Communism is like Spandex.

antisocial-socialist:

nickbomfy:

antisocial-socialist:

nickbomfy:

Good idea, but then real people started using it.

Things got real ugly from there.

Spandex was a good idea at one point? O.O

Two things that work in theory, but not so much in real life…

Funny how that was kind of the point I was trying to make.

Spandex work in theory?

I consulted the boyfriend on this. He says:

“spandex works pretty well for me I have a binder made out of it…
IS IT BECAUSE I’M A COMMUNIST?”

I have chosen to interpret this as meaning “by following through and accepting the complete truth behind all metaphors, we can conclude that communism, like spandex, works well when applied in a sensible way.”

(via solitarysocialist-deactivated20)

So, the Edinburgh Commonwealth Pool is reopening, and this notice was sent out.

Possibly slightly misleading for anyone who isn’t used to its nickname.

(Possible capitalist horror movie title?)

View high resolution

ozymandiasdali:

I WARNED YOU ABOUT STATES, BRO!!!

I apologise for the fact that a grand total of three of you will actually get this.

It was just too good not to post.

View high resolution

ghoulmann:

cf Ubuntu Code of Conduct

Two of my favourite things…

(Source: planetsedge)

View high resolution

effington:

Flawless

That awkward moment when Rick Perry backs his advert with music by a gay Jewish communist.

(Source: , via winkypie)

ftm-communist:

People often reject Communism on face value. “In an ideal world” they say, or “It’s a good idea but we tried and it failed.”

The thin is, Communism is as much based on an “ideal world” as any political and economic theory. The difference with things like representative democracy and capitalism is they are elastic theories that are changed and adapted from their original form because of the needs of the people. Communism, for the most part, was inelastic, and could not blend with outside theories to maximize effectiveness on whatever level (economic and human). Countries like China, Laos, and Vietnam took capitalist production and blended it with Communist politics to make them economically stronger. Democratic, capitalist Scandinavia blended socialist policies with capitalist production to check corruption. Just like ethical theories are often combined because certain ethical theories don’t provide answers for some ethical dilemas, political/economic theories have to combine to adapt to the real world problems of our non-ideal world.

That’s part of being a pragmatist. I appreciate new ideas o n politics and economics that synthesize capitalist democracy and socialist Communism. But neither should be rejected on face value; recognize their pros and cons and think about how to combine them to maximize human good.

The conversation should move away from policies and the theories of one ideologue or another and focus instead on the values in conflict (and identify the values that all sides agree on) to understand why each side builds their theory as they did/do. Finding our common ground will help reconcile the theories and lead to a peaceful, happy, uncorrupted future.

(Source: fabulous-trotskyist)

Communism: You're Doing It Wrong →

letterstomycountry:

The concept of a millionaire Communist might not sit well with Mao’s Little Red Book, but it appears to be just fine with the modern Chinese Communist Party. The Forbes China 400 Rich list revealed this week that ‘over 90% of the 1,000 richest people tracked by the Hurun Report are either officials or members of the Chinese Communist Party.” The list reinforces the view that the CCP has become more of a cartel or, in some cases, a criminal enterprise than a true political party. Communist officials are routinely accused of breathtaking corruption and use of state power to force peasants from their land in development schemes.

Hmmm, nobody could have predicted that the consolidation of political power within a Vanguard party under the guise of centralized state power was actually counterintuitive to achieving the theoretical goals of Communism .

woops.

(via socialistictendencies-deactivat)

socialistictendencies:

Communism: You’re Doing It Wrong

letterstomycountry:

The concept of a millionaire Communist might not sit well with Mao’s Little Red Book, but it appears to be just fine with the modern Chinese Communist Party. The Forbes China 400 Rich list revealed this week that ‘over 90% of the 1,000 richest people tracked by the Hurun Report are either officials or members of the Chinese Communist Party.” The list reinforces the view that the CCP has become more of a cartel or, in some cases, a criminal enterprise than a true political party. Communist officials are routinely accused of breathtaking corruption and use of state power to force peasants from their land in development schemes.

Hmmm, nobody could have predicted that the consolidation of political power within a Vanguard party under the guise of centralized state power was actually counterintuitive to achieving the theoretical goals of Communism .

woops.

(via socialistictendencies-deactivat)

Day 4 - What do you think of Communism? Socialism?

I would think this is obvious from my previous posts.

Both are good ideas and are ultimately best for man kind.

Care has to be taken in the first stages of implementation though, as it does with any radical change in politcal structure.

I’m not going to say anything more because I’m trying to catch up with this and I think this is a question that’s answered by pretty much my whole blog

Day 1 - How do you identify politically? What is the name you use for your political views?

You’re probably expecting me to say I’m a communist, considering my URL, and that is pretty much the truth. Lately though I’ve been calling myself a socialist more and more, not because my views have really changed, but because I find it gives me more freedom to let them change without having to do too much reevaluating of my identity.

I’m not too fussed about what other people call me though, so long as it’s not blatantly wrong. I’m a socialist, a communist, somewhat trotskyist, far left and many other things. I suppose I’m most comfortable being thought of as a socialist and far left, since these are things I have always considered myself to be.

I was about eight when I fist started to become interested in politics, and even before then I knew the basic idea of things (though it was mostly based around British party politics, since that was what I picked up on from the huge amount of time I spent watching the news). There hasn’t been a point since then when I haven’t considered myself quite far left. It always seemed pretty obvious to me that that was the most logical view point, and when I was about eleven I started reading more about it (the Communist Manifesto and an awful lot of Orwell), leading to me identifying for several years (and still partly today) as communist.

It was only relatively recently that I started to consider the different variations of communism, and I’m still nothing definite with that.