Is Communism Really THAT Bad?

[Diyala]

Oh, I didn't know that.


So, I guess that isn't happening.

The point isn't whether it's happening or not , you can't deny the value of something just because others don't dedicate themselves for it , the point rather is this thing existed , done and at some places is still being done, and had remarkable consequences for both sides , well at least there came a time in the Islamic society where they couldn't find the poor on which they would contribute Zakat !

So it's like Tithe to a christian church, right?

Not exactly , there are various differences among which is the amount paid . As far as I know Christians must pay 10% of their income to the church , Muslims on the other hand must pay 2,5% of their income on Zakat as minimum , as the maximum can't stop at a specific number. I really want to know more about Christianity in that field , in Islam the system that guarantees the demolition of poverty is Zakat that is paid by those who can financially afford it , and it isn't taken from people under the supervision of the government , it's just an individual responsibility.
What is the strategy to demolish poverty in your country and how can they decrease it ?

The United States did not become the financial standard of the world accidentally.
The global financial system is not collapsing

You cannot deny the adverse role capitalism played in leading the world to the global financial crisis in 2008 that people are still suffering its consequences every now and then. Every day we hear of the collapse of some great banks, some financial institutions, financial markets with their indicators up and down ; what they gain in the morning can be lost by the evening or at the best situations they remain stable without taking any action. Capitalism was and still is the system of everlasting financial crises and its history can tell facts and figures about its continuous and frequent crises .

Obviously it's like impossible to have it stands without such problems and the defect from which these problems stem lies in the disruption of the structure in capitalism itself and not necessarily in one of its aspects or the government and individual adopting it .
The contradiction between the greed and the desire to profit the individual - this is the most important features of capitalism - and the possibility of the stability of the capitalist system, is a contradiction that cannot be resolved within capitalism itself ;individuals will always be within the system seeking profits without the least consideration to the mutual interests .This imbalance between these two extremes will inevitably lead to crises ,and to maintain a balance is impossible because of the nature of the social order and the capitalistic political system that gives the individual the power to break this contradiction in his favor at the expense of society.

Despite the unfair methods used in stock markets which are gambling, speculation and usury, they usually manage to manipulate the financial system and only create finical crises, not to mention that they are never guaranteed.

So , we could simply elicit why the pioneers of the capitalist system themselves are the ones who are demanding the replacement of the capitalist system with more equitable system for all mankind.

I jumped on your post because you stated that there are more than two governing philosophies.
Like I said, I'm sure most people are aware of that fact, but the discussion was about whether or not Communism is inherently evil.
Which it seems like it is.

So is the alternative , and the proofs are enough I guess.

When you track two contradictory systems that have greatly proved their fatal inability through ages , still not wanting to hear,consider or get a deep look at the new one which has avoided all the gaps mentioned for the excuse it wasn't called for will just sound arbitrary !

Capitalism mainly based on exploitation , and the solution for all these problems lies in adopting mechanisms of ending exploitation ;the exploitation of man by man, the exploitation of the strong for the weak ,the exploitation and control of a class or elite for the capabilities of communities as a whole. The decreased resources and increasing population do not require a total monopoly of some people - that only represents 2 per cent of the world -in the capabilities of the whole world , they rather require just distribution of wealth between nations and individuals , and I assume any different solution than this will only be the base of another problem. But If the West refuses to adopt Islamic economic system for ideological reasons, then at least all Muslim countries have to apply its mechanisms which proved a notable success at the level of banks and Islamic transactions in all countries.

[Order]

As far as I know Christians must pay 10% of their income to the church

Christians are not required to give money to anyone for any reason.
It doesn't matter because making a charitable donation is not a financial system and it is not a form of government.

You cannot deny the adverse role capitalism played in leading the world to the global financial crisis in 2008

2008?
Oh, I remember that year. I was at sea for 297 days because some group of religious extremists were threatening Isreal and a country full of communists was threatening Japan. The condition of the world economy was not a big issue that year, international conflict was, at least for the countries who were being threatened.
That was the year that Japan quit protesting nuclear power, specifically the retirement of the USS kittyhawk and the arrival of a nuclear-powered carrier, the USS George Washington. They quit protesting because their problems were not ideological or financial, they were having ballistic missiles fired at them by North Korea.

So, no. I don't remember an ecomomic crisis in 2008. I remember helping to protect the citizens of a foreign country from having to go to war.

I do, however, recognize that most of the world is not as financially stable as the US. Is that the fault of capitalism?
That there are greedy people living within the system?
Nope, greed existed long before capitalism. It exists in every culture and within every financial system, even yours. It is not a contradiction of the philosophy of any system, it is an unfortunate quality of human society.
There will be greed and envy and hate.

Stop blaming your supposed problems on a foreign country's financial system.
Just because there are poor people does not mean that capitalism made them poor. Each country is entitled to their own financial system and governing philosophy, if America's system were so terrible, no other country would have invested in it.

It is because American capitalism works so well that foreign countries have adopted it's ideas and invested in our stockmarket.

