Well put. Just to clarify that in my earlier post I am obviously using the term "idealist" in the manner in which it is recognized colloquially and not in the neoplatonic form (which is ironically it's antonym).
mvic, your contextually accurate colloquial usage of the term will have been evident to most. You'll have to forgive me, I used your post as a segue into a Z-bashing, in which I occasionally like to indulge. If you point out fallacies, evasions and outright lies in the Troll's posts for long enough, you will be rewarded with either a series of replies in which he cuts and pastes your exact text, or another series in which he threatens anal penetration. It's always fun to prod him until he snaps
Capitalism is just as much fault as communism, the way in which they have been practiced in the past 100 years... Your concept of wealth flourishing is nonsense. Making payments on a mortgage and credit cards is not wealth... Monetary policy doesn't make people borrow like mad, nor live beyond their means. Our society preaches consumerism and credit, as this feeds the capitalistic system.
ZZZ you are a typically naive idealist. You are a typical cynical rationalizer. Communism doesn't work without force because it runs counter to the totality of human nature. Complete horse-shit. This is the tired old rationalization of greed... Maybe one day humans will evolve to the point where a collective society will be possible but we are so far from that point, millenniums at least and I am sure we will do ourselves in as a species long before we evolve to that point anyway. We stay far from that point because people like you perpetuate myths. All the examples you cite have the force of ostracism involved to keep people in line. Nonsense. No one forced anyone to stay at the communes... The community may not "force" you to abide by their rules physically but emotionally and psychologically the price to pay for not conforming is extremely high (ask Ghandi's wife) Gandhi's wife could have left him if she pleased, he certainly would not have stopped her, as he would not impose his will on her decisions... So it was her choice to stay and pay a price, that is freedom of choice. and it is usually a form of dictatorship anyway in a cultish way(personality, lofty unrealistic ideals), all members are certainly not equal as you idealists would have us believe. Corporations in their own way, are dictatorships. They are just more subtle and perverse. Following up on the premise posted by the OP I don't understand why more people don't find religious symbols of the main religions offensive give the destruction, carnage, misery, and loss of life that can be laid squarely at the feet of most of the world's major religions?[b/] Religions are not to blame, human beings are to blame. And before all you delusional idealist religious freaks come out of the woodwork to attack me think about this: Love is not words and tounge but action and truth. I am sure the more fanatic amongst you will know what I am talking about. Spoken like a delusional cynic... I have felt for some time now that the idealists of this world are the cause of a great deal of the world problems. I feel you are deeply disturbed. The idealists and those savvy few who use and exploit their idealistic fervor (all too easy to do as the idealists are too caught up in their dogma to exercise any reality based critical thought that would protect themselves from the exploiters). Idealistic fervor? Is that what Bush and the neocons exploited to get us into war in Iraq? Idealistic fervor? Is idealistic fervor what entices people to endlessly use plastic to live beyond their means, to live selfishly, to ignore the problems of the weak and the poor? The carrot of "anyone in America can get rich" isn't idealistic fervor? Newbie traders aren't filled with idealistic fervor? You are making very poor arguments...
Your are sufficiently delusional and obsessive to think anyone of those pictured have put into practice the ideal of communism...
go to a country where people suffered long enough from communism and you will see: they do. go into cambodia and show them symbolism of the red khmer. go into africa, southamerica ... and so forth. the thing is that nazi mass murder is the one ctastrophy that happened among "us", the western, civilised, industrialised part of the world. your own pain is always more dominant in your thinking than that of your neighbour. and i bet the cambodians do not care a nothing about concentration camps in poland ...
uh. typical case of overshooting mixed with ambition and naivity. perfect food for george w. and alikes.
The nazis lost a major war, consequently their deeds were exposed by occupying powers-with a point to prove. The soviets didnt lose a major war, so practically none of the proof required has been examined independently, certainly not with the prejudice of of an occupying force-plus, multiple generations have grown up with the hammer and sickle, not knowing anything else, clearly a sentimental attachement has occured at a national level that could only have occured with the swastika, had it been around longer. In short, the continuum of government precludes the hammer and sickle being associated with a single person, unlike the swastika. The fact that Che Guevera t-shirts probably produce more global capitalist income than all of cuba, must be irksome to the die hards.
development of humanity has gone away from pure darwinism. we are no longer forced to follow the survival of the fittest path. and in fact we don't. shortsighted people would have been distinguished by evolution, but we invented eye glasses. we do can choose whether we help the poor or let them starve, while we are sitting in our fancy offices and cars. unfortunately we cannot blame nature for our inability to evolve, if we fail and synthetically hold on to darwinism - which btw we only do if it fits our current, personal interest. a lot of hypocrisy in this. but i assume most quite unconscious.