Suspended 5 games for admiring Fidel Castro

It never has. Many countries allow communes, including America, and none of them have ignited any form of violence yet.
Except maybe the Anarchist one in Denmark, but that's because the government there doesn't respect the commune, which is un-libertarian.

Noone knows that they can create communes. And a Commune wouldn't pay taxes, it wouldn't follow our government, and it would be totally free. Sounds nice on paper, but noone wants to go to some random block that calls itself a commune.

You say it like its a bad thing. Democratic Socialism, that is what I am.

I'm pretty sure SWAT had some run inns with highly religious communes in the states.
If a whole country was divided in communes allot of disagreements would acure and lead to violence.

Nothing is stopping anybody from advertising it. At least not in a libertarian society.

Clearly forcing everybody to be socialist is a better alternative to allowing them to be socialist. If you're worried nobody will join your commune because of it's image, than why don't you improve it's image. Or hey, here's a thought, maybe nobody wants to be apart of this commune.

You'll get over it.

Which was very un-libertarian. And it all worked out for the best because most of those communes cults wanted to kill and control their people anyway.

That doesn't make any sense, and is highly speculative. At least back that up.

See Greek City States.

Greek city-states were independent. A commune is not. It is simply a group of people sharing similar beliefs working together and living in a community.

Greek city-states had their own armies. A commune would not.

Greek city-states were disunified and unorganized. Each one had it's own government with it's own laws, and nothing united them together. In a commune the levels of government, State and Federal, would reign over the commune (a local government) and prevent such an outbreak from happening.

Also, I can't see any reason any communes would have a conflict of interest. And it isn't like the entire nation would be split between different communes which act as independent nations, that is just absurd. A commune would be just like any other village or city, the only difference being the "commune" would be run by and populated by socialists. It wouldn't be an institution, it would just be a group of like-minded citizens living within proximity of each other and capitalizing on the amount of freedom the libertarian society allows local governments.

Besides, governments around the world allow communes today, and there exist many socialist, communist, and anarchist communes even in the United States. Are we in a state of civil war? Is the entire nation divided into warring city states? No. Stop being an idiot, and just accept that allowing people freedom is a better option than forcing an ideology down their throats, you disgusting socialist pigs.

How are you so sure that all socialists want to force our ideology down people's throats? I never once stated I want a revolution, or that I wanted to force it down everyone's throat.

Egalitarian Communes*
No need to over complicate it.

By definition a socialist state would force people to be socialist. It's inescapable. Now, admit that I am right or else continue the debate.

Is that what egalitarian means? I've heard the word, but never bothered to find out what it means.

I do believe he should have been suspended on monetary purposes only but I don't believe he should have been suspended.

I can understand why he was, it was politically incorrect with all of the Cubans there. I mean if he had said this in St. Louis, he wouldn't have been suspended.

This entire suspension is based on money due to many of the Cubans in Miami threatning to protest their games. This doesn't take from the fact however that it was indeed wrong to suspend him.

1) I doubt he was being serious.
2) It sounded like a joke to me.

You do know the Jews believe Jesus was a great prophet right?

It's basically as close to socialism as you can get at the communal level without seceding or staring a mass revolt.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Egalitarian_community

Yes, I believe it was probably a joke. This makes it worse that he was suspended because he wasn't even being serious.
EDIT: Back on topic guys, if you want to continue discussing communes then make a new thread and tag me in it.

As socialism is inherently revolutionary, we need to outlaw it immediately in favor of egalitarianism then. Inform those disgusting reds that there is an alternative.

Damn right son.

But then it was the politically incorrect thing to do therefore I believe he should have been suspended.

Joking about a matter that serious isn't funny and he should be punished.

Oh yes, Heaven forbid he state his opinion, especially if he wasn't serious!

It is a serious matter to the Cubans, what kind of person would joke about that?

A person who obviously has a piss poor sense of humor. I don't know what he said exactly, but if he was joking, than overreacting like this is even more appalling. If he wasn't, then this is violating his freedom of speech.

It isn't overreacting, like I said it is a serious matter and should not be joked about. An owner has every right to suspend him.