So , we could simply elicit why the pioneers of the capitalist system themselves are the ones who are demanding the replacement of the capitalist system with more equitable system for all mankind.

What?
The United States, as a nation, will remain capitalist. Our system has worked for a while and it has worked better than any other idea.

I don't know if you realize this, but there have been people living in poverty since the beginning of time.
There is nothing inherently malicious in the capitalist system as it stands today. The rules have been refined and the methods modified to allow individuals to succeed or fail based on their own abilities without having to step on others or depend on handouts to get there.
Name one other system which works that way.
Seriously, one.

Capitalism mainly based on exploitation

Wrong.
Capitalism is based completely on providing a satisfactory product or service for a reasonable price.
Don't spout ignorant garbage as if it's truth, you arrogant ass.

the exploitation and control of a class or elite for the capabilities of communities as a whole.

That's called oppression.
What you're trying to state is that the united states is a tyrannical oppressor of the innocent masses.

You're a douchebag.
I don't even need to point out specific occasions or philosophies this country is based on to disprove that.
But I'm going to anyway.
The Gulf War,
World War 2,
My 10 months at sea in 2008.

The purpose of all these military actions was to protect the citizens from tyrannical dictators' spreading oppression into nearby nations.
If we were so invested in preventing the oppression of foreign citizens and defended them with american lives...
Why would it make sense that we are trying to take advantage of those same people we died to defend?

It's not about control, you moron. The point is that each individual should be allowed basic human rights to live without fear, to keep what they earn and to work toward their goals.

they rather require just distribution of wealth between nations and individuals

So now we hear the root of your arguement.
You want all nations and individuals to split the money evenly.

How is that noble?

You want to piggy-back of my sacrifices and hard work so you can have the same things I have?
I earned my pay a thousand times over and never once stepped on anyone else in order to do it.

But that's what it comes down to,
You don't think it's fair that I was afforded the oportunity to earn my pay, keep what I earned and use it to buy the things I want.

That is truely unfair.
You SHOULD have the oportunity to do as I did.
It is unfair that you do not feel like you have the option to serve your country and know that you are making a positive impact in the lives of foreign citizens as well as your own countrymen.
It is unfair that you feel as though you are unable to work at your highest potential and enjoy the reward for a job well done.
All of that is truely unfair.

But it is not the United States which put you in that position.
If it were possible for me to make it so, every individual on the planet would have the same oportunities we have in this country.
But I can't change your social structure or economic system.

Redistributing our wealth throughout the world would put a lot of money in other's pockets. That's true.
But Americans would continue manufacturing, engineering and inventing and foreign countries would continue importing, learning and buying.

The money would end up back in this country anyway because we build the technology and develop techniques.
Remember, the US is a very young country with a very young financial philosophy. We are not an important figure in the global scale by default. There is nothing we had 200 years ago that any other country couldn't have had.


Your problem is, you're waiting for everyone else to start being fair and to start doing the right thing.
Start being fair yourself. Start doing the right thing on your own.
That's how I did it.
That's how my family does it.
That's how it is supposed to be done.

There are plenty of excuses, but none of them make a difference.
Make a real difference, stop making excuses.

[Diyala]

Calm down little boy……
I'm really afraid that you will have a heart attack out of this anger!

You know you just look like a vampire who was exposed abruptly to sunlight ( forgive the image, I've been reading lots of vampire literature recently)
That is exactly the way someone in the wrong behaves when he is tragically refuted by right.

You could have expressed your opinion politely. I've noticed whenever I want to discuss this subject rationally, you just jump to politics and start bad mouthing me when none of this is actually needed. I can also interpret your pathetic reaction, simply you have nothing logical to say.
I am not saying anymore because you are not a match in an intellectual discussion, the brains of yours is only suitable for street fights.

Just Remember being strong never means being right or fair !


A piece of advice.. Please have mercy on your nerves.

[Order]

So, your point is proven because I used a couple of explitives as I punched holes through nearly every point you attempted to make.

You must be right, even though every statistic you cited is flat-out wrong.

You have proven that your faith is better than any form of government without having to offer a single accurate statement.
Not only that, but you've proven that the US financial system is the cause of everyone's problems without citing a single instance where this took place.

Thats pretty impressive.
You must be proud of proving big bad Order wrong with such little effort, research and logic.
Good job.

[Locke4God]

YES!!!

Ask Cubans if they like it as they cross hundreds of miles of water to escape it.

Jesus, who would ever ask if Communism is "that bad"? Ever hear of anybody from a capitalist nation rowing out of their country under cover of darkness?

[Hobaginator]

I agree with everything Sasquach and Order said. I disagree with everyone else. Especially the muslim chick, because according to Islam her only rights are to be a stay at home mom who keeps her mouth shut.

SOLUTION: Shoot the commies and jail the commie sympathizers.

You're welcome, Earth.

[Clint]

SOLUTION: Shoot the commies and jail the commie sympathizers.

What would be the purpose of doing that? Communism is a political party focused around socialism. It eliminates social classes, the need for money, and creates social order.

