 |
|  |
 |
|  |
 |
|
roalan
|
|
Newton,Ma.U.S.A.
Nov 2000 time: 00:23
|
|
quote: Originally posted by monkspider
In the first years of the Revolution, The soviets (workers' and peasants' councils) were running the state and the economy and everyone was allowed to participate in them. All political parties were allowed to participate in soviet elections and debates and put forward their ideas. It is also a little known fact that the first Soviet government was in fact a coalition between the Bolshevik party and the Left Social Revolutionaries. The only parties not allowed were those which had taken arms against Soviet power.
Within the Communist Party there was the widest of democracies. During the discussion of the Brest-Litovsk peace agreement with Germany there were at least three different fractions within the CP with different opinions. One of them, the Left Communists, headed by Bukharin, even published for a while a daily paper, "The Communist", opposing Lenin's position on the issue! |
There is not a country or an era in the history of the world that has done what you say above..Why even here in the cradle of Liberty Massachuesetts USA we have the Speaker of the House,elected for life, voted in by 7600 votes in his district. We call him "Tommy Taxes" We just got ourselves a new Gov. elected by over 1 million votes. Yesterday he went ,hat in hand, to visit Tommy Taxes to ask him if he would roll back the taxes just imposed on us. His answer was
This new Gov. has as much chance of doing the peoples will as you would have under your Commie friends. 7600 votes rule over a million..The only time the peoples will rules,for a short time, is in a revolution. And that lasts about a day or two. Then anyone who may be a threat to the new leaders are ( I do not see a icon of someone shooting someone else)
|
|
|  |
 |
|
gsmoove23
|
|
quote: Originally posted by Ramo
Left libertarianism is anarchism, not social democracy, regardless of which country you're in. And economics have everything to do with authority; divorcing the issues is nonsense. |
libertarianism is only anarchic if you take it in its most extreme form. Most political labels are pretty sketchy in their most extreme forms. Left certainly wouldn't be anarchic since they would want a strong central government with strong controls. Sure economics has everything to do with authority, creating a multidimensional scale is an attempt to give traditional political descriptions of people some depth though and making a distinction between political control over peoples lives and actions and their wallets seems appropriate.
Read the FAQ and you'll see some people use different definitions then yourself for terms we all may take for granted.
|
|
|  |
 |
|  |
 |
|  |
 |
|
gsmoove23
|
|
social democrats require strong economic government control yes, yet they also require that government allow citizens to live out their lives, make their own choices, and not intervene in their personal lives, for the most part. It is libertarian in some senses of the word and clearly not in others.
Doesn't matter cause libertarian is used as an absolute opposite from authoritarian on a sliding scale here. Someone being say, a -5 on the scale doesn't make him libertarian per se but simply that much closer to the absolute and NOT in an economic sense. Nor does a 5 necessarily make someone an authoritarian.
So 40% of the people who answered this poll are not left-wing libertarians or even left-wing and libertarian but people on the left-wing and the libertarian sides of two separate scales.
|
|
|  |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:23. Apolyton Time is 00:23. |
top of page
|
| archivepost |
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|