Democratic View on Race

[Boyar Son]

What we mostly get here in the US, is we should celebrate diversity, yet, they also espouse we are all the same.

Isn't this ideology conflicting?

[dogukan]

haha
Well no....after we realize that we are all freaking humans and the same , we should see the cultural differences as colour to common culture of humans

[Habelo]

But some cultures are evil and make for a sad joining with good societies.

[Copperknickers II]

What we mostly get here in the US, is we should celebrate diversity, yet, they also espouse we are all the same.

Isn't this ideology conflicting?

We are not the same, but we are all equal. Big difference.

[Habelo]

We are not the same, but we are all equal. Big difference.

No we are not equal, no place on earth is there equality.

[Boyar Son]

We are not the same, but we are all equal. Big difference.

"diversity"
"we are all the same"

what the hell is this.

[Prince of Yunderup]

No we are not equal, no place on earth is there equality.

We are not all financially equal, but legally speaking in most western countries we are all equal. For places that all are not equal it should give us something to strive for.

[Phier]

Perhaps the mistake is celebrating diversity.

Diversity should be thought of as a product of a developing society, not as a goal.

[Boyar Son]

I know! in the end, what is there really to celebrate about diversity.

It's more noble to end hostility between two peoples so they can work together. not just get sued over for not having enough women or minorities in a certain work place.

[Jingles]

But some cultures are evil and make for a sad joining with good societies.

You mean like America?

Racism is a problem fuelled by the bourgeoisie in the effort of further dividing the working classes amongst themselves. We are all inherently equal, no race is essentially better than any other, the idea that this is not the case is essentially ridiculous, or the sign of an exceptionally delusional individual.

[BNS]

You mean like America?

Racism is a problem fuelled by the bourgeoisie in the effort of further dividing the working classes amongst themselves. We are all inherently equal, no race is essentially better than any other, the idea that this is not the case is essentially ridiculous, or the sign of an exceptionally delusional individual.

Fueled by the bourgeoisie? It's often in the lower classes that this problem is magnified.

[Jingles]

Fueled by the bourgeoisie? It's often in the lower classes that this problem is magnified.

Yep, the ones victim to the Bourgeoisie's views. Usually those on the political right - They would be the ones that have been divided from the rest. Think about it, racism against blacks, for example was borne out of the need for an excuse for the slave trade back in the 17th and 18th centuries - essentially keeping a profitable business running by deceiving the general population as to the nature of African slaves, so that the rich could continue making a profit out of an inhumane enterprise. The seeds of this false prejudice remain with us today, and is even stronger in the US, thanks to the very late abolishment of slave labour.

[Phier]

When all you have is a hammer, you see every problem in the world as a nail.

Such is communism assigning every societal issue to class struggle.

[Boyar Son]

Delete

[Boyar Son]

Hey Jingle Bombs. Racism is a problem fuelled by the bourgeoisie in the effort of further dividing the working classes amongst themselves. We are all inherently equal, no race is essentially better than any other, the idea that this is not the case is essentially ridiculous, or the sign of an exceptionally delusional individual.[/QUOTE]

while the above is just a claim, the left flaunts it's cause as anti-racist but brings up the subject of racism again nonetheless. repeating over and over of past conflicts gives young people distrust for others for the future.

also no offense but there are plenty communist countries around. do you live in one? i'm just baffled at communists wanting to change capitalist countries into another failed communist state.

it kinda pisses me off. it's like "have another Nazi country, no Germany was a bad example this time we'll do it right".

[Dracula]

Racism as widely defined and understood doesn't take into account the nature of people, which still has many unexplored parts. You cannot force one to like anything if he doesn't feel to. Otherwise it is just brainwashing, actually braindamage. One shouldn't be forced to accept a "reality" which his inner self is against or distrusts.

[removeduser_487563287433]

What we mostly get here in the US, is we should celebrate diversity, yet, they also espouse we are all the same.

Isn't this ideology conflicting?

No. Equality does not equate to conformity. Next.

[Jingles]

When all you have is a hammer, you see every problem in the world as a nail.

Such is communism assigning every societal issue to class struggle.

It's a point of view, nothing more. I just happen to feel it's the right one.

while the above is just a claim, the left flaunts it's cause as anti-racist but brings up the subject of racism again nonetheless. repeating over and over of past conflicts gives young people distrust for others for the future.

Not entirely sure what you meant by this, could you explain further?

also no offense but there are plenty communist countries around. do you live in one? i'm just baffled at communists wanting to change capitalist countries into another failed communist state.

it kinda pisses me off. it's like "have another Nazi country, no Germany was a bad example this time we'll do it right".