The problem isn't communism. It's a very good idea. The problem is that it's never been done right. When you view communism as something that imprisons a people, and restricts them in various forms, you aren't actually referring to communism, but rather, a dictatorship.

Nowhere is it written in the idea that a communistic society must be ruled by a dictator or a tyrant. Those circumstances merely came to be, most likely because of tyrants taking advantage of the common ownership of the means of production of their nation, under the ideology of communism.

There is nothing the matter with communism, but rather, the people in charge of communistic nations. Stating that you want to eliminate an entire political movement by means of death would mean the genocide of millions of innocent people. And to imprison anybody for sharing a different opinion then that of your own is simply tyrannical.

I truly hope that you do not consider yourself an American, because if you do, then you should be ashamed. No system of control is perfect, but just because one has been scorned upon because of the actions of bad men doesn't make it a bad system.

[Catalana]

What would be the purpose of doing that? Communism is a political party focused around socialism. It eliminates social classes, the need for money, and creates social order.

The problem isn't communism. It's a very good idea. The problem is that it's never been done right. When you view communism as something that imprisons a people, and restricts them in various forms, you aren't actually referring to communism, but rather, a dictatorship.

Nowhere is it written in the idea that a communistic society must be ruled by a dictator or a tyrant. Those circumstances merely came to be, most likely because of tyrants taking advantage of the common ownership of the means of production of their nation, under the ideology of communism.

There is nothing the matter with communism, but rather, the people in charge of communistic nations. Stating that you want to eliminate an entire political movement by means of death would mean the genocide of millions of innocent people. And to imprison anybody for sharing a different opinion then that of your own is simply tyrannical.

I truly hope that you do not consider yourself an American, because if you do, then you should be ashamed. No system of control is perfect, but just because one has been scorned upon because of the actions of bad men doesn't make it a bad system.

You're totally right !!!! Thank you to place words about what I think ! I'm sure I wouldn't have been able to write what you wrote ( lack of vocabulary ).
Gulags time is bygone !

[Hobaginator]

[QUOTE=The Goddamn Clint Eastwood;1334819]The problem isn't communism. It's a very good idea. The problem is that it's never been done right. Nowhere is it written in the idea that a communistic society must be ruled by a dictator or a tyrant. Those circumstances merely came to be, most likely because of tyrants taking advantage of the common ownership of the means of production of their nation, under the ideology of communism.

There is nothing the matter with communism, but rather, the people in charge of communistic nations.[QUOTE]

Good response... You are obviously very well informed as opposed to most people who have posted in this thread. I agree, the problem is dictatorship more than anything... the inherent problem lies in the fact that not everybody was created equally... there are retards and there are geniuses... hard workers and slackers. The problem with communism is that the needs of the many will be supported on the backs of the few; not to say that that isn't a huge problem in EVERY society, because it is. However, in a capitolist economy every human is afforded the opportunity to rise above the rest, seperate himself or herself from the average population and become something great. Success is impossible when you are chained to an idealogical system designed around equality. It's a eutopian ideal that can and will never work. Human beings are animals, we're just exceptionally smart and well adapted to life on Earth. My point is this: if everyone has equal shares of everything, who enforces the rules? Who is in charge of equal distribution? Who creates laws? Why should an electrical engineer have the same assets as a picket fence builder? What's the drive for a person to learn new and valuable skills? Who assigns roles?

Communism isn't freedom. That's why I don't support it. I don't do well with rules. I think that the majority of society's rules are put in place to protect the weak and limit the strong. Here's an example: I used to do mixed martial arts. When I first started out when I was 18, there was 5 rules. Last "show/fight" that I did we had to go over 3 pages of single-spaced 12 point font worth of rules. That really takes the fun and freedom out of it. What I'm trying to convey is the idea that rigid rules limit freedom, and there will always be a seperate group of individuals to enforce those rules upon the masses.

Communism is flawed. Capitolism isn't perfect, but it's better.

The only way to protect freedom is to limit the spread of flawed systems such as dictatorships and tyranny, otherwise future generations may not be able to do things as simple as walk outside and piss on an apple tree in their own back yard. It may seem brutal, because it ****ing is. Communism is slavery and my DNA will not grow up in chains.

"Heeeeeeeere commies commies commies!"

[Diyala]

I agree with everything Sasquach and Order said. I disagree with everyone else. Especially the muslim chick, because according to Islam her only rights are to be a stay at home mom who keeps her mouth shut.

SOLUTION: Shoot the commies and jail the commie sympathizers.

You're welcome, Earth.

I am not here to try to convince you to believe that capitalism is not as perfect as you claim, I'm rather here to tell you that not everything a muslim chick says is related to her staying at home and to warn you against your ignorance.

Maybe muslim women seem wronged to you, but things are not what they appear to be. Islam has appreciated women and respected their humanity and nature. It has asserted her rights and duties. Having a good education is a must for every single muslim including women . Islam has not actually forced women to stay at home, , they can work and earn their own living, have their own money, inherit their relatives, buy and sell and experience everything that does them no harm . Islam is the only religion that keeps a woman's family name after marriage which means it approves their single independent being. There is an entire chapter in Qura'an specified to women and women's rights.

