: But who will guard the guardians? A violent revolution does sound like a very appealing solution; however, it is unlikely to occur because of the very reasons you listed: control of the media by the bourgousie.
Ah my comrade, most of the media is influenced by those neo-socialist liberals, we have a wedge to widen for the revolution. Look over the newspapers of today there are stories to agitate the working class. I know several journalists and many are, knowingly or not, on our side.
: However control of the media by "the guardians of Scientific Socialism" is no better than the current system of propaganda. The (ostensible) reason for a free press is to allow for teh free flow of ideas, debate, and concurrent decision by the masses who then engage in the democratic process, so they don't have to worry about "the guardians of Scientific Socialism"
Free speech, so early on in the revolution will allow the weed of capitalism to compete with our socialist future comrade, you must know that.
: Uhhhh, whatever you say. I think economic revolution is sufficient; destroying the family seems to be really unneccessry
It is central comrade! If people will value one person over another then egalitarianism is at an end. It is from the tiny seeds of such discrimination that capitalism grows - it is the bud that needs to be nipped. Our socialist future will be an egalitarian one where each person values each other person eqaully or it will fail.
: Placing that kind of power in the hands of the state is a little too dangerous. It can quickly lead to the creation of a Hitlerjugend or whatever the socialist equivalent would be. A side note, you seem to have a very mechanical view of sex; how disappointing.
I understand your fears but please understand that a revolution takes courage, bold steps to create change. Scientific Socialism.
: Uhh, whatever you say. Heavy drug use and other self destructive behaviour is, too a certain extent, natural for youth. However, the sheer depravity of some users in their stupidity is the result of some personal reason and may/ may not be because of economic dislocation. I see no reason why drug use would cease under a socialist alternative.
You have stated that drug use is personal? Please understand comrade that an egalitarian society does not blame a comrade for "their stupidity" for it threatens the equality of mankind. When each person sees the other as equal he will not be driven to exceed or deprave 'himself' for he will be part of the collective society.
: I see no reason why private groups can provide charity if they want to, but I think they should play only a minor role. Universal healthcare, housing, etc. is very easy to achieve and should probably be the first things socialized. My only problem with private religious facilities is that besides tacitly pushimg dogma in what is a public good, they also usually deny some forms of care under auspice of their "religious principles". That is why abortion, family planning, and birth control is not covered by insurance companies (viagra is though) and is not available in many hospitals.
You make fine points, religion has no place in a collective - it discriminates. I must contend your idea of private charity - we are thoroughly against it! What would you have? one man helping another more than a stranger? One man choosing whom to help? This is not egalitarian - it is capitalist!
: Your right on this one allright!
I amm pleased you perceive it.
: : There you have it comrades. 5 imperatives of our socialist future.
: But a socialist future that I don't want to live in, at least not taht socialist future.
This saddens me comrade for you seem to have understood many points - perhaps now you are clearer?
McSpotlight: To my (somewhat fuzzy) mind; it seems a little unrealistic to value all people equally; egalitarianism is the realisation that all people are equal; not that all people are identical...