User talk:KDRGibby

THE COMMUNIST PAGE AS IT SHOULD READ!

Editors of the communism page believe the bolded section should be removed for the following reasons

• POV
• Already covered in another page
• Does not fit with communism

I responded by

• editing to remove any percieved POV (They did not, they somehow believe deleting constitutes editing)
• reminding them that Maosim, Lenninsm, the Soviet Union are not only covered in other pages, but have THEIR OWN PAGES
• reminded them that Maoism, Lenninsm, the soviet union, and more, dont actually fit with the origins of communism either.

Furthermore, I added to the disclosure to reflect what the page really means, an evolution of the usage of communism rather than the original ideology (as they claim it to be but dont actually present it!!!!) I also put up tags, which have been removed with no discusion.

• Natalinasmpf is an immature communist brat from Singapore who keeps deleting this and my other sections from Wiki, she has violated the 3rev policies multiple times and gets away with. Has no logical arguementation skills, and no ability to defend her deltions.

---

:This article is about communism as a form of society and as a political movement, as it has evolved in its usage. For issues regarding Communist organizations, see the Communist party article. For issues regarding Communist Party-run states, see Communist state.

Communism refers to a theoretical system of social organization and a political movement based on common ownership of the means of production. As a political movement, communism seeks to establish a classless society. A major force in world politics since the early 20th century, modern communism is generally associated with The Communist Manifesto of Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels, according to which the capitalist profit-based system of private ownership is replaced by a communist society in which the means of production are communally owned, such as through a gift economy. Often this process is said initiated by the revolutionary overthrow of the bourgeoisie (see Marxism), passes through a transitional period marked by the preparatory stage of socialism (see Leninism). Pure communism has never been implemented, it remains theoretical: communism is, in Marxist theory, the end-state, or the result of state-socialism. The word is now mainly understood to refer to the political, economic, and social theory of Marxist thinkers, or life under conditions of Communist party rule.

In the late 19th century, Marxist theories motivated socialist parties across Europe, although their policies later developed along the lines of "reforming" capitalism, rather than overthrowing it. The exception was the Russian Social Democratic Workers' Party. One branch of this party, commonly known as the Bolsheviks and headed by Vladimir Lenin, succeeded in taking control of the country after the toppling of the Provisional Government in the Russian Revolution of 1917. In 1918, this party changed its name to the Communist Party; thus establishing the contemporary distinction between communism and socialism.

After the success of the October Revolution in Russia, many socialist parties in other countries became communist parties, owing allegiance of varying degrees to the Communist Party of the Soviet Union (see Communist International). After World War II, regimes calling themselves communist took power in Eastern Europe. In 1949 the Communists in China, led by Mao Zedong, came to power and established the People's Republic of China. Among the other countries in the Third World that adopted a Communist form of government at some point were Cuba, North Korea, Vietnam, Laos, Angola, and Mozambique. By the early 1980s, almost one-third of the world's population lived under Communist states.

Communism never became a popular ideology in the United States, either before or after the establishment of the Communist Party USA in 1919. Since the early 1970s, the term "Eurocommunism" was used to refer to the policies of Communist Parties in Western Europe, which sought to break with the tradition of uncritical and unconditional support of the Soviet Union. Such parties were politically active and electorally significant in France and Italy. With the collapse of the Communist governments in Eastern Europe from the late 1980s and the breakup of the Soviet Union in 1991, Communism's influence has decreased dramatically in Europe, but around a quarter of the world's population still lives under Communist Party rule.

Marxism

Main article: Marxism

Like other socialists, Marx and Engels sought an end to capitalism and the exploitation of workers. But whereas earlier socialists often favored longer-term social reform, Marx and Engels believed that popular revolution was all but inevitable, and the only path to socialism.

According to the Marxist argument for communism, the main characteristic of human life in class society is alienation; and communism is desirable because it entails the full realization of human freedom. Marx here follows G.W.F. Hegel in conceiving freedom not merely as an absence of constraints but as action having moral content. Not only does communism allow people to do what they want but it puts humans in such conditions and such relations with one another that they would not wish to have need for exploitation. Whereas for Hegel, the unfolding of this ethnical life in history is mainly driven by the realm of ideas, for Marx, communism emerged from material, especially the development of the means of production.

