Prof. Jose Maria Sison's analysis...Interesting read!

[hala tindak jud]

get real man! communism is not effective, it failed in russia and other communist powers so the conclusion is that it is not real but mere fantasy.

" in the real world inequality is equality "

Ngano lagi bai? Kindly enlighten me please? Mao ni ang akong pangutana sad sa uban pero hangtud karon wala gihapon ka deliver sa ilahang claim, unya ikaw mao sd! Pero basin diay makahatag ka sa imong punto ngano nga failure jd ang Communism...Ug palihog basha sad ang uban nako nga na post bai ha!

[rumsfield]

dats the beauty of the system tindak, u hav the oppurtunity to be n'dat class the smarter yo r & yo got beter chances n reaching dat level yo want. But there's one more it's the condition of being free; the power to act or speak or think without externally imposed restraints & dats wat we called FREEDOM! and how sweet it is isn't it? surely yor communism cod not afford or provide dat perks to der pepol. dats y der s'a lot of chaos & mayhem of all the countries dat adapt yor belief. :idea:

[cerebus]

"A classless society is a stagnant society?" kabalo ka sa imong gipangyawit nyor...? Enlighten me please on your idea regrading this. Please

Ug si Deng Xiaoping, was a revisionist renegade...then live with his greedy quotations.

what's the use of working more to earn more in a classless society? none. because you all earn the same. what's the use of studying to be an engineer or a doctor if i earn the same as that of a worker or a farmer when i graduate. why should i let the state company i run produce more product if i earn the same as that of the men on the floor? people got no motivation. why work hard when we all earn the same.

in communist russia before the its fall, private farms (yes, there is private farms that time) produce more crops state farms. why is that? one worker on the state farm said: 'we pretend to work, they pretend to pay.' they got no motivation to produce more.

comrade deng is right. he's a realist. he lived in a communist state and he knows what he's talking about. oops, mea culpa. i forgot. they're not communist to your definition. getting rich is good. for it means i could buy more food to my family, i could have a vacation, i could live comfortable. i could have what i want. what's wrong with that? is getting rich a sin in your communist utopia?

by the way comrade, you have not yet respond to my response to your post. or can't you?

[rumsfield]

tindak by the way when u reply pls. minimize yor bisaya i'ts kinda hard for us to read yor comments.

[hala tindak jud]

dats the beauty of the system tindak, u hav the oppurtunity to be n'dat class the smarter yo r & yo got beter chances n reaching dat level yo want. But there's one more it's the condition of being free; the power to act or speak or think without externally imposed restraints & dats wat we called FREEDOM! and how sweet it is isn't it? surely yor communism cod not afford or provide dat perks to der pepol. dats y der s'a lot of chaos & mayhem of all the countries dat adapt yor belief. :idea:

mao bah? sure jud ka? wala pa may nasud nga nakakab-ot lagi og Komi...

kung maghisgot lagi ta ug mga nasud nga ingon ninyo nga nakakab-ot na og Komi, giunsa pagkabao ninyo nga Komi na sila, og unsa man sd diay ang depinisyon nato sa KOMUNISMO diay? ingana ra gd ang ganahan nako nga argumento unta, dili man unta ta maabot sa matud sa pa sa uban nga nag propose ko ug usa ka KOMI state...when man? Our argument was on the topic about your views about Communism, then, given to your POVs, as what you already stated...then how come we can say that thru our manifestations it is the thing that happened...

ug ganahan man ko molituk sa akong pinalangga nga pulong beh...Gahisgut man kaha ta og Kagawasan dinhi, unya dili man diay mo gana. Sagdi lang gud og banga kaayo ang akong binisaya, tinuoray man sd pagkasulti.
Sige sa sunod i will try...

[hala tindak jud]

"A classless society is a stagnant society?" kabalo ka sa imong gipangyawit nyor...? Enlighten me please on your idea regrading this. Please

Ug si Deng Xiaoping, was a revisionist renegade...then live with his greedy quotations.

what's the use of working more to earn more in a classless society? none. because you all earn the same. what's the use of studying to be an engineer or a doctor if i earn the same as that of a worker or a farmer when i graduate. why should i let the state company i run produce more product if i earn the same as that of the men on the floor? people got no motivation. why work hard when we all earn the same.

in communist russia before the its fall, private farms (yes, there is private farms that time) produce more crops state farms. why is that? one worker on the state farm said: 'we pretend to work, they pretend to pay.' they got no motivation to produce more.

