Great! She'll Be On 60 Minutes

Off Topic Politics and World Issues
21

[quote]nopal_juventus wrote:
What’s wrong with being a communist?[/quote]

Marx was undeniably the greatest fantasist of the 20th century (sorry Tolkein). I’ve read his fiction and I’m not sure who he was trying to write about, but it wasn’t people. Let’s examine the sweet results of the Revoltion, comrade!

MURDER BY COMMUNISM*

Here’s a link detailing how many of their own citizens communist governments killed in the 20th century.

Roughly 110 000 000 communist comrades murdered in cold blood by their own government (democide). That’s one hundred ten MILLION civilians. This does not include war.

Some "high"lights of the study-- the Soviets killed an estimated 61 million, making them the leaders. Main causes of this democide – gulags and the transfer to and from the gulags. For comparison, WWI, WWII, Vietnam, Korea, the various wars in Africa, and all the other wars of the century accounted for roughly 38 000 000 killed. (This will vary depending on whether you count the Holocaust or not, which might add as many as 20 000 000, but we’ll keep it separate for now). The USSR nearly doubled that death toll just in murdering its own citizens.

The Chinese come in second, with a sturdy showing of 35 million of their own citizens murdered. Considering how many more good little communists were available, they are not nearly as ambitious in their horror as the Soviets. The Chinese didn’t even manage to beat all the casualties in all the wars worldwide, although I have to admit they came close.

The author notes that that’s not nearly as impressive as the communist regime of Pol Pot. Out of a country of 7 million, he killed 2 million! That means that you had a 2 to 1 chance of surviving his reign of terror I mean worker’s paradise.

We have to give an honorable mention to the Vietnamese communists, whose bloody purges after the USA pulled out well exceeded a million. But we don’t talk about that because the USA is evil and they were fighting heroic insurgents in Vietnam.

Also, the old Yugoslavia, despite their supposed heroic independence from the USSR, murdered well over a million of their own citizens. That’s funny, the New York Times always protrayed Tito as a great guy standing up to the bullying Soviets. Apparently, he solved ethnic problems by just murdering the hell out of everyone!

And we have to give some credit to the North Koreans, who we can’t really make any estimates about because of their lead curtain. However, best estimates put them close to the Vietnamese in their murder, which is certainly noteworthy given how many fewer people there are in North Korea.

Now, I’m no statistician, but I’m pretty sure that makes communism the most disastrously bloody stupid mistake ever made by human beings. Just communists being communists was --10 times more bloody than the Holocaust, 478 times more murderous than the recent tsunami, 7333 times more bloody than the Inquisistion, 36765 times more deadly than Sept. 11th.

In fact, the only single cause of human death in history over the same time frame is smallpox.

So there’s a fairly good reason or 110 000 000 that communism is a bad idea.

If you are going to deny it then you must meet your anti-hero, AL SHADES!

22

Ok, I guess it does kind of imply that Ben Franklin copied Marx, but I already posted that that’s not what I meant.

“Communist conquests.”
Communism is the anthithesis of Imperialism, so it’s impossible for a communist nation to be imperialistic. What is possible is for some alleged communist countries (who a more fascist in nature) to compete with certain imperialistic nations (read: U.S.S.R.and U.S.) in terms of land mass, markets controled, resources, and military might.
Just because Russia called itself communist doesn’t mean that communism implies colonialism, whereas with imperialism it does.

I’ll give you some clear imperialist examples of the last 35 years (these are all military actions taken by the U.S. in said countries with flimsy excuses as backing. If you’re still unsatisfied, I’ll provide websites with in-deph analysis and my own knowledge on some of the events): Vietnam, School of the Americas, Irak, Cambodia, Chile, Angola, Nicaragua, El Salvador, Philippines, Colombia, Afghanistan.

23

'Marx was undeniably the greatest fantasist of the 20th century (sorry Tolkein). ’

As I recall the Communist Manifesto was written in 1848, but I guess I must be wrong because I pointed out that communism is not the evil that imperialists make it out to be.

