Capitalism must be about philosophy, since politics is a branch of philosophy- namely by what means shall a state exist to further the ethics of my philosophy. Adam Smith's magnum opus would be a good start.
Communism is not material liberty, it is material equalty and satisfaction
How can you have your equality if you don't have your liberty?
You said capitalism was about freedom more than communism, I wanted to show that freedom will never be complete, that the only complete freedom will be our freedom of thought, and that there is no need to seek it in a system that pushes humans to their unavoidable limits just because "the more you work, the better you live"
Shrugs. I think this is particularly invalid in this discussion. I mean I could say, there's no freedom to murder and that would mean that freedom isn't complete, and I think both systems would punish that idea. What is our unavoidable limit? That people work? Are you saying we should opt for communism because it's lazier?
I referred to a system having nothing to do with proletariat. A new form communism.
But my good friend, have you never read the Communist Manifesto. The dictatorship of the proletariat is communism's final state end. What new communism do you speak of?
WW1 and even WW2, a well built communism can't survive a war, it has to be corrupt to persist.
Corrupt to exist.*
I know Russia VERY well and I can tell you one thing: Staline may have killed and destroyed, but Staline saved Russia The way he did it was hard, but it was the only way (I'm an anarchist so all those kills for the sake of state make me sick don't get me wrong. but capitalism would have done anything to keep a state alive too). Russia under Lenin wasn't under so much pression as it was under Staline, internationnally spoken of course.
I know Russia very well, I spent two years studying it. Capitalism does not advocate collectivism so the peasants wouldn't have been massacred, the NEP would have continued and probably flourished. Internationally speaking? Hmm, I think you're wrong my friend remember that after the October revolution there was that small civil war affair, where the white army troops were boosted by support from Britain and America amongst other nations. In any case, this has nothing to do with communism being corrupt, as I have been endeavouring to show.
Send a 300 communism-convinced people to a strange and wealthy planet, promise them to never ever come back there and leave them alone, it will work. Do the same with 300 true anarchists, it will also work.
The existance of capitalism or pro-capitalism people makes communism and anarchy impossible nowadays, because these two aren't made to compete but to live happily.
Ok, now the problems. I said, ideal, but I meant believeable. So scrap the planet. Say one anarchist, covets his neighbour anarchist's wife, to which the second anarchist kills the first. If he is to be adjudged by his peers, then a system of law will evolve. To ensure that there is only laws passed by the commune, it would be helpful for someone to write the laws down, effectively legislating. Things are getting a bit sticky already, no?
What's 'pro-capitalism' I assume you don't mean 'proto-capitalism' because that would be silly. Are governments supposed to compete or make the lives of their citizens happy. Do you think many people will choose communism if as I'm inferring, the people aren't going to be happy?