Vive la republique!

[Anathema]

Caid, you shouldn't be dissing Napoleon. European countries, including Netherlands, have some of the best education and public service systems because of him. In fact, it would probably been better if Napolean conquered a lot more before being defeated.

Edric, you're generalising when you're talking about capitalist democracies. Over here we have plenty of parties to chose from, some of wich are far to radical to be counting on support of companies.

[Caid Ivik]

Maybe, some had benefits, but many others only lost. For example everything on the east of Rhein...

[Edric O]

Dude_Doc and Namp, please understand that there is nothing to "return" to, because the old stalinist empire had nothing to do with real communism. Returning to stalinism is impossible (thank God), especially since no one is stupid enough to actually want that. The past is behind us; now we must look to the future.

And by the way, from what I've seen on the internet, most people already know that stalinism is not communism. Every time someone mentions Stalin as a communist, there is always someone else to correct him.

But even if the name "communism" is going to bear the stigma of Stalin forever, that will never be more than a minor problem. After all, we can simply choose another name for ourselves.

Also, Namp, I want to ask you something: If you don't believe that communism can be achieved, then what do you think will come after capitalism? Remember that nothing lasts forever. Sooner or later, capitalism must come to an end.

[Dude_Doc]

Dude_Doc and Namp, please understand that there is nothing to "return" to, because the old stalinist empire had nothing to do with real communism. Returning to stalinism is impossible (thank God), especially since no one is stupid enough to actually want that. The past is behind us; now we must look to the future.

Ehh, okay, first you said that we were pretty much back in the 1920's again, and now that we're making progress.

Also, Namp, I want to ask you something: If you don't believe that communism can be achieved, then what do you think will come after capitalism? Remember that nothing lasts forever. Sooner or later, capitalism must come to an end.

It seems you are obsessed with this question. Democracy maybe? Why not? Why does communism always have to be after capitalism? What if capitalism will be here until the day the last human dies, or we get executed by some alien race, or until all stars burn out of fuel etc? Democracy is the best there is. People in large numbers are naive. They don't really know what to choose. Democracy is their answer. That is my beliefs in the future.

[otheymzefedaykin]

The past is behind us; now we must look to the future.

It is necessary to remember all the past, not to redo the same errors!

[Edric O]

Ehh, okay, first you said that we were pretty much back in the 1920's again, and now that we're making progress.

Errr, no. What I said was that the political situation in Europe is somewhat similar to the 1920's but without such a strong communist movement, that the communist movement itself is more or less in the same situation as in the early 1900's, and that we are making progress and moving forward from that stage.

It seems you are obsessed with this question. Democracy maybe? Why not? Why does communism always have to be after capitalism? What if capitalism will be here until the day the last human dies, or we get executed by some alien race, or until all stars burn out of fuel etc? Democracy is the best there is. People in large numbers are naive. They don't really know what to choose. Democracy is their answer. That is my beliefs in the future.

Of course I'm "obsessed" with this question, because the end of capitalism will be a crucial historical event!

And saying that capitalism will last for thousands of years is utter nonsense. A capitalist system can't sustain itself forever. Please read some economics. Capitalism can only survive by growing and "eating up" an ever-increasing amount of labour power. That's what caused globalisation. But eventually, capitalism will not have any room to grow any more, and then it will inevitably collapse.

Also, remember that democracy is a political system, while capitalism is an economic one. We need an ECONOMIC system to replace capitalism after its fall. Democracy is something completely different altogether.

So far, the only known economic system which is BETTER than capitalism is socialism/communism.

It is necessary to remember all the past, not to redo the same errors!

Yes, of course! What I meant was that we are not nostalgics who dwell on the past. We learn from the past, but we also move on towards the future.

[otheymzefedaykin]

Those who say that such or such economic system is better, say it simply because they benefit from it! ??? The opinions are shared! :-

Are you Ro, Edric ? :)

[Edric O]

The people who would benefit from socialism and communism are the vast majority of the world's population: the poor workers, who are oppressed and exploited under capitalism.

And yes, I'm from Romania...

[Dude_Doc]

And saying that capitalism will last for thousands of years is utter nonsense.

Really? "Capitalism" has existed longer than communism...

[Edric O]

Yes, it has existed for a grand total of a few hundred years... Which is nothing compared to the systems before it (namely feudalism and slavery).

And anyway, claiming that anything would last for thousands of years without having any actual proof of the fact is really just nonsense...

[TMA_1]

Probably too late to comment, but I just wanted to add my two bits.

C.S. Lewis talked about the french revolution in the screwtape letters. He said that it was a good thing in general, but that it lead to a lot of anti religious sentiments, which is true. It was a good thing to rid france of the horrible dictatorship, but many of those who replaced that dictatorship were just as bad. Ironically the great leader and savior of france was also a lunatic tyrant as well. Revolutions breed fanatacism, even in America during it's revolution. During it, people of america would take british noblemen, tar and feather them, eventually horribly killing them. Lynchings were all over the place and those who were loyal to england were outcasted. Revolutions seemly do great things, but generally they are done with evil fighting evil.

[Edric O]

Yes, this is often true. Revolutions are a way of fighting fire with fire. But what if you have no other choice? When the country is ruled with an iron fist by a despotic king or dictator, armed revolution is the only way to get rid of the tyrant...

[Caid Ivik]

Louis XVI. was a weak king. As well as Nicolaus II. had weakened position in 1917. Revolutionaries usually wait for the end of strong despots and then seize the throne. As we look to Holy Roman Emperor Joseph II., have you ever considered a possibility, that whole revolution was driven by austrian agents?

[Edric O]

Revolutionaries don't "wait". It's just that strong despots make any revolution impossible (that's why they're called "strong" in the first place - because they have a very good grip on power).

Both Louis XVI and Nicholas II were indeed very weak kings, but they had one thing in common: They refused to compromise with the people. That's why revolutions happen. If the tyrant refuses to make any compromise, the people have no choice but to openly revolt.

There were no revolutions in the countries where the kings accepted compromise and started introducing reforms.

[Caid Ivik]

And bolsheviks made compromises?

Anyway, you are true. We need compromises. That nearly costed Kerenskij, Dubcek, Chruscov, Nagy and other burgeois pigs their life.

[Edric O]

I never said that compromise was inherently good. I only made a historical observation: the fact that compromise is often the only way for a monarch or despot to avoid revolution. And this cannot be simply "good" or "bad" in itself. It depends on the kind of compromise we're talking about, the kind of revolution we're talking about, etc.

[Duncan_ghola]

this is alittle late too but july 27 was peruvian independence day, do all nations celebrate independence in july?

[Edric O]

It must be a good season for revolutions. ;)

But Romania declared its independence on the 10th of June (in 1877), and it was an action taken by the government and the king rather than by the people, so I suppose that leaves us out...

[Caid Ivik]

I never said that compromise was inherently good. I only made a historical observation: the fact that compromise is often the only way for a monarch or despot to avoid revolution. And this cannot be simply "good" or "bad" in itself. It depends on the kind of compromise we're talking about, the kind of revolution we're talking about, etc.

Line of compromises makes a happy citizens. See Holy Roman Empire. Compromises made it survive for nearly thousand years. Yes, it was only a confederation and fell many times to civil or foreign wars, but Habsburgs were always able to keep up content people. Especially ruling of Maria Theresia and Joseph II. are examples of the "good rulers".