110,000,000. First off those stats seem to be a little off: http://encyclopedia.lockergnome.com/s/b/The_Black_Book_of_Communism

Secondly, killing is not the only way to end someone’s life. I in no way support the mass murders commited by Russia, China, and other communist nations, but they are not that different from the deaths caused by capitalist nations (and their derivatives). And you fail to mention other effects that communist coutries had, such as the 100,000,000 lives saved in China after the “great leap foward.” Also, in almost all examples, the communist nations mentioned did not come close to achieving Marx’s goals, so they are only capitalist in name. In some cases, they used the name as an excuse to have the backing of the proletariat (such as Stalin murdering Lenin and exhiling Trotsky). Another important point is that none of the nations followed the ‘guidelines’ set up by Marx and Engels to achieve true communism (i.e. going through the capitalist and imperialist stages first so as to ensure adequate resources would be at hand when " …eventual cessation of capitalism and all it’s associated phenomena such as the exchange of money, the use of banks, and governments that ruled from the top down" took place.

The study paints a very one-sided picture, and uses vague data to base it’s conclusions on.
Read The Black Book of capitalism and then decide.

24

[quote]nopal_juventus wrote:
Ok, I guess it does kind of imply that Ben Franklin copied Marx, but I already posted that that’s not what I meant.

“Communist conquests.”
Communism is the anthithesis of Imperialism, so it’s impossible for a communist nation to be imperialistic. What is possible is for some alleged communist countries (who a more fascist in nature) to compete with certain imperialistic nations (read: U.S.S.R.and U.S.) in terms of land mass, markets controled, resources, and military might.
Just because Russia called itself communist doesn’t mean that communism implies colonialism, whereas with imperialism it does.

I’ll give you some clear imperialist examples of the last 35 years (these are all military actions taken by the U.S. in said countries with flimsy excuses as backing. If you’re still unsatisfied, I’ll provide websites with in-deph analysis and my own knowledge on some of the events): Vietnam, School of the Americas, Irak, Cambodia, Chile, Angola, Nicaragua, El Salvador, Philippines, Colombia, Afghanistan. [/quote]

You state that communism is the antithesis of imperialism. Gotta throw the bullshit flag on that one - it seems that the U.S. was each of those countries in response to the ‘anti-imperialist’ land grab by your commie friends.

I take that back. Iraq was not, but you can hardly call a country holding free an open elections a victim of ‘imperialism’.

How many free and open elections did the USSR have? or Red China?

If you want to call championing the spread of democracy imperialistic, then I will agree with you and wear the badge proudly. Democracy is spreading. Communism/facism is on the decline.

25

[quote]nopal_juventus wrote:
Ok, I guess it does kind of imply that Ben Franklin copied Marx, but I already posted that that’s not what I meant.

“Communist conquests.”
Communism is the anthithesis of Imperialism, so it’s impossible for a communist nation to be imperialistic. What is possible is for some alleged communist countries (who a more fascist in nature) to compete with certain imperialistic nations (read: U.S.S.R.and U.S.) in terms of land mass, markets controled, resources, and military might.
Just because Russia called itself communist doesn’t mean that communism implies colonialism, whereas with imperialism it does.

I’ll give you some clear imperialist examples of the last 35 years (these are all military actions taken by the U.S. in said countries with flimsy excuses as backing. If you’re still unsatisfied, I’ll provide websites with in-deph analysis and my own knowledge on some of the events): Vietnam, School of the Americas, Irak, Cambodia, Chile, Angola, Nicaragua, El Salvador, Philippines, Colombia, Afghanistan. [/quote]

Want to compare the results of American imperialism and what your great- great- great-grandfathers did? I’ll give you a hint: the Spanish in the New World come in at almost a tie with smallpox for the most killed! Your country’s “accomplishments” in the New World led to the death of 45 times as many deaths as all of the wars and crimes that Americans have ever even been accused of.