Marxism holds that a process of class conflict and revolutionary struggle will result in victory for the proletariat and the establishment of a communist society in which private ownership is abolished over time and the means of production and subsistence belong to the community. Marx himself wrote little about life under communism, giving only the most general indication as to what constituted a communist society. It is clear that it entails abundance in which there is little limit to the projects that humans may undertake. In the popular slogan that was adopted by the communist movement, communism was a world in which 'each gave according to his abilities, and received according to his needs.' The German Ideology (1845) was one of Marx's few writings to elaborate on the communist future:

In communist society, where nobody has one exclusive sphere of activity but each can become accomplished in any branch he wishes, society regulates the general production and thus makes it possible for me to do one thing today and another tomorrow, to hunt in the morning, fish in the afternoon, rear cattle in the evening, criticise after dinner, just as I have a mind, without ever becoming hunter, fisherman, herdsman or critic. [1]

Marx's lasting vision was to add this vision to a positive scientific theory of how society was moving in a law-governed way toward communism, and, with some tension, a political theory that explained why revolutionary activity was required to bring it about.

Some of Marx's contemporaries, such as Mikhail Bakunin, espoused similar ideas, but differed in their views of how to reach to a harmonic society with no classes. To this day there has been a split in the workers movement between Marxists (communists) and anarchists. The anarchists are against, and wish to abolish, every state organisation. Among them, anarchist-communists such as Peter Kropotkin believed in an immediate transition to one society with no classes, while anarcho-syndicalists believe that labor unions, as opposed to Communist parties, are the organizations that can help usher this society.

The growth of modern Communism

Soviet Marxism

Main article: Marxism-Leninism

In Russia, the modern world's first effort to build socialism or communism on a large scale, following the 1917 October Revolution, led by Lenin's Bolsheviks, raised significant theoretical and practical debates on communism among Marxists themselves. Marx's theory had presumed that revolutions would occur where capitalist development was the most advanced and where a large working class was already in place. Russia, however, was the poorest country in Europe, with an enormous, illiterate peasantry and little industry. Under these circumstances, it was necessary for the communists, according to Marxian theory, to create a working class itself. Nevertheless, some socialists believed that a Russian revolution could be the precursor of workers' revolutions in the west.

For this reason, the socialist Mensheviks had opposed Lenin's communist Bolsheviks in their demand for socialist revolution before capitalism had been established. In seizing power, the Bolsheviks found themselves without a program beyond their pragmatic and politically successful slogans "peace, bread, and land," which had tapped the massive public desire for an end to Russian involvement in the First World War and the peasants' demand for land reform.

The usage of the terms "communism" and "socialism" shifted after 1917, when the Bolsheviks changed their name to the Communist Party and installed a single-party regime devoted to the implementation of socialist policies. The revolutionary Bolsheviks broke completely with the non-revolutionary social democratic movement, withdrew from the Second International, and formed the Third International, or Comintern, in 1919. Henceforth, the term "Communism" was applied to the objective of the parties founded under the umbrella of the Comintern. Their program called for the uniting of workers of the world for revolution, which would be followed by the establishment of a dictatorship of the proletariat as well as the development of a socialist economy. Ultimately, their program held, there would develop a harmonious classless society, with the withering away of the state. In the early 1920s, the Soviet Communists formed the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, or Soviet Union, from the former Russian Empire.

Following Lenin's democratic centralism, the Communist parties were organized on a hierarchical basis, with active cells of members as the broad base; they were made up only of elite cadres approved by higher members of the party as being reliable and completely subject to party discipline.

In 1918-1920, in the middle of the Russian Civil War, the new regime nationalized all productive property. When mutiny and peasant unrest resulted, Lenin declared the New Economic Policy (NEP). However, Joseph Stalin's personal fight for leadership spelled the end of the NEP, and he used his control over personnel to abandon the program.

The Soviet Union and other countries ruled by Communist Parties are often described as 'Communist states' with 'state socialist' economic bases. This usage indicates that they proclaim that they have realized part of the socialist program by abolishing private control of the means of production and establishing state control over the economy; however, they do not declare themselves truly communist, as they have not established communal ownership.

Stalinism

Main article: Stalinism

The Stalinist version of socialism, with some important modifications, shaped the Soviet Union and influenced Communist Parties worldwide. It was heralded as a possibility of building communism via a massive program of industrialization and collectivization. The rapid development of industry, and above all the victory of the Soviet Union in the Second World War, maintained that vision throughout the world, even around a decade following Stalin's death, when the party adopted a program in which it promised the establishment of communism within thirty years.