And as for staying at home, actually what took me so long to reply is that I was traveling and shopping for the entire week. Plus, I'm single and I'm not forced to get married unless I like it.
Muslim women are requested to wear Hijab because this way they protect themselves against sexual harassment and rape .

[Hobaginator]

Maybe muslim women seem wronged to you, but things are not what they appear to be.

I don't know about that. I have a friend here in the states who's fiance left her muslim husband and divorced him. He beat her, insulted her, and pretty much out right disrespected her, and told her she should be publicly stoned to death. Maybe your area is different, I don't know. I don't know much about you or where you're from. But I do know that in some places, it's commonplace for muslim men to mutilate women publicly, beat them publicly, and they're treated as second class beings. Round here that don't fly. If I walked outside and saw a man smacking a woman, you better believe he'd be eating his teeth for dinner.

But let me not act like I'm better than people I've never met. All I'm saying is that there's a reason why, when U.S. soldiers walked through the streets of Fallujah, women and children flocked to them. Taliban is all about genocide.
I can't say the same about the various PMCs that rove around blowing up mosques, killing nuns and shit, because I know a little about that too.

My point is that you're supporting an out-dated religion that advocates such things as taking women as prisoners of war and raping them - says that a woman's testimony is worth half of a mans - says that a man should get double the inheritance of a woman - and says that men are a degree above women in class. Oh yeah and how about the whole thing comparing men's wives to fields to be plowed... "go into them any way you like"... So if you have a husband it's ok for him to just jam it right up the pooper against your will? Your religion says so.

I'm not blowing smoke... I've studied religions in college, read much of the religious texts, and formulated my own opinions based on what I've read.

Is the bible any better? Nope, and I'm not Christian.

So long as you support a religion that says you're a second class citizen, I'm going to keep throwing that in your face every time you use Islam to support your arguements.

[Heartless Angel]

What would be the purpose of doing that? Communism is a political party focused around socialism. It eliminates social classes, the need for money, and creates social order.

The problem isn't communism. It's a very good idea. The problem is that it's never been done right. When you view communism as something that imprisons a people, and restricts them in various forms, you aren't actually referring to communism, but rather, a dictatorship.

Nowhere is it written in the idea that a communistic society must be ruled by a dictator or a tyrant. Those circumstances merely came to be, most likely because of tyrants taking advantage of the common ownership of the means of production of their nation, under the ideology of communism.

There is nothing the matter with communism, but rather, the people in charge of communistic nations. Stating that you want to eliminate an entire political movement by means of death would mean the genocide of millions of innocent people. And to imprison anybody for sharing a different opinion then that of your own is simply tyrannical.

I truly hope that you do not consider yourself an American, because if you do, then you should be ashamed. No system of control is perfect, but just because one has been scorned upon because of the actions of bad men doesn't make it a bad system.

If there were enough things in the world for everyone to have as much as they wanted, perhaps communism would work that way. However this is not the case. Things have value because things are limited. Money is simply a tool to measure the scarcity of an object, because it's easier than trying to figure out the exchange rate between chickens and Ferraris. As there is a limit to things we want, either everyone is going to get too little to be satisfied, or not everyone is going to get something in the first place. Order is incompatible with either of these, because people will attempt to upset that order for their own good. This is why communism always requires a dictator in reality, because nobody with the ability to be above average would accept the system without somebody forcing it down their throats.

The only way communism could ever be 'done right' is if every single human being in the world were on board with it, truly cared more about the collective than themselves, and didn't mind living in terrible conditions just to make sure that no one person anywhere is living in slightly worse conditions than anyone else. This will never happen. Human nature is incompatible with the idea of true communism. Humans seek to live and grow as individuals, not a collective. One could just as easiy call capitalism a perfect system with no inherent flaws because it would work amazingly and everyone would be happy if the majority of the human race were satisfied with living in poverty so a few of us could thrive. Because that isn't the actual state of reality, none of that matters. Communism and capitalism are both flawed in reality. The problem isn't the systems. The problem is people.

[Diyala]

The only way communism could ever be 'done right' is if every single human being in the world were on board with it, truly cared more about the collective than themselves, and didn't mind living in terrible conditions just to make sure that no one person anywhere is living in slightly worse conditions than anyone else. This will never happen. Human nature is incompatible with the idea of true communism. Humans seek to live and grow as individuals, not a collective. One could just as easiy call capitalism a perfect system with no inherent flaws because it would work amazingly and everyone would be happy if the majority of the human race were satisfied with living in poverty so a few of us could thrive. Because that isn't the actual state of reality, none of that matters. Communism and capitalism are both flawed in reality. The problem isn't the systems. The problem is people.

