No...It Isn't What You Think

[cratehorus]

In ideals, they both are the same.

No, they're not..............

Communism as the positive abolition of private property as human self-alienation, means the real appropriation of human entity by and for man; thus the complete, conscious return – accomplished inside all the riches of the past development – of man for himself qua social, that is, as a human being. This Communism is, as perfect Naturalism, identical with Humanism, and as perfect Humanism identical with Naturalism; it is the real solution of the antagonism between man and nature, between man and man; the genuine solution of the conflict between existence and essence, between objectivisation and self-affirmation, between freedom and necessity, between the individual and the species. It is history’s solved riddle and is conscious of being the solution.

http://www.marxists.org/archive/norman/m...y/ch02.htm

Communism has existed before and it is INEVITABLE that it will exist again

Since Hook does not see in Das Kapital the uncovering of the laws of social movement but only the critique (conditioned by the will of the proletariat) of bourgeois economics, so Das Kapital is not to him the theoretical actualization of materialist dialectics but “the application of historical materialism to the ‘mysteries’ of value, price, and profit (page 187).” In other words, since, according to Hook, the relations of production determine the thinking and actions of human beings, Marx developed from the standpoint of the proletariat his critique of bourgeois economics, which is simply criticism and nothing else. If the proletariat wins, then as a consequence Marx’s Capital remains merely as an historical document, filled with the thoughts of a class which suffered under the rule of capitalism. Historical materialism here is not a part of the dialectical development but divorced from it; not a productive element, but a view of life (Weltanschauung). “Yet,” as Marx wrote concerning his Russian critic in the preface to the first volume of Capital, “what else is he describing but the dialectical method?” But to Hook, Das Kapital is only an ideology

http://www.marxists.org/archive/mattick-...bility.htm


Capitalism, was invented by Karl Marx, calling yourself a "Capitalist" is just as silly as calling one's self a "Plutocrat"

I know you are a turkish nationalist, or an ottoman imperialist, or some stupid crap like that, so here's your assigned reading: chapter 3 of Karl Marx's 1867 classic Das Kapital
http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1867-c1/