Does the end justify the means!

[Groucho]

The end justifies the means.

Provided. The means do actually lead to the desired and justified end. The end is itself justifiable. The means to the end do not cancel out the justification for the end.

E.g. To save a life is justifiable as an end. To chuck a nuclear missile at an aggressor does not secure the desired end as it kills the victim as well as the attacker. If the life is that of Cliff Richard the end is not justifiable. If to save the life of a decent individual you have to kill two other decent individuals (or worse still have to let Cliff Richard live) the desired end is cancelled out by the worseness overall outcome.

 

[Random]

Provided. The means do actually lead to the desired and justified end. The end is itself justifiable. The means to the end do not cancel out the justification for the end.

But they do, so very often, as the history of Leninism shows Your argument is basically that any horrors can be justified as long as they get the 'desired end'. Well that's a great excuse for those in power to do what they like.

Edit: I knew revol would pull me up on that one, the intellectually snobby wee knut

 

[Groucho]

But they do, so very often, as the history of Leninism shows Your argument is basically that any horrors can be justified as long as they get the 'desired end'. Well that's a great excuse for those in power to do what they like.

Edit: I knew revol would pull me up on that one, the intellectually snobby wee knut

No, my argument is that any horrors are justified so long as they result in the termination of Cliff Richard.

But quite apart from Cliff R, it is clear that the unleashing of untold horrors will not lead to a desirable end.

 

[Random]

it is clear that the unleashing of untold horrors will not lead to a desirable end.

No, it's not clear at all. Secret police, secret trials, mass executions have all been justified by Leninists in the name of reaching a desired end. Once you've made it clear that communism can be reached by anti-communist methods, then the field's clear for all manner of horrors, which can be subjectively justified by the people doing them.

 

[Groucho]

No, it's not clear at all. Secret police, secret trials, mass executions have all been justified by Leninists in the name of reaching a desired end. Once you've made it clear that communism can be reached by anti-communist methods, then the field's clear for all manner of horrors, which can be subjectively justified by the people doing them.

I'm not in favour of "Secret police, secret trials, mass executions". I am in favour of executing Cliff Richard.

 

[revol68]

No, it's not clear at all. Secret police, secret trials, mass executions have all been justified by Leninists in the name of reaching a desired end. Once you've made it clear that communism can be reached by anti-communist methods, then the field's clear for all manner of horrors, which can be subjectively justified by the people doing them.

look if your going to be a soft fucker for Cliff Richard thats up to you, but the proletarian revolution cna afford such stalling.

Come the day he's a fucking dead man!

 

[Random]

I'm not in favour of "Secret police, secret trials, mass executions".

Not even if they'll 'lead to the desired and justified end'.?

 

[Random]

Come the day he's a fucking dead man!

As long as he's killed by communist methods, like popular lynching or revolutionary tribunal, but not of he's taken out of our hands by a vanguard elite who want to kill him 'for us.'

 

[Groucho]

Not even if they'll 'lead to the desired and justified end'.?

They wouldn't.

But if it is the ONLY way to be rid of Cliff Richard then, well fuck it, so be it.

 

[revol68]

Not even if they'll 'lead to the desired and justified end'.?

we've already stressed that by their very nature they can't achieve it!

if they could achieve their desired end i'd have no problem with it, but they can't infact they undermine it.

I mena if shooting someone in the head could bring them back to life i would do it.

Of course it doesn't.

 

[Random]

we've already stressed that by their very nature they can't achieve it!

'We' might have, but It's a central plank of Leninism that communism can be achieved through the use of state repression.

 

[revol68]

'We' might have, but It's a central plank of Leninism that communism can be achieved through the use of state repression.

yes and they are fucking wrong.

 

[Groucho]

'We' might have, but It's a central plank of Leninism that communism can be achieved through the use of state repression.

No, it isn't. Stalinism sure.

Only a democratic revolution - 'the emancipation of the workers is the act of the workers themselves' - could genuinly free humanity from the shackles of piss poor middle of the road easy listening Christian pop.

 

[Random]

No, it isn't. Stalinism sure.

Leninism includes, in theory, setting up a workers' state that will carry out repressive functions. In practise, Lenin and Trotsky, and many other Leninists in movements in South america, asia, etc have set up police forces that have carried out brutal repression.

 

[sovietpop]

Leninism includes, in theory, setting up a workers' state that will carry out repressive functions. In practise, Lenin and Trotsky, and many other Leninists in movements in South america, asia, etc have set up police forces that have carried out brutal repression.

And for those of you interested, here's an article that discusses the Russian Revolution as an example of means determining the end ....

Freedom and Revolution

 

[cats hammers]

Leninism includes, in theory, setting up a workers' state that will carry out repressive functions. In practise, Lenin and Trotsky, and many other Leninists in movements in South america, asia, etc have set up police forces that have carried out brutal repression.

and had they been alive a mere 40/20 years longer, would have presumably helped Mr Richard to his first record deal.

 

[Groucho]

Leninism includes, in theory, setting up a workers' state that will carry out repressive functions.

A workers democracy that will defend workers democracy against attacks from the deposed capitalist class...unless you think that overnight all will be immediately communist with no need for a fight to get there..somewhat utopian.

Lenin and Trotsky were unfortunately fighting to defend an isolated revolution based on a minority working class attacked by a whole number of hostile countries. The invadors and the whites set about massacring every socialist, every jew (the worst massacres of jews in history until Hitler came along) - the cost of defeat was unthinkable. But the isolation of revolution on such a weak basis is not something that today applies. There would be no excuse for such weakness in an advanced capitalist country such as the UK or the majority of the World. What may have been a tragic necessity then holding on to the desperate hope that the German revolution was around the corner - would be inexcusable today. There are positive lessons to learn, but no blue print to follow.

In practise... many other Leninists in movements in South america, asia, etc have set up police forces that have carried out brutal repression.

Stalinists modelling themselves on the Soviet Union/China etc.

What the fuck is going on anyway?? The real issue of ridding the World of Cliff Richard seems to be beyond discussion for some people.

 

[Random]

But the isolation of revolution on such a weak basis is not something that today applies.

So brutal methods were justified then, and would be justified if used today, as long as used by a revolutionary movement under severe attack?

As for killing Cliff, I've already answered that -- your methods would involve whisking him off by the professionals, and brutalising him in some secret police station's cellar, instead of carrying out his due by popular action

 

[soulman]

and had they been alive a mere 40/20 years longer, would have presumably helped Mr Richard to his first record deal.

Why do you still smell middle class?