Talk:Lovian Communist Party

How do you guys like ? Dr. Magnus 22:33, November 26, 2009 (UTC)
 * I don't like it because it creates exactly what communism is meant to prevent: class difference. Andy McCandless 07:18, November 27, 2009 (UTC)
 * Not my cup of tea. I`ll think I`ll have to give some support to other parties, kwestie van het evenwicht te behouden... --Lars 08:44, November 27, 2009 (UTC)
 * It's disgusting. --Bucurestean 08:53, November 27, 2009 (UTC)
 * Bucurestean, don`t let them carry you away, keep cool man, keep cool...--Lars 09:00, November 27, 2009 (UTC)
 * After edit conflict) I'll keep cool, it's just a fictive country anyways. But I don't understand why it would be so hard to learn some history... --Bucurestean 09:02, November 27, 2009 (UTC)
 * I know, I know my friend. Be patient --Lars 09:09, November 27, 2009 (UTC)
 * Sigh-- 11:35, November 27, 2009 (UTC)

I always dislike party rule and I sure dislike atomization of the political landscape. Where are the people who still vote and think from a practical POV and whose praxis dominates political dogma? 16:58, November 27, 2009 (UTC)
 * Extreme parties are by definition anti-democratic, but I must say the foreign policy of the CPL is mostly okay. Lovia should be against war and export a serious amount of humanitarian aid. @dimitri : parties ruled by praxis don't exist because the question is not 'what is best?' but 'what do certain people define as best and in who's interests do they define it as such'. A paradigm as window for your decisions is inevitable... 08:48, December 3, 2009 (UTC)

Ghost Party
A ghost is haunting Europe -- the ghost of Communism. (Opening sentence of the Communist Manifesto) I have a few questions concerning the LCP and its views. Does this party have any members or is it a ghost party? And does it seek to install a dictature of the proletariat or does it agree upon the principles of a representative democracy as Lovia has? Finally, can a communist party defend a monarchy, because that would be rather unique. If anyone can answer these questions, please do! 13:17, December 6, 2009 (UTC)
 * xD --Bucurestean 13:19, December 6, 2009 (UTC)
 * I feel these questions are important. If this party hasn't any members left it should move to the category 'former political parties'... 13:22, December 6, 2009 (UTC)
 * Word play? --Bucurestean 13:22, December 6, 2009 (UTC)
 * Yuri, it has one member: Pierius. 13:23, December 6, 2009 (UTC)
 * I wanted to say that Pierlot McCrooke 13:24, December 6, 2009 (UTC)
 * Ok, it just wasn't very clear to me. That guy on the right I suppose? 13:55, December 6, 2009 (UTC)
 * Yeah. You might know him from Bassie & Adriaan? 13:58, December 6, 2009 (UTC)
 * Ahh... dus daar ken ik die kop van! --Bucurestean 14:00, December 6, 2009 (UTC)
 * We used to have a video of Bassie and Adriaan in the American West, and that's where I know this guy from. 14:04, December 6, 2009 (UTC)


 * ?? serious ?? This guy was in the Bassie&Adriaan show? So in the Netherlands they have communist propaganda for nine year olds and what have we (Belgium) got? A talking dog and a bunch of other crazy colored animals... 14:03, December 6, 2009 (UTC)
 * Don't forget Kabouter Wesley. --O u WTB 14:08, December 6, 2009 (UTC)


 * The party does not wish for a dictatorship of any kind and does support the monarchy, however, the party is in favour of more influence to the state and overall equality of income. Dr. Magnus 10:19, December 19, 2009 (UTC)
 * That's socialism, not communism. --O u WTB 12:29, December 19, 2009 (UTC)
 * True, this party isn't marxist, leninist, stalinist, maoist or even orthodox communist (soviet-style). It's just a hardline socialist party. 10:52, December 21, 2009 (UTC)
 * Ehem: "Never trust what they say". ;) --Bucurestean 10:52, December 21, 2009 (UTC)