Spaniards are actually the only people in the world that make us look benevolent in regard to our treatment of the Native Americans. I mean, the destruction of the North American Indians is the darkest period in American (and Canadian) history. But we don’t even come close to the excesses of your own ancestors. A path of butchery and devastation that wedges the Spanish right between smallpox and the several centuries of Mongol conquest on the all-time killer list.

This is more irritating the more I think about it: a Spaniard lecturing the US on imperialism? Do you have any idea from a historical perspective how idiotic that is? Spain probably has the least mixed history of horror of any nation on Earth (sorry Portugal). Really, think about it: who else has less achievements in the realm of civilization and more in the way of imperialist murder than you? Certainly not any in the West. And you might make some arguments for some Middle Eastern countries on thte one side, but they can’t hold a candle to 80-140 million Native Americans underground, either, so the crown is still Spanish.

You idiots raped and murdered your way across most of the globe for CENTURIES and all you have to show for it is your ruin of a country? What did you do with all the gold and slave labor? Having obviously squandered that (all that horror and not even lasting material gain?), why would we care what you think about the US?
Whatever you do don’t get a job and try to bring Spain into the 18th century. You’re better off protesting the School of the Americas.

A Spanish (see above) Communist (see previous post) who loathes the USA (s leader in the fight against international smallpox). That puts you at a 0% sanity level when it comes to human abomination. Let’s see if we can make this 0 for 4… What do you think of Genghis Khan in comparison to George Washington?

26

100,000 iraquis would disagree about the elections… if they were still alive. And elections aren’t free if you’re still occupied by a foreign army and have a puppet government set up, forget the fact that the nation is in total chaos and the dominant shi?te party will probably still control Irak 10 years from now.

I never ever supported Red Russia and China, I did the exact opposite. I’ve already said twice that just because the dictatorship set up came from a party with communist in its name does not make the nation communist. Imperialism requires colonialism and land-whoring to subsist in the long run, whereas communism does not. You really need to see beyond the ‘spread the freedom’ fascade that has been used for so long to veil blatant greed and corruption. I suppose you were freeing Vietnam as well? Or Panama? Or Sudan? Same thing goes for Stalin and Mao’s crimes. The whole proletariat thing was just to convince people that they were the good guys, Stalin pissed all over Marx and Engels’works when he murdered Lenin and exhiled Trotsky.

27

[quote]nopal_juventus wrote:
'Marx was undeniably the greatest fantasist of the 20th century (sorry Tolkein). ’

As I recall the Communist Manifesto was written in 1848, but I guess I must be wrong because I pointed out that communism is not the evil that imperialists make it out to be.

110,000,000. First off those stats seem to be a little off: http://encyclopedia.lockergnome.com/s/b/The_Black_Book_of_Communism

Secondly, killing is not the only way to end someone’s life. I in no way support the mass murders commited by Russia, China, and other communist nations, but they are not that different from the deaths caused by capitalist nations (and their derivatives). And you fail to mention other effects that communist coutries had, such as the 100,000,000 lives saved in China after the “great leap foward.” Also, in almost all examples, the communist nations mentioned did not come close to achieving Marx’s goals, so they are only capitalist in name. In some cases, they used the name as an excuse to have the backing of the proletariat (such as Stalin murdering Lenin and exhiling Trotsky). Another important point is that none of the nations followed the ‘guidelines’ set up by Marx and Engels to achieve true communism (i.e. going through the capitalist and imperialist stages first so as to ensure adequate resources would be at hand when " …eventual cessation of capitalism and all it’s associated phenomena such as the exchange of money, the use of banks, and governments that ruled from the top down" took place.

The study paints a very one-sided picture, and uses vague data to base it’s conclusions on.
Read The Black Book of capitalism and then decide.[/quote]

Sorry I got confused by all the 19th century communist countries.

