>>79
"I don't believe that council communism has anything to do with direct democracy. Council communism is organised into exclusive divisions whilst direct democracy is universal and national."
Huh? I dont get what you mean, that council communism has NOTHING to do with direct democracy. Universal AND national? Seems oxymoronic to me. All democracy is divisional, i cant vote in american elections and you cant vote in us elections. I cant vote in the parliament or in a board of directors, are these not democratic because they are not universal?
"There are Abu Ghraibs all over China..."
We were talking about imperialism and naziesque occupation. China is a totalitarian state, i dont deny this. But what you seem to say that if the US only had one Auschwitz that would be ok since Nazi Germany had many, and that this Auschwitz would just be a mistake than a systematic procedure. Well, i think this line of reasoning is absurd by obvious reasons.
"I'm not an intellectual, I'm a scientist."
Im a scientist too (physical geography and environmental science). I find communisms materialism sound, its rationality comforting and its humanity strengthening. You should not read the communist manifesto if you want to learn Marxian theory since its just a political pamphlet for a specific time and place (eg it demands the invention of cheap public transportation). Capital or his earlier writings are better if you want to penetrate his theories, which can be quite complex. As an empirical scientist Marx is comparable to Darwin in the sense that it is based on a data collecting period of 12 years, and that should be reason alone for a person interested in the history of ideas and the development of modern science, and he has influenced a lot of different disciplines. Scientists biased by their political ideology is always a sad sight though...