However, under Stalin's leadership, evidence emerged that dented faith in the possibility of achieving communism within the framework of the Soviet model. Stalin had created in the Soviet Union a repressive state that dominated every aspect of life. After Stalin's death, the Soviet Union's new leader, Nikita Khrushchev admitted the enormity of the repression that took place under Stalin. Later, growth declined, and rent-seeking and corruption by state officials increased, which dented the legitimacy of the Soviet system.

Despite the activity of the Comintern, the Soviet Communist Party adopted the Stalinist theory of "socialism in one country" and claimed that, due to the "aggravation of class struggle under socialism," it was possible, even necessary, to build socialism in one country alone. This departure from Marxist internationalism was challenged by Leon Trotsky, whose theory of "permanent revolution" stressed the necessity of world revolution.

Trotskyism

Main article: Trotskyism

Trotsky and his supporters organized into the "Left Opposition," and their platform became known as Trotskyism. But Stalin eventually succeeded in gaining full control of the Soviet regime, and their attempts to remove Stalin from power resulted in Trotsky's exile from the Soviet Union in 1929. After Trotsky's exile, world communism fractured in two distinct branches: Stalinism and Trotskyism. Trotsky later founded the Fourth International, a Trotskyist rival to the Comintern, in 1938.

Though some follow Trotskyism today, Trotsky's theories were never reaccepted in Communist circles in the Soviet bloc, even after Stalin's death; and Trotsky's interpretation of communism has not been successful in leading a political revolution that would overthrow a state. However, Trotskyist ideas have occasionally found an echo among political movements in countries experiencing social upheavals (such is the case of Alan Woods' Trotskyist Committee for a Marxist International, which has had contact with President Hugo Chávez of Venezuela), most parties are active in politically stable, developed countries (such as Great Britain, France, Spain and Germany). It is noteworthy that Trotskyists groups that contribute with pro-capitalist parties have not escaped criticism as opportunists from other Trotskyists which are loathe to do so (see Trotskyism).

Cold War years

As the Soviet Union won important allies by victory in the Second World War in Eastern Europe, communism as a movement spread to a number of new countries, and gave rise to a few different branches of its own, such as Maoism.

Communism had been vastly strengthened by the winning of many new nations into the sphere of Soviet influence and strength in Eastern Europe. Governments modeled on Soviet Communism were formed in Albania, Bulgaria, Czechoslovakia, East Germany, Poland, Hungary and Romania. A Communist government was also created under Marshal Tito in Yugoslavia, but Tito's independent policies led to the expulsion of Yugoslavia from the Cominform, which had replaced the Comintern, and Titoism, a new branch in the world communist movement, was labeled "deviationist."

By 1950 the Chinese Communists held all of China except Taiwan, thus controlling the most populous nation in the world. Other areas where rising Communist strength provoked dissension and in some cases actual fighting include Laos, many nations of the Middle East and Africa, and, especially, Vietnam (see Vietnam War). With varying degrees of success, Communists attempted to unite with nationalist and socialist forces against Western imperialism in these poor countries.

Maoism

Main article: Maoism

After the death of Stalin in 1953, the Soviet Union's new leader, Nikita Khrushchev, denounced Stalin's crimes and his cult of personality. He called for a return to the principles of Lenin, thus presaging some change in Communist methods. However, Khrushchev's reforms heightened ideological differences between China and the Soviet Union, which became increasingly apparent in the 1960s and 1970s. As the Sino-Soviet Split in the international Communist movement turned toward open hostility, Maoist China portrayed itself as a leader of the underdeveloped world against the two superpowers, the United States and the Soviet Union, with Maoism gaining recognition worldwide as a new branch of Marxism.

Collapse of the Soviet Union and Communism today

In 1985, Mikhail Gorbachev became leader of the Soviet Union and relaxed central control, in accordance with reform policies of glasnost (openness) and perestroika (restructuring). The Soviet Union did not intervene as Poland, East Germany, Czechoslovakia, Bulgaria, Romania, and Hungary all abandoned Communist rule by 1990. In 1991, the Soviet Union itself dissolved.