This can only work within a good loving small family that share the same blood and in a temporary hard time and Not with a society with such impossible perfect idealism ! People were not created to work for others or to make sure they are good just out of good intentions and the love of goodness , nay even within the religious frame ppl would quit the charity if it is on the expense of their own living because simply it is not fair to work with my own sweat and one will take it with nothing ! where is the motivation for me to work ? oppression or love of goodness ! well if you're not living your entire life with the first then you will find yourself running out of the second coz that is injustice not goodness which is by force ! goodness is something overwhelms you not forced on you. So why would anyone lie to himself in believing that this is fair to reduce poverty ! this is just like what the church was doing with ppl back in the medieval ages when its heads take money from ppl by the name of charity while it was all given to priests and mayors which means someone will go mad out of this and turn against it to demolish it

! Communism and capitalism are both flawed in reality. The problem isn't the systems. The problem is people.

How can we make Humans the problem when you say that these are incompatible with their nature ! when this is something related to humans structural system –that is never to change- then it has no room for us to blame or accuse people of misdoing a system that can bear changes and restructuring . Greed is something in ones innate and man is not wrong when wishes to gather more ! Loving ourselves that we refuse to work for others is no wrong for we are born with the innate freedom in us.

All things in the world are made and prudently created to make a suitable fitting life for Human beings and not to restrict them in a small suppressing frame of oppression . Things must be created to be compatible with our nature , we are not to twist our nature to fit things!

Humans are the most progressive creatures the Lord created but when living with a chaotic open freedom they will go down to animals class where no rules stop their innate nature of loving possession, loving their aggressive acts against those who are less than them in power and etc !

If we keep fighting over things and doing wrong by the excuse of our un optional innate and Instincts that can flip the world when not balanced , then we are totally the speaking animals!

What I'm trying to say is that our nature is something not optional to make it the guilt we are accused of But the limits on it is the gist here and when these limits are broken by people then they are the problem not the system ,whereas when followed right it can make things work out amazingly within the same system .

But the problem here is systems not people !

People can work and create miracles when they are led by a good system (you know better than me in that ), good people within a bad system will not go out with anything no matter how hard they try and ask me about that concerning the bad systems of education within which I taught.
Capitalism and communism are not compatible with Man because they are Manmade not Divine !

Capitalism is a big great intense reaction of communism and communism is so against it .It's all about how these streams are greatly extremes ,one in the east and the other in the far west and with all such unbalanced extremes we find nothing in the middle but people claiming against each system and how it is flawed.

That's when I say Islamic system is in the middle between two extremes and from which I go with its ideology that is mainly based on moderation and balance. I talked with brief earlier about it and If you want to know in details , then I'm not able to be better than this site in presenting its chapters :


Category: Economy - The Religion of Islam

I know neither me nor my beliefs are welcomed here , but people must stop their fear of others ' beliefs and the harsh way they refuse things for the fear of its takeover . This is logic , this is knowledge , this is not just a religious text you would simply reject and peace !

I think you people have no limitations in seeking knowledge yet you remind me of the 12th century's church when u refuse something good because it isn't compatible with your ideas.

Remember I do not force my beliefs on others , they are a different opinion based on logic and goes with the perspective that human beings are the slaves of the creator Who knows their nature better than them and offers them a system that perfectly goes with it . My ideas I believe in and I want to present ,that's all.

P.S : during the disasters capitalists try to deal with , Islamic banks are the only ones that are not affected and stayed stable .

This system just needs some advanced studies and researches to show the world its surpassing results that proves It is the one that is compatible with Human beings ; individuals and groups , rich and poor !

[Diyala]

I don't know about that. I have a friend here in the states who's fiance left her muslim husband and divorced him. He beat her, insulted her, and pretty much out right disrespected her, and told her she should be publicly stoned to death. Maybe your area is different, I don't know. I don't know much about you or where you're from. But I do know that in some places, it's commonplace for muslim men to mutilate women publicly, beat them publicly, and they're treated as second class beings. Round here that don't fly. If I walked outside and saw a man smacking a woman, you better believe he'd be eating his teeth for dinner.

But let me not act like I'm better than people I've never met. All I'm saying is that there's a reason why, when U.S. soldiers walked through the streets of Fallujah, women and children flocked to them. Taliban is all about genocide.
I can't say the same about the various PMCs that rove around blowing up mosques, killing nuns and shit, because I know a little about that too.

No just human can accuse Islam of mistreating women ever , what is more likely to be the case is that some people who do not know much about Islam give unjust jumble between Islam as an ideology with its own teachings that guarantee the happiness of its followers when followed right , and between some bad behaviors of some Muslims who did nothing to their religion but a deformed picture.

My point is that you're supporting an out-dated religion that advocates such things as taking women as prisoners of war and raping them

Look who's talking ! you will get me talking about things that some of your friends do not like.


Islam is a religion that came to fight slavery and end it once and for all. During Judaism and Christianity, slavery was at its highest peak in the Middle East. People were enslaved and they and their children were inherited and passed down to generations forever.
It was not Islam that started slavery, but it was Islam that ultimately ended it .
There is no text in the Holy Quran or Sunna that says of slavery or allowing it . Slavery was a shape of life circumstances and a fact in all nations but Islam came to put decent rules and a lot of legislations to limit till abolish it . among these rules are :

1-A slave can buy himself from his master by making a contract through which he can collect the money he needs and free himself .