It is one big mystery. Dr. Magnus 12:55, December 21, 2009 (UTC)
 * I fought that also when i read the arguments, this i just a typecal socialist party and not a communist part Jillids 18:29, January 12, 2010 (UTC)
 * thought* I fought = ik vocht. --O u WTB 18:46, January 12, 2010 (UTC)
 * Anyway, another funny part is that they greet each other with Godspeed :P --Bucurestean 18:47, January 12, 2010 (UTC)

Invasion
The invasion has begun, I see. --Bucurestean 15:23, January 12, 2010 (UTC)
 * I hope this is good for Lovia. Pierlot McCrooke 15:28, January 12, 2010 (UTC)
 * Do you really think so? :P --Bucurestean 15:29, January 12, 2010 (UTC)
 * As long as they follow the rules I have no problem with them. 15:29, January 12, 2010 (UTC)
 * I hope they will always follow them Pierlot McCrooke 15:32, January 12, 2010 (UTC)
 * Time will tell --Bucurestean 15:35, January 12, 2010 (UTC)
 * It will indeed. -- 06:58, January 13, 2010 (UTC)
 * "Voorlopig gaan we nog even door op het lichtend pad, het verkeerde spoor" - from the song Mia (Gorki) 16:03, January 13, 2010 (UTC)
 * One of the few Dutch-language songs I truly appreciate. 16:07, January 13, 2010 (UTC)

I can see the troops coming ... no, they're joggers
So where is this great invasion you're all speaking of? Nowhere is the answer. LCP is a normal party and not to be feared. Vote if you would like a little bit of change.
 * The question is "what change?". LD, WLP and PD also want change. 16:17, January 13, 2010 (UTC)
 * We now, but you have to admit that communist songs are very inspiring: Bandiera rossa la trionferà ... 16:17, January 13, 2010 (UTC)
 * Eisler's "Der heimliche Aufmarsch" is nice  16:19, January 13, 2010 (UTC)
 * Is that the song you asked me about in Ghent? I like the International, what an anthem! 16:21, January 13, 2010 (UTC)
 * Yes, that's it, I suppose. Really nice, combattive tune. 16:21, January 13, 2010 (UTC)
 * Communism is without doubt the most unique movement in history... 16:22, January 13, 2010 (UTC)
 * Probably. Just not my movement ^^ 16:23, January 13, 2010 (UTC)
 * I like the Frankfurter Schule and the theories of Antonio Gramsci, they leave behind the economic determinism  17:44, January 13, 2010 (UTC)
 * Adorno, Horkheimer, Marcuse, Habermas and their little buddies? 07:45, January 14, 2010 (UTC)
 * The Italian rocks but I don't know the other ones 08:33, January 14, 2010 (UTC)
 * Which Italian? 12:16, January 15, 2010 (UTC)

Nonsense

 * 1) The working class is the most important and valued in society.
 * 2) ''No race or ethnic positivie discrimination: all people are equal and should be treated as such.
 * 3) We keep the monarchy.

