Mecky Posted November 22, 2010 Share Posted November 22, 2010 They rejected his daft version of a Marxist attempt to run the country. Marxist attempt, what does that mean? Marx never said people should do one thing or another but theorised what might occur if this or that should happen, so how can the state be run without anything written down in stone? Capitalism or communism? Capitalism advocates greed, selfishness and risk taking. Communism advocates togetherness but in reality the leaders live a better life than others and there are still poor people. In that respect there is no difference to capitalism. There are winners and losers in both economic systems and both all systems are dangerous to mankind. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EvilScotsman Posted November 22, 2010 Share Posted November 22, 2010 Marxist attempt, what does that mean? Marx never said people should do one thing or another but theorised what might occur if this or that should happen, so how can the state be run without anything written down in stone? Capitalism or communism? Capitalism advocates greed, selfishness and risk taking. Communism advocates togetherness but in reality the leaders live a better life than others and there are still poor people. In that respect there is no difference to capitalism. There are winners and losers in both economic systems and both all systems are dangerous to mankind. Anarchism? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sccsux Posted November 22, 2010 Share Posted November 22, 2010 Anarchism? Also a system (of sorts) and equally as dangerous to humanity. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EvilScotsman Posted November 22, 2010 Share Posted November 22, 2010 Also a system (of sorts) and equally as dangerous to humanity. How? Why do I have to post 10 letters? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
upinwath Posted November 22, 2010 Share Posted November 22, 2010 The labour movement had the best opportunity in 50 years to transform not merely an industrial situation and win an important battle for workers in struggle, but an opportunity to change the government of the day. Arthur Scargill Yet what you need is not marches, demonstrations, rallies or wide associations, all of them are important. What you need is direct action. The sooner people understand that, the sooner we'll begin to change things. Arthur Scargill That sounds a lot like he wants to remove a democratically elected government and replace it with something of his liking. Given he's one of those idiots that thinks Marxism is a workable theory, I'm guessing that's what he wanted. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sccsux Posted November 22, 2010 Share Posted November 22, 2010 How? All systems have failure points (even society) which makes them inherently dangerous to humanity. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wildcat Posted November 22, 2010 Share Posted November 22, 2010 That sounds a lot like he wants to remove a democratically elected government and replace it with something of his liking. Given he's one of those idiots that thinks Marxism is a workable theory, I'm guessing that's what he wanted. You mean he has a political viewpoint you don't like...... so what? How does that justify the Tories mobilising the army and secret services to destroy an industry and impoverish its communities? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alchresearch Posted November 22, 2010 Share Posted November 22, 2010 An excellent insight into the mining problems can be found in the BBC documentary, "All our Working Lives". Although not available on iPlayer, you should be able to find it on Youtube. http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b00vff10 It's a lot more complex than the usual drivel spouted on here, i.e. "The Tories hated Northerners so decided to close the pits for a laugh". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Prime Posted November 22, 2010 Share Posted November 22, 2010 That sounds a lot like he wants to remove a democratically elected government and replace it with something of his liking. Given he's one of those idiots that thinks Marxism is a workable theory, I'm guessing that's what he wanted. He is talking about the Labour movement, the head of which is the democratically elected Labour Party. Saying he likes direct action does not equate to a manifesto for revolution, just a general slogan. If it were not for direct action and mass law breaking we would not even have parliament. A mass picket to blockade Grunwick or Orgreave was direct action but not a revolution. It could be a revolution if the majority of the population advocated it nationwide in which case it would be the will of the people anyway. I am particularly fascinated by how an NUM victory in 84 would have somehow transformed us into a communist state. Anyone got an answer how this would actually happen? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
upinwath Posted November 22, 2010 Share Posted November 22, 2010 You mean he has a political viewpoint you don't like...... so what? How does that justify the Tories mobilising the army and secret services to destroy an industry and impoverish its communities? The fact he was openly saying his goal was to overthrow a democratically elected government by force. That is an affront to the whole political system and removal of the freedom to vote as we know it in the UK. He was a danger to democracy in the UK. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.