2- A Muslim can atone after doing wrong by doing a good deed like freeing a slave.

3- Islam encouraged Muslims to free slaves as a door of goodness the lord loves and a reason to save ones' life from Hell and get closer to Heaven.

4- Islam puts intense punishment for whomever mistreats his slave or beats him by making it a must to free that slave .

And one thing you need notice that Islam never allows slavery but under one condition which is WAR , and even in war not everything is allowed for winners to do against the defeated as we see these days against Muslims who weren't really in a fair war . There is no single text that says of slavery but there is a text that says after war there are options to do with prisoners : freeing them in exchange for money ,or in exchange for nothing . killing them (if they were a form of aggressive threat against the society ) , or having them as slaves were other alternatives by Muslim scholars .

As for raping women when they are prisoners ,actually Islam cares about the slightest rights of Man , do you think it will go with raping which is the most aggressive and cruel deed against someone's dignity and freedom! To marry women when they are prisoners of war is no difference than marrying women generally , unless you think marrying a free woman is a form of raping her . And there are some points you have to take into your account when talking about women in war :

1-A woman who is taken as a prisoner is not to please every man like a bitch, but for her master just as the wife is for her husband and he cannot force her to be with someone else.

2-If the woman is taken with her husband as prisoners , their master can't touch her and she is a wife for her slave husband.

3-When the slave woman is pregnant from her master , she can't be sold to others because that would separate her from her child , her children are free people and when her master dies she is freed and her children can inherit their father and live decently instead of the misery that she might would have if it was in any other creed if at all she was allowed to live.
So it is not raping and never was , it's just a property that must be dealt with with such morality and humanity .And when you remember that this prisoner was just about to kill you in war , you will find that Islam has put the most elegant legislation by keeping them alive and letting them have such position .

Look at America and its high civilization that allows imprisoning people and treating them worse than animals in Guantanamo who might or might not be behind the invisible threats you imagine or might yourself have created ! which one is more civilized ? prisoners in your prisons or prisoners in Islam that mustn't be called slaves or prisoners when they have the freedom to walk out and has to be treated greatly , mustn't be harmed , must be given food and clothes from their owner's money and a lot of such that proves the nobility of such divine source . Not to mention that no slavery is found these days and all people are equal.

The problem of those who stand against the slavery that was in Islam is that they think it is no difference than those of other nations , but the difference is so vast . The world thought they fought slavery and stopped it but there are other shapes of it like enslaving a people by starting wars against them , appointing traitor to form their governments in order to fulfill their purposes at the expense of people,taking advantage of their resources, forcing others to stay ignorant and under the control of their dominance, preventing them from standing on their own feet and stay disabled forever and so many pictures of slavery that are worse and uglier than the ones we read about in history , then you come to say Islam is raping , slavery bla bla ? come on! Get real !
I wish they even used some of what Islam offers about slavery.

- says that a woman's testimony is worth half of a mans -

Men and women are not equal in nature but their rights must be equally balanced . they need to be treated with justice and to assume that you can fulfill this justice in treating them as if they were One is the failure justice in its clearest shapes . they are physically and psychologically different and based on such a fact many Islamic teachings come .

The text which requires two female witnesses in place of one male witness, gives a clear reason for it i.e. "if one of them forgets, the other reminds her." Is this derogatory to the status of the women or is it a revealed secret about the nature of the women? Though much has been said about the difference between a man's brain and that of a women but I would rather like to quote the latest research made about this issue. According to a survey, as published in Los Angeles Times (U.S) , made involving fifty men and women for quite a considerable time, the out come was as follows:

Man's mind is uni-focal while the women's mind is multi-focal. In other words, a man would be fully occupied with the task he is involved with; he may not be distracted by anything else while being engaged in his activity. On the other hand, a woman may be busy in kitchen work and she will be easily alert to a phone buzzer or her infants cry from the cradle. In a way she is found to be more sensitive and active in her dealings. Thus she has got a very praise worthy character but that is not so good for a case of testimony which requires more attention and concentration.What is wrong then, if a second woman is needed, only to remind her if she fails to deliver her testimony completely. So it is a case of verification of the testimony, not that of degradation to the status of the women at all.

- says that a man should get double the inheritance of a woman

The inheritance system in Islam is an integrated system and should be seen in all its aspects. The cases in which women take half of the legacy that men take are only four , while there are more than thirty cases where the situation of women is as follows:

1- equal males.
2 - take more than males .
3 –Inherit some that their equivalent males do not .

Islamic inheritance system is highly associated with the family system as a whole. The man is primarily responsible for spending on his wife and children not the woman , thus for such great burden he takes more than her. And if you count it you will find they are really equal in this side . Lately , and for the just methods of this system , many Arab Christians are turning to it's ideology when quarrels between the heirs arise to solve them . Women have many greater positions in Islam than men among which is the great honor it highly gives her as a mother deserving more rights than a father though each must get a full respect, concern and love .

