I heard that if Hillary Clinton becomes president she is going to legalize marijuana, have you heard this, and is it true?

(I wasn't sure what this should go under so i put it under news, if you feel it should be moved please feel free to.)

Welfare isn't synonymous to free health care, nor should it be associated to any sort of economy type nor any political view or party.



In terms of Cuba, there isn't a class.. or classes. Everyone is equal. So it's not so much about the rich and poor, it's about the companies that produce a lot more money that get a portion taken out in order to feed the country.

Now don't get me wrong, there's nothin wrong with taxation. In fact we sort of need taxation, but we dont need IRS. The fair tax plan is the best thing for this country. Where everyone pays taxes no matter what, whether they're illegal immigrants or 2 billion dollar a day makin CEOs... they'll all pay a flat rate for anything they purchase.

This way instead of having "tax season" and worrying if people are gonna pay their taxes (because if they don't, we get hit harder), we'll simply sign a form (verifying who we are @ the end of the year), and receive our check/wired transfer and not worry about having to owe taxes. Of course I'm makin this seem more simpler than it really is. I'm sure there's a bigger process and I'm currently tryin to learn that system.

C'mon, that's an idealist point of view. Cuban isn't supposed to have classes, but it certainly does. There are rich Cubans, and there are poor Cubans, just like any other country.

You mean... there's rich politicians who are connected with castro... yes this is true. Everyone else that isn't connected to castro is pretty much in the same boat. That's what makes the real difference between socialism and communism, greed. The abolishment of classism = socialism, socialism with classism = communism.

Socialism > communism

No, that's not what I mean. There are large variations in income across Cuba. Ideally this would not be so, but there is. Socialism and communism are both imperfect systems.


Well...maybe. In Marxism, this isn't true; socialism is just an intermediary between private and government ownership of the means of production. But I'm not sure what you're getting at here, really.

O.M.G. Hilary won the primary. I no longer care about politics in the U.S., I give up.

Marxism is shit... Socialism > Marxism

How so?

Are you testing me?... Marxism is socialism with dictatorship. Unlike the purity of Socialism, which is without a dictatorship.

No. Don't get so defensive.


Correct me if I'm wrong, please, but I don't think Marx espoused dictatorship. He describes socialism as a transitional period between capitalism and communism, and communism, ideally, is in fact stateless (the opposite extreme of a dictatorship, you could say).

Actions speak louder than words. Marxism is a failure, that's why Socialism has a bad name.

I think you're confusing Marxism, socialism, communism, and the Soviet-style implementation of communism. To my knowledge, Marxism (as described by Karl Marx, obviously) has never really been successfully implemented in practice.

Truth be told, I've actually lost sight of what the point of this discussion was. I think it had something to do with Clinton being a communist, a point on which I'm still confused.

Thanks for takin us off topic. Marxism doesn't work... socialism does. Socialism and Marxism isn't synonymous. Marxism is Socialism with a touch of Communism. Socialism has to be very strict and cannot become corrupted because it can easily become Communism. Regardless of what Karl Marx said, he's not the ultimate creator of Socialism. So please, stop associating Marxism with Socialism.

Well, this goes back to what I said in an earlier post: To my knowledge, true Marxism has never really been implemented, partly because it's a highly abstract idea. If you have a case in which the ideals of Marx have actually been implemented, with or without success, by all means, post such information. The closest implementation of Marx's ideas was Soviet Russia, but even that was a corruption of Marxist thought.

I guess you can say that Marxism doesn't work to such a great degree that it can't be implemented, although you'd have to argue that point much more thoroughly than you've done here.

Socialism does and has worked, but most socialist nations don't implement "hardcore" socialism, at least not in the terms of the 18th century socialist movement.


No, you're right, Marx didn't create socialism. The ideas go back much farther than Marx, and truth be told, I haven't read the works of most of the originators of socialist thought. I have read Jean Jacques Rosseau, who touches upon ideas of socialism, but he doesn't call it by name, of course.

However, I think it's an error to completely try to separate Marxist thought from socialism. The 18th century socialist movement was largely based on the ideas of Marxist, so the two are not completely separate.

I'm curious what you mean by "Marxism is Socialism with a touch of Communist," and why you are so opposed to a transition from socialism to communism, since Marx essentially saw socialism as a stepping stone to communism.

People asking you to explain yourself over things YOU'VE posted that don't make sense IS NOT taking things off topic.

No wise cracks at the end of your comment/post, Spencer?

Are you instigating, Tama?

I thought you were done with that?????

Who's instigating, it's an innocent question. Have you changed, now? :D