You are certifiably insane. The link you posted said it is between 60-85 million. Bumps communism down to third behind the Spanish in the New World and smallpox as the greatest killers of man in a 100 year period.

SIXTY TO 85 MILLION? HOW CAN YOU STILL EVEN BE TALKING ABOUT THIS? 85 000 000 human beings? That is still more than World War I, World War II, the wars in Indochina, the Spanish Civil War, Rwanda, the wars in the Koreas, and the Arminian genocide combined! It’s like saying I support the rise of a system of government that would commit 4-7 times the murder of the holocaust.

Apparently a pre-requisite for modern-day communists is heartlessness and ignorance.

28

Man some of you are giving the socialist guy a hard time. There IS a difference between ideal and practice. It’s been pretty well shown that communism doesn’t tend to be the stablest type of goverment. I personally think that it’s because people have ambition, and strict communism doesn’t really allow for that (unless you happen to be one of the leaders). However, it doesn’t mean that the ideas of socialism and communism don’t sound decent on paper.

I happen to agree that the US is acting out in imperialistic ways… the war in Iraq? Come on… weapons of mass destruction is it? Or perhaps we didn’t have a strong enough handle on the oil in the middle east?

I’m pretty happy about being American… we have 24 hour grocery stores. My gym is open from 6am to 1am. Food is cheap and plentiful. And to be damned sure, there are some beautiful places in the US. But everytime I turn on the TV and see that monkey (Bush), and listen to his stupid ass, it makes me somewhat ashamed that we could have such an idiot leading our country. Moreover, that we can be lied to, both by the government and the (government controlled) media about our actions in the world, just really chaps my hide. And for that short time when Bush’s stupid words enter my ears, I think that living in a more socialist country wouldn’t be all that bad.

Whew.

29

"The U.S. imperialistic? Not in the last 90 years, or so. " - Rainjack.

Your definition of ‘imperialism’ - “imperialism - the policy, practice, or advocacy of extending the power and domination of a polity by territorial expansion or by gaining indirect control over the political or economic life of other areas”

Errmmm how about the invasion of Iraq ? the US has over 100,000 troops over there (‘territorial expansion), controls the economy, and natives are unable to reverse legislation put in by Paul Bremner (‘indirect control over …economic life’) and have no say in the action of the occupying Army. Sounds like Imperialism to me ?. Why the denial ? whether its right or wrong is another question but its an invasion and occupation of someone elses’ country ?.

30

[quote]nopal_juventus wrote:
Another important point is that none of the nations followed the ‘guidelines’ set up by Marx and Engels to achieve true communism (i.e. going through the capitalist and imperialist stages first so as to ensure adequate resources would be at hand when " …eventual cessation of capitalism and all it’s associated phenomena such as the exchange of money, the use of banks, and governments that ruled from the top down" took place.
[/quote]

I’ve read the Manifesto, as well as everything Ayn Rand wrote.

Your above statement about how the countries didn’t “follow the rules” explains why Marx’s ideal government was called “utopia”, a paradise that could never exist. Communism is simply a method of the radical pandering to the “proletariat” in order to overthrow the current power structure by duping the proletariat into believing the new power structure will be “Equal” and “fair”. Marx’s ideas were benevolent in theory, but the practical applications are always brutal. Once the radical has taken it’s position of power it continues to acquire power and wealth because it has the means, the “Proletariat” cannot because it has no means to acquire material goods. Comumunism is by it’s own nature parasitic.

I believe it was Winston Churchill that said “Communism guarantees an equal amount of suffering to all.”

31

Well…

Maybe Ms. Sgrena is going to clear all this up for us tonight on “60 minutes…”

And let us know how and why those Imperialist Americans wanted her killed…but were so inept at it that they couldn’t get the job done…

Mufasa

32

“How many heavily armed American soldiers does it take to kill an Italian Communist riding in a Hugo…”?