By the beginning of the 21st century, Communist parties hold power in China, Cuba, Laos, North Korea, and Vietnam. President Vladimir Voronin of Moldova is a member of the Communist Party of Moldova, but the country is not run under one-party leadership. However, China has reassessed many aspects of the Maoist legacy; and China, Laos, Vietnam, and, to a lesser degree, Cuba have reduced state control of the economy in order to stimulate growth. Communist parties, or their descendent parties, remain politically important in many European countries and throughout the Third World, particularly in India.

Theories within Marxism as to why communism in Eastern Europe was not achieved after socialist revolutions pointed to such elements as the pressure of external capitalist states, the relative backwardness of the societies in which the revolutions occurred, and the emergence of a bureaucratic stratum or class that arrested or diverted the transition press in its own interests. Marxist critics of the Soviet Union referred to the Soviet system, along with other Communist states, as "state capitalism," arguing that Soviet system fell far short of Marx's communist ideal. They argued that the state and party bureaucratic elite acted as a surrogate capitalist class in the heavily centralized and repressive political apparatus.

Non-Marxists, in contrast, have often applied the term to any society ruled by a Communist Party and to any party aspiring to create a society similar to such existing nation-states. In the social sciences, societies ruled by Communist Parties are distinct for their single party control and their socialist economic bases. While anticommunists applied the concept of "totalitarianism" to these societies, many social scientists identified possibilities for independent political activity within them, and stressed their continued evolution up to the point of the dissolution of the Soviet Union and its allies in Eastern Europe during the late 1980s and early 1990s.

Today, Marxist revolutionaries are active in India, Nepal, and Colombia.

Free Trade Communists?

What seems to be contradictory to communism as a theory, and even communism as it has been practiced, are the free trade zones currently operating in The People's Republic of China; the largest self described communist nation in the world. After opening up trade to the world under Deng Shao Ping, communist China runs some of the most free trade oriented regions in the world, including Hong Kong, which is regarded by the Hoover Institute and the Wall Street Journal as the most free economy in the world [2].

The People's Republic of China's "Special Economic Zones" have few restrictions upon buisnesses, industries, imports and exports, including the elimination of duties. Since the opening of the Free Trade Zones China has maintained a growth rate of over 8%, and originally saw growth rates around 12%.

According to China.org "After opening Shenzhen and other three coastal cities in South China as special economic regions and then dozens of economic and technological development zones in the 1980s, the country introduced free trade zones in the early 1990s in 15 coast cities, including Shanghai, Guangzhou, Shenzhen and Tianjin." [3]

"Communism" or "communism"?

According to the 1996 third edition of Fowler's Modern English Usage, communism and derived words are written with the lowercase "c" except when they refer to a political party of that name, a member of that party, or a government led by such a party, in which case the word "Communist" is written with the uppercase "C".

Criticism of communism

Main article: Criticisms of communism.

A diverse array of writers and political activists have published anticommunist work, such as Soviet bloc dissidents Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn and Vaclav Havel; economists Friedrich Hayek, Ludwig von Mises, and Milton Friedman; and historians and social scientists Hannah Arendt, Robert Conquest, Daniel Pipes and R. J. Rummel, to name a few. Some writers such as Conquest go beyond attributing large-scale human rights abuses to Communist regimes, presenting events occurring in these countries, particularly under Stalin, as an argument against the ideology of Communism itself.

It should be noted that these are criticisms of Communist parties and states they have ruled, rather than criticisms of communism as such. It should also be noted that many Communist parties outside of the Warsaw Pact (i.e. Communist parties in Western Europe, Asia, Latin America, and Africa) differed greatly, therefore no single criticism fits all.

See also

• Communist state
• Anti-communism
• Criticisms of communism
• Post-Communism

Schools of communism

• Anarchist communism
• Council communism
• De Leonism
• Eurocommunism
• Hoxhaism
• Juche
• Left communism
• Luxembourgism
• Marxism
• Marxism-Leninism
• Maoism
• Stalinism
• Trotskyism

Organizations and people

• Communist Party
• List of Communist parties
• List of Communists

Further reading

• Fernando Claudin, The Communist Movement: From Comintern to Cominform (1975)
• Pipes, Richard, "Communism", London, (2001), ISBN 0-297-64688-5