- and says that men are a degree above women in class.

This degree is related to their duty of guardianship and management that can be found in every establishment , and a family is a great establishment on which societies are based . Management doesn't imply a separate class or a better one more than a responsibility they must take care of , a responsibility that can be a form of unbearable burden when given to women and doesn't necessarily mean dominance or less class , it rather gives women what they deserve as being a precious class . This degree is a duty not a privilege you claim against as among men's commitment is to offer protection and expense to their families and go out to fight in wars not their women (though women can fight if they want to).Not to mention that this guardianship is mainly based on love ,understanding and consulting. Women in Islam are the other half of men , each completes one another and each is in need to be companions not classes and they're given their duties the way that goes with their own nature.

So long as you support a religion that says you're a second class citizen, I'm going to keep throwing that in your face every time you use Islam to support your arguements.

The fact is I'm not using Islam to support my argument (concerning financial system that you driven the argument away from ) but this argument is just a part of Islam as it covers every aspect of one's life and economy is a crucial one.

Again if you think you will find a good position for you in turning the topic into religious by resorting to things that got nothing to do with the topic then I advise you to stop specially when nothing you mentioned served your purpose and soon you will be finding yourself talking with no one.

[Hobaginator]

2- A Muslim can atone after doing wrong by doing a good deed like freeing a slave.

Oh it's good to know that a muslim can slit a christian child's throat but it's made okay as long as he frees a slave he took.

3- Islam encouraged Muslims to free slaves as a door of goodness the lord loves and a reason to save ones' life from Hell and get closer to Heaven.

Sweet, so taking slaves and then freeing them after 10 years of torture is holy and just.

And one thing you need notice that Islam never allows slavery but under one condition which is WAR , and even in war not everything is allowed for winners to do against the defeated as we see these days against Muslims who weren't really in a fair war .

Since when is war fair? Was it fair that muslim extremists flew planes into the world trade center resulting in the deaths of thousands of civillians, police and firefighters? Is it fair that the Taliban hides among the women and children they claim to protect? Is it fair that Taliban plants improvised explosive devices on roads for the indisciminant killing of "infidels" which includes press, red cross, and anybody else who the Taliban doesn't specifically warn? What the hell is fair about war?

There is no single text that says of slavery but there is a text that says after war there are options to do with prisoners : freeing them in exchange for money ,or in exchange for nothing . killing them (if they were a form of aggressive threat against the society ) , or having them as slaves were other alternatives by Muslim scholars.

Ok so guatanamo bay, where the U.S. send it's own military personnel who are court martialed, where we send our OWN guys, isn't good enough for your tangos who shoot RPGs at U.S. military from civillian housing? It's better that we turned them into slaves or killed them after they already surrendered? Taking slave is against U.N. law and U.S. foriegn policy, and killing p.o.w's after their surrender or detainment is also against our policy.

As for raping women when they are prisoners ,actually Islam cares about the slightest rights of Man , do you think it will go with raping which is the most aggressive and cruel deed against someone's dignity and freedom! To marry women when they are prisoners of war is no difference than marrying women generally , unless you think marrying a free woman is a form of raping her . And there are some points you have to take into your account when talking about women in war :

Good tactic. Take a woman as a slave, and tell her that the only way for her to gain her "freedom" is to marry you. That's not forcible at all.

1-A woman who is taken as a prisoner is not to please every man like a bitch, but for her master just as the wife is for her husband and he cannot force her to be with someone else.

Oh ok good, so if my american girlfriend over seas gets taken prisoner, she only has to get raped by her "master", not everybody. Good to know. That doesn't sound like the objectifying of women at all.

2-If the woman is taken with her husband as prisoners , their master can't touch her and she is a wife for her slave husband.

Oh ok, so only if the guy is there to kick his ass will he respect her human rights. If her husband is not taken as a prisoner at the same time as her than too bad, she's her new muslim master's own private sexual property. That sounds just about mulsim enough to me.

Look at America and its high civilization that allows imprisoning people and treating them worse than animals in Guantanamo who might or might not be behind the invisible threats you imagine or might yourself have created ! which one is more civilized ? prisoners in your prisons or prisoners in Islam that mustn't be called slaves or prisoners when they have the freedom to walk out and has to be treated greatly , mustn't be harmed , must be given food and clothes from their owner's money and a lot of such that proves the nobility of such divine source . Not to mention that no slavery is found these days and all people are equal.

Do you want me to show you some video of guantanamo bay? They bust rocks all day, they get three meals a day, get to sleep in a bed. Do you want me to link you some videos about how your people treat prisoners? We have lots of them. Videos of your people with prisoners of war, innocent christian missionaries, and non mulsim civillians -- beheading them with knives, ripping them apart with ropes and vehicles, burning them alive and beating them to death all in the name of Allah. That's better than guantanamo bay? Don't deny their existence, I've seen more of these videos than I'd care to remember.

