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

[NASYO]

---

socialismo? dili bagay sa atong nasod.
geographically impossible.
bulag2X atong isla.

OK ang Federalismo.
Apan naa ghapon buslot ni.

Demokrasya na lang ta. Republika.

[elvandesantos]

we just simply cannot please all the population,

[KaRoger]

greetings comrade!

salutations to Jored, to comrade Joma, to the international proletariat and to the revolution!

dili ta mag padala aning ilang mga komentaryo nga walay "IGO" nga basihanan...

nganu naka ingon ko ani?

ang pag ka lupig sa USSR, pag kupog sa Berlin Wall... kay dili tungod sa communismo...

kamu nga mu criticize sa communism wala mo ga tuon ug igo.
define sa COMMUNISM....

define it objectively
present it as it is do not equate it with the dissolution of the USSR...

[KaRoger]

socialismo? dili bagay sa atong nasod.
geographically impossible.
bulag2X atong isla.

OK ang Federalismo.
Apan naa ghapon buslot ni.

Demokrasya na lang ta. Republika.

sayup imong context.
socialism is a economic system while federalism is an administrative system. totally different concepts...

RUSSIA was a FEDERATION within the USSR...
and the USSR was made up of SEVERAL REPUBLICS
UNION OF SOVIET SOCIALIST REPUBLICS..... make sense?? (meaning of USSR)

SOCIALISM is an economic system and DEMOCRACY can work with SOCIALISM.

please before commenting, or throwing hard criticisms about communism or socialism, please please STUDY the TOPIC FIRST!!!!!

i feel sad for you people... you say things you dont even know.

[davebryan18]

taas man kapoy basa.. teehee

[elvandesantos]

greetings comrade!

salutations to Jored, to comrade Joma, to the international proletariat and to the revolution!

dili ta mag padala aning ilang mga komentaryo nga walay "IGO" nga basihanan...

nganu naka ingon ko ani?

ang pag ka lupig sa USSR, pag kupog sa Berlin Wall... kay dili tungod sa communismo...

kamu nga mu criticize sa communism wala mo ga tuon ug igo.
define sa COMMUNISM....

define it objectively
present it as it is do not equate it with the dissolution of the USSR...

simply you want to control the people for the attainment of national pride, success, taas nuo mapanghambog ang nasod mong natawhan... but at the expense of liberty sa mga tao...

for that to succeed, you need support. it could be by mere propaganda, hearsays, choking a communities development by not letting the government do there job, harrasing government or any important installations, recruiting students to do there deeds, taking advantage to less educated and try to sell(or not plant) there beliefs.

the idea of communism maybe so pure anationalism(or so they claim) but the down side would be discontent of the majority of the people. since what really people want is not some federal, republic nor communist government or any fancies... or i could be wrong. what the people need is "just" a government who could give them enough liberty in a way it coincides with the necessary development needed in a particular country and as a result making them happy.

also pagka lupig sa USSR ug ka tumba sa berlin wall is because of the "discontent of the people". whats with all the success of a nation if the people living in it is unhappy.

[entz_fire]

pls. site a nation that is successful in their communist form of govt.

[canister_sa_puwet]

someday i'm going to follow his footstep. I'm sick and tired,, the form of govt here in da Pilipins,,,, full of corruption.

[KaRoger]

simply you want to control the people for the attainment of national pride, success, taas nuo mapanghambog ang nasod mong natawhan... but at the expense of liberty sa mga tao...

for that to succeed, you need support. it could be by mere propaganda, hearsays, choking a communities development by not letting the government do there job, harrasing government or any important installations, recruiting students to do there deeds, taking advantage to less educated and try to sell(or not plant) there beliefs.

the idea of communism maybe so pure anationalism(or so they claim) but the down side would be discontent of the majority of the people. since what really people want is not some federal, republic nor communist government or any fancies... or i could be wrong. what the people need is "just" a government who could give them enough liberty in a way it coincides with the necessary development needed in a particular country and as a result making them happy.

also pagka lupig sa USSR ug ka tumba sa berlin wall is because of the "discontent of the people". whats with all the success of a nation if the people living in it is unhappy.

nah...
u haven't been fully acquainted with
MARXIST philosophy and the DIALECTICS of SPIRIT by Hegel

again equating communism with what happened to the USSR is UNFAIR for communism.... because when KRSUSCHEV sat in power everything went UPSIDE DOWN... please read the history of the USSR from LENIN to KRUSCHEV and see the difference
look at the policies implemented by KRUSCHEV, LENIN, and STALIN

ever wonder why the SINO-SOVIET SPLIT HAPPENED? it was because of KRUSCHEV's REVISIONIST policies
the failure of the USSR is not due to the weakness of SOCIALISM, it was because of the failed policies of REVISIONISM.

[KaRoger]

pls. site a nation that is successful in their communist form of govt.

fo communism to happen 90% of the overall population must be socialist

you have to understand that we are talking about at political economic system... plz refrain from emotional un-founded claim or hatred for communism. how will u understand or even come to appreciate the philosophy if you hate it from the first place without even listening to it.

anyway....

this is what we call historical materialism

primitive communal society - slave society - feudal society - capitalist society - socialist society - communism.

before communism we pass through 5 stages of economic mode of productions.... ang pamaagi sa pag mugna sa mga material pangkinabuhi.

kada stage naa nay contradictions.

primitive = walay class (walay datu o pobre) taw vs. nature
slave = master vs. slave ruling class: master
feudal = landowner vs. tenant ruling class: landowner
capitalist = owner of production tools (mga capitalist) VS. laborer ruling class: owners
socialist = workers vs. remaining elements of the old society & bureaucrat technocrats
communism = no more state, no more class.

ask lang mo ug question nga tinarong... discuss tag tarong il try to explain as much as i can.
im a student of political science. soon to be prof.

t.y.