Oil & Gas shortages will lead to poverty and fascism

[London Boy]

no no no, you don't understand, this time it'll be done properly

Russia
Mongolia
Spain/Catalonia 1936-1937
Poland
East Germany
Hungary
Czechoslovakia
Romania
Bulgaria
Yugoslavia
Albania
China
Vietnam
Laos
Cambodia
Cuba
Nicaragua
Greneda
Yemen
Somalia
Angola
Mozambique
Benin
Ethiopia
Tanzania

I'm sure there are more examples but all of these countries tired communism, socialism and anarchism and all that is resulted in was bloodshed, oppression and a system of society far, far worse than what it replaced.

Forgive me for thinking there have been too many times this failed ideology has been tested and the human cost to high to even think of having another revolution.

aside from ribbing, the post seems to be about community self-organisation in the abscence of a strong state - which it is presumed has collapsed, so not a repeat of the brutal 'communist' countries of the C20th

Okay all well and good, but why then oppose capitalism, I would like to ideally see the state done away with but I can only say that a genuine free society of free beings is one that will allow the right of people to private property, their own means of business, trade, commerce and financial affairs and a tolerance of the right of free people to make a profit on their labour or buiness ventures.

Thats real anarchism and thats why the false anarchism of the far-left (or as it called itself anarchist-communism or class struggle anarchism) is never going to be anything other than a repeat of the other trend of the left such as Stalinism or statist socialism.

How can the left wing 'anarchists' claim to strive for a society of free peoples with no coercive authority if they insist on imposing their own views of economics and societal norms such as forcing people to collectivise property, abolish money or any other abuse of a individuals freedom.

I have no problem if the left wing 'anarchists' want to build their own cities or communes or whatever and have their system in place for those who wish to live under that system, but why not tolerate the rights of others who would wish to have a different type of stateless society, such as myself as my ideal is stateless free market capitalism (real capitalism as opposed to what passes for capitalism in todays world).

 

[Crispy]

that really is a debate for another thread - far more interesting I think is whether the coming oil crash will be a big enough shock for revolutionary activity like yours and others' to take place. We all know how governments love the status quo, but will any of them be long-sighted enough to buck the trend in order to avoid chaos and disruption down the line?

 

[Yuwipi Woman]

Without the factories and transport infrastructure, the guns will run out of bullets.

Bullets are extremely easy to make with materials on hand. I have a full set of bulletmaking plates and reloading equipment in my garage. You only need about 600 degrees F to melt the shot. That can be done with a woodburning stove or brick kiln.

 

[paimei01]

In modern times money owners have slaves who do the work for them,and they give them money - the slaves are happy
I like the native american way - they were too proud to even think of hiring someone, especially one of their own.
Dictature always goes wrong , communism does not.
Imagine a post peak world where survivors work together and share everything, and not one of them dares to tell anyone else what to do or what moral concepts to have - because each of them has self respect

 

[Crispy]

In modern times money owners have slaves who do the work for them,and they give them money - the slaves are happy
I like the native american way - they were too proud to even think of hiring someone, especially one of their own.
Dictature always goes wrong , communism does not.
Imagine a post peak world where survivors work together and share everything, and not one of them dares to tell anyone else what to do or what moral concepts to have - because each of them has self respect

These people will be killed or beaten into submission

 

[CyberRose]

I think in the future, if we go to war and it is viewed that we are going to war for oil (as many viewed the current Iraq war) I don't think people will see that as an unjust reason to go to war like they do now. If our government said that the Iraq war was to secure oil resources, there would be an uproar and the government would be voted out. In future, I think political parties will actually win support by waging resource wars (if the situation is so bad because of a shortage of resources - like poverty and lawlessness)

Personally, I'm going to invest in a solar panelled wind turbine, and the DVD box set of Ray Mears' Extreme Survival and I reckon I'll be fine

 

[Crispy]

I'll say it again though - the survivalist/lone ranger/eco-hermit lifestyle is just not possible for anything more than a tiny slice of the population.

 

[jæd]

Dictature always goes wrong , communism does not.

Please name at least one Communist country that will be ready for a shift in energy resources...?

Imagine a post peak world where survivors work together and share everything, and not one of them dares to tell anyone else what to do or what moral concepts to have - because each of them has self respect

The bleak survivorist countries are going to be the dictatorships of this world. Capitalism is the most adaptable society we currently have and those are the ones which will surive the coming changes. Dictatorships and "communist" countries just maintain the status quo for the leaders. They will be going to the wall quite soon, or invading their neighbours...

 

[paimei01]

Communism can exist without dictature. Communism is opposed to capitalism, dictature is opposed to democracy.
Let's say there is a group of 100 people, they form a village. Why would 99 work for 1 of them ? And let him give them a little of their work in return ?
My imagination : at first they would all work together and share, after a time groups will form among them, maybe some of them will be looked as more important within the community, they will become leaders, and they will have others do their work, either that, or they will make others do their work by force. In this way a new "class" is created - the nobility
In time they will gather more stuff and will be able to make others work for them by giving them some stuff, not because of the "noble origin" - they will say that is some "medieval" concept, and everybody will agree that is very fair for many to work for 1 because he is rich
If people are not smart enough this what I have written above will always happen. If the people do not change the system will not change, communism is a good idea but it is an utopia, people are not good enough to accept everybody else as equal and do not care about posesions

 

[Fruitloop]

Capitalism is adaptable my arse.

 

[Crispy]

Benevolent robot slaves will set us free from work.

Just thought I'd throw that one in there.