External links

Online resources for original Marxist literature

• Marxists Internet Archive
• Libertarian Communist Library
• Marxist.net
• Theses on Feuerbach
• Principles of Communism
• The Communist Manifesto
• The Civil War in France
• Socialism: Utopian and Scientific
• Reform or Revolution?
• What is to be Done?
• One Step Forward, Two Steps Back
• Two Tactics of Social-Democracy in the Democratic Revolution
• Materialism and Empirio-Criticism
• The Right of Nations to Self-Determination
• Imperialism, The Highest Stage of Capitalism
• The State and Revolution
• The Military Programme of the Proletarian Revolution
• The Tasks of the Proletariat In Our Revolution

ar:شيوعية bg:Комунизъм zh-min-nan:Kiōng-sán-chú-gī be:Камунізм ca:Comunisme cs:Komunismus da:Kommunisme de:Kommunismus et:Kommunism es:Comunismo eo:Komunismo fa:کمونیسم fr:Communisme ga:Cumannachas gl:Comunismo (política) ko:공산주의 id:Komunisme it:Comunismo he:קומוניזם lt:Komunizmas mk:Комунизам ms:Komunisme nl:Communisme nds:Kommunismus ja:共産主義 no:Kommunisme nn:Kommunisme pl:Komunizm pt:Comunismo ro:Comunism ru:Коммунизм simple:Communism sk:Komunizmus sl:Komunizem sr:Комунизам fi:Kommunismi sv:Kommunism vi:Chủ nghĩa Cộng sản tr:Komünizm uk:Комунізм zh:共产主义

---

Liberalism

Liberalism needs to be completly deleted. Its now about modern liberalism as defined by individuals throughout the world. Not liberailsm the ideology. I complained about this and they finally got rid of the disclaimer that the perverted article was not following. Now the article is about what it once said it would not be, and is now about something it is not. If you follow me. If not, the article on liberalism is really about socialists calling themselves liberals. Aka a bunch of crap! - Gibby

--- Dear Gibby, I suggest you send comments to a libertarian/classic liberal website. WIkipedia is not,. The article on liberalism describes liberalism as it stands now.. I am sorry for you it is not your liberalism. But please do not vandalize my talk page by suggesting I am saying that the Green Party (which Green Party) is a liberal party. I am just a European liberal democrat, triying to develop the article, which gives space to diverse forms of liberalism. Electionworld 21:40, 3 December 2005 (UTC)

---

They only appear as truths because the government did in fact do everything hayek said they did!!!! You didnt like it because it runs counter to everything you've learned! How can macroeconomists blame the free market for the problems of something like the great depression if the government intervened so heavily? This new information must have come as such a shock to you that you assumed it was a POV arguing in favor of itself... Its just facts that when made observable make the opposition seem...well stupid because they havnt taken account for those variables. You deleted it because you didnt like it. Period

(Gibby 22:26, 7 December 2005 (UTC))

---

The way the depression and the totalitarian sections were phrased made the macroeconomic assumptions appear to be correct. Thus you give defacto support for their belief. Which you do in fact believe in. I called you a name because its taken this long just to get you to leave up PART of a segment where I defend liberal interpretations other than the one you support, to NOT GET COMPLETLY DELETED. Then you insult my position by calling it propaganda, thus showing your lack of intelligence. Again, I hate to call names, and I rarely do it. I only save it for the people who disserve it the most!

In in regards to students...they aren't trying to revise the entire history and understanding of liberalism!

-Gibby

After you started editing (first anonymous) I made five edits in reaction to your edits. The first edit (1 December, 19:48 Dutch time) I deleted negative qualifications on American liberalism, restored the text about social liberalism (the text you deleted: you started to delete paragraphs) and deleted the paragraph about Hayek since in that text Hayeks opinions were presented as truth. The second edit, 10 minutes later, I had to restore the text on social liberalism again. I deleted in reaction also your new version of the text on Hayek (It could have stayed in, but I read it in combination with your other edits). The third edit was on 4 December 13:18: I mades omme small corrections in the text on Hayek and removed the socialled Atlee prove of Hayeks arguments, since that text was presented as truth, not as an opinion. Later that day 4 December 22:46, I removed the text on Atlee again and adjusted the text about Hayek, to make it more neutral. The sixth edit (5 December 08:37) was minor.