Well. --Bucurestean 14:48, January 14, 2010 (UTC)
 * Funny huh?  14:49, January 14, 2010 (UTC)
 * Yup... but anyways, it's already been shown that a real idealist communist state is impossible. ("Well, we have to pass through this horrible situation which is already lasting for 80 years before we reach 'the utopia'"). Pff. --Bucurestean 14:53, January 14, 2010 (UTC)
 * I'm sorry I have to say this, but your interpretations are way too outspoken. The LCP refers to marxist labor theory to state that the working class is the motor of economy and - according to marxists - thus the entire society. This doesn't violate the equality of people since everyone is ought to have equal access to labor in a communist society. I do admit that the monarchy-thing is strange, but I believe that was added to 'keep things cool'. Second, if you would leave me on a deserted island with nine other people of my choosing I'm sure we could establish a communist society. It is all up to the will of the people who build society! Also, I seriously regret the infantile argument that 'the Soviet Union did fall'. As of 1963, no leader of the USSR actually believed that they had a marxist system. There is a huge difference between scientific socialism/classic marxism, bolshevism/soviet communism and communism in se. 15:57, January 14, 2010 (UTC)
 * Yes, you sure are right about that Yuri, but I second Alexandru if/when he claims communism (as described by those who call themselves communists) is inherently against our own struggle for survival. And I believe thát is why attempts to form a socialist/communist state have either failed from the beginning, or were "distorted" into a corrupted system which is in no way what Marx would have wanted. 12:15, January 15, 2010 (UTC)
 * A socialist system is not necessarily against the struggle for survival when you regard society as the ultimate tool of mankind. The 'invention' of society is a weapon against nature (diseases, disasters, ...) and a tool to create commodities and prosperity. A strong society isn't against Darwin's law, it is the final outcome of its logic! 12:51, January 15, 2010 (UTC)
 * Yes yes, I know; I argue that a communist society wouldn't be a strong one! 12:54, January 15, 2010 (UTC)
 * That depends on your interpretation of marx's terminology. Marx intended a strong society, you are just confusing this with his statement of 'minimal to no state'. State and society are two different concepts. 12:58, January 15, 2010 (UTC)
 * If I'm not mistaken: Marx did plan to abolish a central government once a "socialist state" was realized, in order to make a "communist state". 13:00, January 15, 2010 (UTC)
 * He wouldn't abolish the state (political structures like government etc.), these would dissolve themselves once the ultimate society (social capital, thrust in and action for the greater good, etc.) was created. Something like 'a super strong society would require no state at all'. I do admit it does sound utopian, but the logic doesn't violate Darwin's theorem. 13:03, January 15, 2010 (UTC)
 * Oh right. Well, a bit utopian indeed. 13:06, January 15, 2010 (UTC)
 * Like my professor sociology said: 'Nothing beats Marx!' 13:10, January 15, 2010 (UTC)
 * Hm. I must admit I found his economic theories quite convincing. The exploitation theory really made me think differently of capitalism. 13:12, January 15, 2010 (UTC)
 * In fact that is, together with labor theory, the only one that has been proven wrong (or at least not completely correct). You should have a look at commodity fetishism once, now thát is convincing. 13:15, January 15, 2010 (UTC)

The former communist states/countries imploded and thus proved not to be workable. So, I wouldn't worry too much about this party. In the corridors (de wandelgangen) it is said, by lack of support, the members will vote for the democratic candidates or simply not vote at all. How about that? --Lars 16:38, January 16, 2010 (UTC)


 * You people are worrying way to much. The LCP is a democratic party and there is nothing to worry about. When the elections end on the 27th I will probably have three or four votes at most. Also, I am currently the only LCP-member running for MOTC. That means, at this point, we do not have great influence whatever the media may say. Things may shift at the mid-term elections, but I am not expecting a landslide victory, in fact, I am not expecting any victory whatsoever. I do think it is reasonable however to expect the LCP to gain at least three or four congress seats in the next elections. But I do not think any of our members will actually make it to prime minister. So why worry? Dr. Magnus 07:45, January 17, 2010 (UTC)

Also, I would like to thank Yuri Medvedev for defending my honour abit during my forced exile from Lovia. I am glad he understands. His party will never even think about exluding the LCP from politics. As any democratic party with several members, the LCP simply belongs in the congress! :D Dr. Magnus 07:47, January 17, 2010 (UTC)

Free at last
I am free at last! The LCP is free and has its founder back. However, comrade Scanderson will remain the party leader, since he is, in my eyes, a much more "balanced" politician blessed with greater oratary skills and a better knowledge of the English language. And yes, there will be some changes! Dr. Magnus 20:41, January 16, 2010 (UTC)
 * "The proletarians have nothing to lose but their chains. They have a world to win." - Communist Manifesto 13:11, January 18, 2010 (UTC)