 

[jæd]

Capitalism is adaptable my arse.

As oil becomes more scarce the start-up costs for newer energy sources become less important... There will be a short-term cost when changing energy sources, but I don't see the doom'n'gloom scenario many are predicting...

But of course, we could all just stock up on ammo and tins of beans...

 

[jæd]

Let's say there is a group of 100 people, they form a village.

Villages are the largest unit Communism works for. Larger than that and human nature takes its course and you get a dictatorship. Of course, if you've got any other working examples of Communism, please share.

 

[Fruitloop]

Ah, that old chestnut.

 

[Crispy]

Villages are the largest unit Communism works for. Larger than that and human nature takes its course and you get a dictatorship. Of course, if you've got any other working examples of Communism, please share.

Monkeysphere, innit.

 

[CyberRose]

Communism can exist without dictature. Communism is opposed to capitalism, dictature is opposed to democracy.
Let's say there is a group of 100 people, they form a village. Why would 99 work for 1 of them ? And let him give them a little of their work in return ?
My imagination : at first they would all work together and share, after a time groups will form among them, maybe some of them will be looked as more important within the community, they will become leaders, and they will have others do their work, either that, or they will make others do their work by force. In this way a new "class" is created - the nobility
In time they will gather more stuff and will be able to make others work for them by giving them some stuff, not because of the "noble origin" - they will say that is some "medieval" concept, and everybody will agree that is very fair for many to work for 1 because he is rich
If people are not smart enough this what I have written above will always happen. If the people do not change the system will not change, communism is a good idea but it is an utopia, people are not good enough to accept everybody else as equal and do not care about posesions

Yea well enjoy it while it lasts cos my tribe is on its way over to massacre your men and rape your women, then we'll steal all your stuff and make your kids join our army, then we'll move onto the next village!

 

[Barking_Mad]

evolution not revolution.

 

[muckypup]

all political dogma is flawed by nature of mans inherent greed. ultimately it creates 'mans subservience to man'.

the use of the term man is non gender specific

 

[Fruitloop]

Is it National Gnomic Nugget of Wisdom Day or something?

 

[Crispy]

Thing is, ideology can be a strong driving force in the human mind, but its not the only one, and sometimes not the strongest. Revenge, family, love, greed - all can very easily override the very decent and sensible plans we have made for ourselves.

 

[Crispy]

Is it National Gnomic Nugget of Wisdom Day or something?

It's the soundbite version of 'debate' - so much easier on the eye and mind

 

[Fruitloop]

Politics for the MTV generation

 

[muckypup]

Is it National Gnomic Nugget of Wisdom Day or something?

well i thought id state the obvious minus the tedious and convoluted arguments

 

[Barking_Mad]

Politics for the MTV generation

Pepsi or Coke
Anarchy or Dictatorship.

Vote now to 80888*





*prizes have been already been given away, you stand no chance of winning. Calls charged at £2.99 per minute.

 

[Fruitloop]

prizes have been already been given away, you stand no chance of winning

Capitalism in a nutshell.

 

[nino_savatte]

Yea well enjoy it while it lasts cos my tribe is on its way over to massacre your men and rape your women, then we'll steal all your stuff and make your kids join our army, then we'll move onto the next village!

Careful, there are some folk on Urban who have had a selective irony bypass and they may accuse you of all sorts.

 

[nino_savatte]

Russia
Mongolia
Spain/Catalonia 1936-1937
Poland
East Germany
Hungary
Czechoslovakia
Romania
Bulgaria
Yugoslavia
Albania
China
Vietnam
Laos
Cambodia
Cuba
Nicaragua
Greneda
Yemen
Somalia
Angola
Mozambique
Benin
Ethiopia
Tanzania

There's a problem with your list: namely it operates from the perspective of the so-called capitalist 'free world' (aka The USA and its supporters). The inclusion of countires like Nicaragua and Grenada are particularly revealing, since it was those two countries that were targeted for punishment by Reagan. In the case of the former, the Sandanistas had overwhelming support, whereas the Contras - backed by the US - embarked on a campaign of indiscriminate killings in order to demonstrate their commitment to 'freedom and democracy'.

 

[bendeus]

Never mentioned 'communist' Chile under Allende either.

Wonder why?

 

[ViolentPanda]

Never mentioned 'communist' Chile under Allende either.

Wonder why?

Perhaps even humourless evangelists for capitalism now realise that Allende's Chile was about as "Communist" as a 1970s Arsenal away strip.

 

[slaar]

Communism can exist without dictature. Communism is opposed to capitalism, dictature is opposed to democracy.
Let's say there is a group of 100 people, they form a village. Why would 99 work for 1 of them ? And let him give them a little of their work in return ?

For exactly the same reason they always have in feudal societies, because he's got bigger muscles, more weapons or is more persuasive and smarter. Or a combination of the above.

My imagination : at first they would all work together and share, after a time groups will form among them, maybe some of them will be looked as more important within the community, they will become leaders, and they will have others do their work, either that, or they will make others do their work by force. In this way a new "class" is created - the nobility
In time they will gather more stuff and will be able to make others work for them by giving them some stuff, not because of the "noble origin" - they will say that is some "medieval" concept, and everybody will agree that is very fair for many to work for 1 because he is rich
If people are not smart enough this what I have written above will always happen. If the people do not change the system will not change, communism is a good idea but it is an utopia, people are not good enough to accept everybody else as equal and do not care about posesions

Well, quite. That's why such plans so often fail, because it assumes human nature is more malleable than it actually is. Humans take advantage of the conditions they find themselves in best to further themselves.