As I see it now, I should not have deleted the text on Hayek in my second edit. I did this because of the context you made your edits and your comments in the talk page. The line of your edits was a disqualification of other forms of liberalism than yours, even a denial that these forms are also liberal. In my edits you cannot find a preference for any of these versions, though I am a supporter of (what you might dislike) a mixture of economic and social liberalism, but more focused on the ethical and political side of liberalism. Never (as far as I remember now) I argued in Wikipedia that social liberalism is more liberal than classical liberalism. Never I insulted my fellow wikipedians. That is the way people should edit Wikipedia. We have to keep in mind that the liberalism page in Wikipedia is not a page of or for liberalism, but on liberalism, and also opponents of liberalism can edit this page. You tried to impose your interpretation of liberalism to Wikipedia and were not ready to accept other views. The text as it stands now gives attention to the major forms of liberalism without a preference for any of these forms. Electionworld 14:13, 6 December 2005 (UTC)

-- If that was true, why would you delete it rather than edit out a POV? Or perhaps its because the evidence given by Hayek destroys the line of thought you support and hold dear? (Gibby 16:55, 6 December 2005 (UTC))

---

Closing remark: You still forget that YOU started to delete sections which you didn't like (the text on social liberalism) and your first text on Hayek was presented as truth, not as his position. It was this combinations of edits and the text of your comments on the talk page what led to my deleting and editing your edit. You might have seen that my edits of 4 december and later had only the purpose to edit out a POV. You started to insult me. So I have to remember you of three official Wikipedia guidelines: Please respect Wikiquette, assume good faith and be nice. Electionworld 07:30, 7 December 2005 (UTC)

---

Nothing was deleted until I discovered that my edits giving an alternative viewpoint of both the great depression and the rise of totalitarian dictators was deleted. I had first posted those in October then again in late novemeber. Once they were deleted twice, I reposted for a third time and began editing the page liberalism to reflect fact and theory rather than political rhetoric and propoganda. -Gibby

We'll never agree on what happened: I cannot see your edits in October. Your edits 29 november (if you are anon user 68.97.49.51) started with presenting the Hayek and Friedman interpretation as true adn disqualifications of other forms of liberalism. but 1 december the same user 68.97.49.51 (later identified as you) at 19:26 Dutch time the paragraph on Liberalism and the great depression and two edits later at the same time you deleted the text on Social liberalism. Electionworld 22:08, 7 December 2005 (UTC)

Classical liberalism

Gibby, you are clueless. Under your anonymous account, you removed my cleanup notice on Classical liberalism while calling it "socialist vandalism," but then you went ahead and did some copyediting. Nice duplicitous start to your "collaboration" with other Wikipedians. 151.203.182.244 04:18, 6 December 2005 (UTC)

I copied my own work from Classic Liberalism and liberalism...

Other than calling things a rant you provided no useful evidence or no helpful instructions. I deleted your note because it was useless and added nothing.

Great Depression & FairTax

Sorry I edited your FairTax submission but it was a little POV. I'm an advocate myself but I had to tweak it a bit. While I agree that the FairTax is progressive, it is a debated point and discussed a little further down the article. Read your Bio - Thought you might like these audio streams for your debate on the Great Depression. As I'm sure you know, FEE is an excellent resource for those that hold classic liberalism views and appreciate liberty. Three Startling Myths about FDR and the New Deal & Myths of the Great Depression Morphh 20:19, 8 December 2005 (UTC)

With your recent post in "Indirect Effects", I think you duplicated the 2nd paragraph under "Monthly Entitlement Checks". I did not know if this was intentional or not. Also in this post, the prebate checks are not given to all members of society. They are only given to legal residents of the U.S. Perhaps you were referring to income levels? Morphh 02:18, 9 December 2005 (UTC)

Communism

Please discuss your edits on article Communism with Natalinasmpf directly - Try to avoid an edit war! --Intimidated^talk 17:06, 10 December 2005 (UTC)

Hi. Thanks for initiating discussion on the Free Trade Communism issue on Talk:Communism.

New topics are added to the bottom of discussion pages rather than the top, though. If you scroll down the page you'll find a discussion that I started yesterday about the passages in question (topic no. 29 on the list). I have taken the liberty of moving your comments there, with the rest. A few editors have tried to explain why they feel the sections are inappropriate and these issues need to be addressed before the passages are added back in. Yours discursively, Mattley ^(Chattley) 12:28, 11 December 2005 (UTC)

You still haven't got used to the way talk pages work on Wikipedia, as evidenced here [4]. In the light of that, perhaps you'd consider taking time to review basic Wikipedia policies in general, before continuing with your editing. In particular, please have a look at No Original Research, Don't disrupt Wikipedia to prove a point and the Manual of Style. Mattley ^(Chattley) 19:28, 11 December 2005 (UTC)