Congratulations with the elections
Watching the exit polls with a couple of hours to go, I want to congratulate you already with your results. Your party can be called unique, just like the history of its members. The election of your party leader and approximately 8% of the votes may be called a wonderful result for a new party! We wish you all the good luck in the coming year in the Congress! In name of the LD. --Bucurestean 17:38, January 27, 2010 (UTC)
 * Well, I am very happy with this message. It shows the good will of the Liberal Democrats. I also wish to congratulate the LD with her success at the elections. Dr. Magnus 17:44, January 27, 2010 (UTC)
 * Congratulations on behalf of the PD too. Also, I would like to invite the LCP in a 'five point dialogue' about the reform that awaits us. It seems best to me if we first talk about a shared proposal, instead of each making our own proposal in Congress. 11:32, January 28, 2010 (UTC)

I have now said my opinion on the "Five Point Dialogue". I am all in for a shared proposal, since seperate proposals would be a complete and utter waste of time. The LCP likes speed and efficiency in these matters. Dr. Magnus 14:14, January 28, 2010 (UTC)

just heard about you planning a revolution
I am all for change but cant you do it thru the ballot box Owen1983 13:57, January 28, 2010 (UTC)
 * Our goal is to gain influence in a democratic way. That is, thru the ballot box. We are not planning a revolution. Who told you that nonsense? Do not listen to our enemies who spread lies about us. The LCP has always been and will always be a democratic party. Dr. Magnus 14:06, January 28, 2010 (UTC)
 * Talkin' 'bout a Revolution; the overthrow of the old social and political order, replacing it with something completely different by means of a new moral system and the creation of a new man. Theoretically this can be achieved in a peaceful way, not? 14:14, January 28, 2010 (UTC)

Indeed it cannot. But the LCP does not want a revolution. It does not want a completely new system. We want to change the current system, but within the Lovian law and constitution. A violent coup has never even crossed our socialist and democratic minds. If it had, we would have had zero votes. Dr. Magnus 14:17, January 28, 2010 (UTC)
 * I was just correcting mr. Owen's view on revolution as a violent process. Revolutions can be peaceful, only history counts very little such changes. 14:19, January 28, 2010 (UTC)

I do not even know where he heard the revolution thing. I have never even spoken to anyone about a possible revolution. I said right from the beginning that the LCP rejects violence and disorder. We want democracy and efficiency. Not violence and civil wars: it killed wikistad... Dr. Magnus 14:23, January 28, 2010 (UTC)
 * I was wondering if the LCP would be interested in a propaganda poster? I'm designing one as part of my sister her school assignment and find it a waste that only she us going to use it. Perhaps I can recycle it into an LCP add? 14:28, January 28, 2010 (UTC)
 * I hereby grant you my permission, and total artistic freedom. Suprise me, in a positive way my friend! It is a splendid idea I must say. Dr. Magnus 14:30, January 28, 2010 (UTC)
 * The goal is to make a retro-style propaganda poster for something. My sis was thinking about Obama, but I can edit the photoshop file afterwards. 14:35, January 28, 2010 (UTC)

Obama? Nah, although is a bit of a "red" president... I was thinking more off good old Che. He always does great on posters! Anyway: you may use your imagination and suprise me. It is more fun that way. Total artistic freedom, like I said. Dr. Magnus 14:38, January 28, 2010 (UTC)

Change is coming to Lovia
All parties represented in Congress have made clear their opinions on the reform. Please fill in the gaps. 12:26, January 29, 2010 (UTC)
 * The LCP opinion on point 5 is more then enough, as there is only one LCP Congressman and point 5 is the only point which is not accepted yet... and the only thing the LCP can change in the dialogue. --Bucurestean 12:35, January 29, 2010 (UTC)