Such is the goal of Communism I'm afraid - however I'm actually planning to move to Cuba in a few years. Just got to scrape together the funds and brush up on my Spanish. At the end of the day, I feel Cuba to be the only truly communist country left. A relic of the cold war? maybe. But they have damn fine weather! I would really prefer it if you didn't compare Communism to Nazi Germany; it's just so wrong on so many levels... The fact remains that over the course of the cold war, "Communism" (although all Marxists these days agree that the Soviet Union was not in fact Communist any more after the middle of Stalin's rule, favouring Bureaucratic Socialism instead), was boxed into probably the most underdeveloped and war-torn section of the Western world. Russia never caught up with the West, thanks to internal corruption and the fact that it had to make up for almost a century of economic development denied it by the Tsars. I'd quite like to point out here though that from 1945-1989 economic growth in the east was 30% higher than in the West on average - which keenly highlights my point. They had too much catching up to do. If the October Revolution had instead happened in Britain, France or Germany, I'd imagine the result would've been very different, as unlike Russia, these countries displayed the correct characteristics required for a successful, long lasting Communist revolution. Unfortunately, two world wars and a little phenomenon called Fascism got in the way of that.

No. Equality does not equate to conformity. Next.

Pure Win. This entire thread is somewhat useless now lol.

[Boyar Son]

No. Equality does not equate to conformity. Next.

this business must be an equal opportunity hirer. not conforming to this will be in violation of the law. besides that wasn't even the thread topic. see it as purely 'race'.

"next"

[Boyar Son]

Not entirely sure what you meant by this, could you explain further?

i meant that your above post about

Racism is a problem fuelled by the bourgeoisie in the effort of further dividing the working classes amongst themselves

is a claim. there can't seriously be a credible source that backs this up. unless I'm mistaken then that'd be crazy! the elite doing this with proof right in front of our faces.

however I'm actually planning to move to Cuba in a few years

Really? interesting! I don't live to far from cuba, Bombs, and my cuban math teacher says he despised Castro. most of the Cuban population here does really (generalization, but i haven't met a Cuban that liked him yet). cubans here don't like Bush and Obama's stance towards Cuba as a whole. thinking we shouldn't mix up Castro and Cuba at the same time and Cubans here are generally anti Castro, even if the intensity varies with each generation along with new mixture of Cuban refugees. i think while there are many cubans swimming towards America in search for a better life.

you're heading in the opposite direction...can i ask why? besides good weather?

was boxed into probably the most underdeveloped and war-torn section of the Western world. Russia never caught up with the West, thanks to internal corruption and the fact that it had to make up for almost a century of economic development denied it by the Tsars. I'd quite like to point out here though that from 1945-1989 economic growth in the east was 30% higher than in the West on average - which keenly highlights my point. They had too much catching up to do. If the October Revolution had instead happened in Britain, France or Germany, I'd imagine the result would've been very different, as unlike Russia, these countries displayed the correct characteristics required for a successful, long lasting Communist revolution. Unfortunately, two world wars and a little phenomenon called Fascism got in the way of that.

well it's a little more complicated than that. Firstly, both sides of Europe were war torn, but all sides were allowed to participate in the US Marshall plan economic recovery. denied by Stalin!!!

secondly, yea the centrally planned system of the soviets could organize it's resources and put it into industrialization, it is a command economy and thus if the Gov't wants it done it gets done. But what you didn't say was this economic growth was the mobilization of vast resources into a certain sector. the Soviets put it's effort into industrializing, "more of the same" type work. according to answers.com

...emphasis on fulfillment of quantitative production targets rather than on improvements in quality, technology, and efficiency, routine expansion instead of creativity, and rigidity and "more of the same" instead of flexibility...

. Developed western market economies suffers what you call business cycles, i learned that in economics class. its fluctuation of the economy for good or bad, and you can suffer a loss but you can bounce back up to simply put it. in the long run the west bounced back from whatever economic problem it had.

while declining soviet productivity growth and population proved fatal.

It's easy to do this, and will be successful at the start. but in the last decades of the USSR, work motivation declined (obvious communist characteristic), as you said corruption, illegal activities, declining standard of living, improvements of almost anything, and weakening legitimization of the soviet gov't.

all in all bro'ski communism just doesn't work. I just can't see it happening if this more of the same economy can handle the changing world. capitalism can handle this, it even thrives on new improvement.