Hi,

In repsonse to your question, Matley, in Revision as of 18:53, 11 December 2005, removed the following comment from the discussion page under the section "Free Trade" Communists"

I'm beginning to think this article is being blocked by a bunch of cyber-thugs. BostonMA

On another subject, do you mind if I make some edits on your China section? I promise not to get into an edit war ;-) --BostonMA

You might have asked me about it, you know. I didn't mean to delete them and did so by accident. Assume good faith, BostonMA particularly in the case of editors who have spoken up on behalf of edits you made and attempted to get other editors to give them more attention [5]. Mattley ^(Chattley) 00:42, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

I welcome any edit that helps make it better. So long as the fact remains that a self described communist country has free trade zones, including one that is recognized as the most free economy in the world. Those are (very interesting) facts that should be expressed. (Gibby 00:34, 12 December 2005 (UTC))

oh and you can sign your posts by puting up () then four Gibby 00:34, 12 December 2005 (UTC) in between. ( ~ ~ ~ ~ ) just without the spaces.

Blocked for 24 hrs for WP:3RR

You have been blocked temporarily from editing for abuse of editing privileges. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please review Wikipedia's guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.

≈ jossi fresco ≈ t • @ 00:43, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

This is bullshit, you guys dont even follow your own policy.

1. It wasnt 3 reverts, it was cut and paste. Cut and paste is not in your revert policy 2. I was not warned, a warning was added in after the fact. 3. Natalinasmpf did four "reverts" of unknown type. Are they blocked as well? If not, I call BS.

Learn your own rules then follow them!

Hi.

Technically, you would be right, this is your own page and you decide what goes on it. However, blanking it is not recommended. Secondly, may I suggest you move the communism bit to /Communism? NSLE _(T+C+CVU) 01:36, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

Or create a sandbox User:KDRGibby/Sandbox. You can store alternate versions and work on fresh material there. Mattley ^(Chattley) 01:40, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

I prefer it right where it is, so anyone who stops by can see my protest. I think i've been wronged on the Communism page. The editors there in have not made any good attempts at working with me. Unjust deletion does not qualify as editing. Furthermore the rules of wikipedia have been violated, and then were unfairly applied, as evident in Nati's ability to edit even though she violated the rule in which she actually USED the revert function 4 times!!!! I cut and pasted my section in. Not a violation, if you read the rule book. (Gibby 01:45, 12 December 2005 (UTC)) I also think JossieF is friends with Nati rather than an unbiased admin. POV all over the freaking place on that page!

You should always talk things through on the discussion page, and get a neutral to look it through. If this fails, the best option would be to ask for comments. (PS - jossifresco is not in cahoots with anyone, and it is quite unfair to make any unproven accusations. The admins in the IRC vandalism channel watch certain articles for edits, and hence when this popped up she took action.) NSLE _(T+C+CVU) 01:58, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

She did not take action, Nati squeeled. That administrator refuses to answer any questions including why it can violate the policies to block someone who did not violate a policy while leaving someone alone who did.

I call total bs!

You clearly don't know how the CVU works on IRC. We have certain articles tagged, and a bot shows up edits. Communism is tagged. (PPS - I've <!-- -->'d the communism bit such that people who com to your talk page can see it if they try to edit the page, but otherwise doesn't show, to make the page look shorter.) NSLE _(T+C+CVU) 02:03, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

I have edited the communism page dozens of times and have had no trouble pasting my section back in. Furthermore, ITS NOT ON YOUR FREAKING RULE BOOK. PASTING IS NOT REVERTING. IF IT IS ADD IT!

Words have meanings, my god! Learn them people!

Pasting is reverting - it's essentially the same thing if the same content is added to. Hence, it becomes an edit war. You are arguing about semantics. It's not really appreciated. You claim to be a university graduate and a teacher but it seems that you are over-reacting. You also claim to have never heard of libertarian socialism despite the fact that it's a rather major ideology. You claim the deletions are unjust. We justified the deletion with the fact not that we had a problem with its content really, but it was in the wrong place. Here, articles are organised on a basis of hierarchy from most general to most specific. This makes it easier to read for flow and organisation. Your section was way too specific for an article as broad as Communism and therefore had to be removed. It would have been moved to other articles except it's already mentioned there. -- Natalinasmpf 02:09, 12 December 2005 (UTC)