comrade deng is right. he's a realist. he lived in a communist state and he knows what he's talking about. oops, mea culpa. i forgot. they're not communist to your definition. getting rich is good. for it means i could buy more food to my family, i could have a vacation, i could live comfortable. i could have what i want. what's wrong with that? is getting rich a sin in your communist utopia?

by the way comrade, you have not yet respond to my response to your post. or can't you?

then asa naman ani ang contradiction between the classes? d'you think as subtle as what deng sez? getting rich is good, if tanan wala na galisod, look at China after the fall of the Gangs of Four? D'you think that renegade answered the farmer's call? The free education as what Mao is trying to give? How about the Tiananmen Square Massacre? Look at China now? tho they are economically stable compared nato, pero what i want to talk abpout here is the classes they have. They have still farmers, they have this landlords...so if we stick to the definition sa Communism, therefore China hasn't reached that state.

I doubt if a doctor will earn as much as the farmer will going to earn...
and, unya ra... you are contradicting the defintion of Communism, w/c is a classless state...

a farmer can be a doctor if he wants too, a doctor can be a musician if he wanted too, everyone can do things they wanted basta dili makalapas sa katungod sa tao og sa kalibutan.

diin man ka og idea nga it is a sin kung madato ka if maabot ka sa usa ka Commie state?

I objectify imong subjective thought bai,

ug unsa nga question nimo akong gustong tubagon unta?

[cerebus]

then asa naman ani ang contradiction between the classes? d'you think as subtle as what deng sez? getting rich is good, if tanan wala na galisod, look at China after the fall of the Gangs of Four? D'you think that renegade answered the farmer's call? The free education as what Mao is trying to give? How about the Tiananmen Square Massacre? Look at China now? tho they are economically stable compared nato, pero what i want to talk abpout here is the classes they have. They have still farmers, they have this landlords...so if we stick to the definition sa Communism, therefore China hasn't reached that state.

I doubt if a doctor will earn as much as the farmer will going to earn...
and, unya ra... you are contradicting the defintion of Communism, w/c is a classless state...

a farmer can be a doctor if he wants too, a doctor can be a musician if he wanted too, everyone can do things they wanted basta dili makalapas sa katungod sa tao og sa kalibutan.

diin man ka og idea nga it is a sin kung madato ka if maabot ka sa usa ka Commie state?

I objectify imong subjective thought bai,

ug unsa nga question nimo akong gustong tubagon unta?

i've been waiting for you, obi wan

about getting rich is a sin on communist state is a question for you not a conclusion. so your answer is. . . ?

getting rich is good. others don't want to or are not trying to because they are happy with what they have or just plain lazy or just like to whine. so, they are always be someone that is poor. it's not the fault of the rich or someone whose trying to be (i'm one of them, btw). there is always be farmers. and landlords too. the landlords on red china (like in red russia before) were farmers who were given more (not own) lands because they are more efficient than the state farms. they are allowed to hire people to work for their farms. what's wrong with that? it is because they are better farmer? there is always someone who is better even among farmers. its reality. and the state finds that out.

about free education, they have it even without mao. us too.

i'm still waiting for the response for this post of mine: Jun 09, 2005 7:49 pm. i got some question i want you to answer. if you don't mind.

me don't understand this:

'I doubt if a doctor will earn as much as the farmer will going to earn...'

could you elaborate this please in a brief manner. thank you.

another thing:

'Look at China now? tho they are economically stable compared nato, pero what i want to talk abpout here is . . .'

you don't want to talk that china is progressing because they are moving towards a market economy. all you want to discuss is classless society? ok. you could always choose your weapon in a duel.

[jonciocon]

Maayo lang na ang communism/socialism sa mga tawo nga wala nay ugma! In reality, there is always ABC and 123. Kasabot ka!

[jonciocon]

mao bah? sure jud ka? wala pa may nasud nga nakakab-ot lagi og Komi...

Illusion ra lagi na ang Komonismo.. Hanggaw man ka!

[Greyfox]

no oi ang real issue here is not about Communism / Socailism or Democracy or Freedom or any of that.

To put it plainly ... "Hala Tindak Jud" just loves to hear himself speak.
ganahan lang gyud na siya mang hambog pud intawn nga
naa pud intawn siyay na kamaho-an. Kai sa pag lalis lalis
niya diri sa forums diri raman siya ni bati ug ka anyag (kuno)