Your people deserve every act inflicted upon them by the U.S. because they drew the wrath of the U.S. Our old testament God's wrath. Fire and brimstone wrath. Your people have been living in their own shit and they brought it to our country. Just like the japanese bombing pearl harbor, except this time we weren't even in a war with your people. You're just lucky we didn't flatten your continent out with one of our many, many, MANY weapons of mass destruction that we decided not to use... in this instance... yet.

Our goal is simple: to show the world not to **** with the States. Your nation did just that. It's not about who's god is right. It's about not letting crimes against humanity go unpunished. Your people must be pacified and taught that all life is sacred, not only muslim life. In order to pacify your nation, it means the discriminant killing of the extremists and their supporters which are imbedded into the civillian population so strongly that your "innocent civillians" will lure our warriors into traps or misguide them with malicious intent in order to protect their blood-spilling fathers, sons and brothers. Less of your civillians would die if the Taliban would buck up and fight like men instead of hiding behind women and children... but they won't, because our nation is more advanced, stronger, and WILL win this war even if we have to get our hands dirty to do it.

**** the Taliban.

[Catalana]

For me : NO !
I don't want to explain because it would be too long and I don't know enough vocabulary to make a correct argumentation so sorry but in my opinion, no... seriously I don't think Communism is THAT bad xD

I understand that every person has his own opinion, his own family story and I'm okay with that but according to mine, I can't be right or extreme right ! Impossible ! ( I don't know your politic parties so if you don't understand the last sentence, doesn't matter I just said that I wasn't capitalist... that's all )

[Hobaginator]

For me : NO !
I can't be right or extreme right ! Impossible !

No, you were correct. The right hates commies, the left loves aids and black babies.

[Alpha]

Feel free to keep discussing the Islamic economic system (vis à vis Western economic systems) as some kind of Third Way, but debating religion itself and religious violence strikes me as rather off topic. If you're not going to talk about Zakat (a 'tax' on all working Muslims for the benefit of the poor that is one of the Five Pillars of Islam) and all that interesting stuff, please refrain from posting in this thread.

Economic systems only. Take the rest to VMs or make a new thread and open it to the floor without detailing this any further. This is especially directed at Diyala and Hoaginator. I like when discussions evolve but it's getting too far from the origin.

[Hobaginator]

Feel free to keep discussing the Islamic economic system (vis à vis Western economic systems) as some kind of Third Way, but debating religion itself and religious violence strikes me as rather off topic. If you're not going to talk about Zakat (a 'tax' on all working Muslims for the benefit of the poor that is one of the Five Pillars of Islam) and all that interesting stuff, please refrain from posting in this thread.

Economic systems only. Take the rest to VMs or make a new thread and open it to the floor without detailing this any further. This is especially directed at Diyala and Hoaginator. I like when discussions evolve but it's getting too far from the origin.

Communism isn't an economic system only. It's also an idealogy. It's not just about money and how the citizens use it, it's also about the utopian ideals behind it. Communism is based off of the idea that all man was created equally, but equal distribution of money is impossible. If no matter what you do you will have the same amount of money as everybody else, that takes away the very definition of money. Money is a system of attributing value. If everyone is forced to maintain the same wealth, then there is no value to anything. If you obtain more than you should have, you either have to hide it, or it gets taken away from you by a higher authority. Communism isn't JUST an economic system. That's why I believe discussing idealogies in this thread is not off topic at all, nor discussing human currency, nor the handling of prisoners of war. In a true communist society, there would be no prisoners, no slaves, no leadership. Yet we see in countries like North Korea the average citizen is starving while the "president" is fat -- and this so called "president" is not voted on, his lineage continues reign. This resembles more of a monarchy. War is also not off topic on this thread, as war is a major "economic system" that drives international commerse and relations. It's not like we're discussing Ren and Stimpy, or if Twinkies are better than Ho-Hos. If we're going to discuss a topic as broad and powerful as communism itself, I don't think it's unfair to bring the discussion to encompass other economic systems and argue whether they're right and just or not. After all, it's a debate on whether the economic system of communism is "that bad". Comparing it to others or arguing their rightness or wrongness seems to be an entirely valid discussion for this topic. If you go back to the earlier posts, you'll see we are simply continuing and expanding on this comparison to communism and giving reasons for why it's right or wrong. Or is this a dictatorship where discussing our beliefs on the broad topic at hand will result in punishment at the hands of the figures of authority? Your choice. I'm just here to say what I think and to show people when and why their statements are incorrect (which is always on topic).

Dilaya's original point was something along the lines of the Islamic system works better than capitolism, particularly why America is wrong and therefore our views on communism are incorrect. I'm simply stating the facts on why the Islamic system is at least just as flawed as communism. By showing her where her prefferred idealogical and economic system is flawed, I'm reinforcing the moral standpoint of the nation that I stand for. Therefore, I am defending the Republican American viewpoint on the "badness" of communism through the fact that I claim to represent this demographic. On topic.