Hacker News Reader

Comment by LV-426 | Hacker News Reader

> Capitalism [...] doesn’t aim at making the world a just or better place

I didn't say it did. I pointed out that if you're going to insist that mass murder under a few decades of communist regimes = real communism, then mass murder (and genocide and slavery) under centuries of capitalist regimes = real capitalism.

> Communism [...] invents all kinds of counter measure ( one of them being the revolution, and « temporary » dictactorship).

Communism did not invent revolution or dictatorship.

View on HN

Indeed, dictators originally had term limits even, so the idea of a temporary dictatorship is... pretty much its original intent.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roman_dictator

Well, no you can’t make that equivalent reasoning , that’s my point. People blaming communism makes a lot more sense because it does deal with what the political regime should be (once again, a dictatorship). Who should be in charge, for what political goals, with which privilege, as well as provides all the intermediate steps on how to accomplish that goal.

It is not of the same nature.

> Well, no you can’t make that equivalent reasoning

And yet I seem to have done it.

> People blaming communism makes a lot more sense

You're entitled to your opinion.

> because it does deal with what the political regime should be (once again, a dictatorship).

Since you persist in arguing about "dictatorship" instead of communism, I don't see any point in continuing this.

Edit: instant downvoter I think you missed one of my posts; here's a link to make it easier:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16034997

Feel free to check out my comments page and obsessively downvote others you may have missed, if any.

I don't understand the sentence "your persist in arguing about "dictatorship" instead of communism". Maybe i wasn't clear in what i meant by dictatorship, but i refer to the "dictatorship of proletariat" (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dictatorship_of_the_proletaria...) which is core to the communist doctrine.

You'll probably argue that this kind of dictatorship isn't to be understood in the common sense, but judging by the various communists thinkers that refer gladly to violence, as well as its historical examples, i'd say the difference aren't that clear.

> "dictatorship of proletariat" (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dictatorship_of_the_proletaria...) You'll probably argue that this kind of dictatorship isn't to be understood in the common sense

I don't have to. Your own link says so in just the second paragraph:

    Dictatorship of the proletariat is different from the
    popular notion of 'dictatorship'

Reply on news.ycombinator.com