(…Never mind…it wouldn’t have been very funny anyway…)

Mufasa

33

Hey socialist dude, I think the capitalists point is that sure communism works great as an ideal, but as for real world application, a capitolist democracy has proven to be the best society thus far in human existance. The quality of life for the world at large is so many times better than it was 200 years ago and a very large cause of that advancement has been the democratic process coupled with capitalism. People were rewarded for working harder and being more innovative, Therefore, the cream rose to the top and thier ideas and discoveries pulled the less ambitious up with them.

People who wine and cry about how great communism, or socialism is, are simply un-ambitious IMHO. If you were ambitious and innovative, you would be prasing a system that lets you be the best you possible, and rewards you for doing so. In a communist or socialist society, the harder you work, the more pissed off people around you are gonna be because you make them look bad. It’s just how it is. My grandmothers family is from the Ukrane, I have heard from her lips the things that they had to deal with, and her family still deals with. These people go extended periods of time, not being able to afford toilet paper. Thats right, they wipe with thier hand and then wash it of in some water. Oh trust me they love communism.

V

34

[quote]jeru72 wrote:
"The U.S. imperialistic? Not in the last 90 years, or so. " - Rainjack.

Your definition of ‘imperialism’ - “imperialism - the policy, practice, or advocacy of extending the power and domination of a polity by territorial expansion or by gaining indirect control over the political or economic life of other areas”

Errmmm how about the invasion of Iraq ? the US has over 100,000 troops over there (‘territorial expansion), controls the economy, and natives are unable to reverse legislation put in by Paul Bremner (‘indirect control over …economic life’) and have no say in the action of the occupying Army. Sounds like Imperialism to me ?. Why the denial ? whether its right or wrong is another question but its an invasion and occupation of someone elses’ country ?.[/quote]

Absolutely wrong! In Imperialism you keep the country, dummy! By your definition, we invaded and added France, Belgium, Luxembourg, Italy, the Netherlands, Germany, parts of Czechslovakia, Morrocco, Algeria, Tunisia, South Korea, the Solomon Islands, Japan, and the Phillipines (to name a few) to the United States Empire. Those are all still colonies that pay taxes and do what they’re told, right? Since they’re part of the Empire, we regularly dictate from Washington what they can and cannot do, correct? I’m going to write my representative and tell him to shut up Jack Chirac the provincial governor.

No wait… I’m sorry. I thought the US was European for a minute. That’s historically what any European nation who ever got a leg up on the other guy would do in our position. You have to learn what the word “imperialism” means. Look up the French in the two decades following the second World War if you want to see real imperialism (supported by genocide).

35

I think that Vegita and some others hit it right on the head…ON PAPER Communisism sounds Utopian (which should be your first warning sign)…but IN PRACTICE it is much different. The problems as I see them (and some of these have been touched on):

  1. It requires everyone working for some greater good (e.g. “The Motherland”) while putting their personal interest in check. This goes contrary almost to the nature of Humans to look after oneself first. Also, the ideal of a “greater good” tends to work only in small measure (e.g. within a family, or a Platoon, or a Basketball team), but not on a national level involving millions.

  2. While spouting off ideas of “classless” societies, the Party Leaders tended to live like any King in an “Imperialist” society, enjoying all the spoils of the common mans labor. (“No poor among us?”…right…)

  3. When people would not work for the “greater good”…or point out the hypocrisy of the leaders…or are simply “intellectual”…they were (and often are) killed and jailed by the millions.

(One interesting paradox…Capatalistic Societies, fueled by Democracy, have been able to take care of more of the poor than Communism ever has…)

Mufasa

36

Just remember that all systems have their problems – as much as we like to trumpet the current system, it is very far from perfect as well.

Granted, I certainly like it a lot better than I think I would communism, whether in truth or in name. A dictatorship might be nice, but then, only if I’m the dictator.

A little more seriously, there are still problems with greed, power and government secrecy.

37

vroom:

I agree 100%…there most definitely is no perfect system…

But my question has always been this…after more than a Century of seeing how Communism works in practice…how does [u]anyone [/u] continue to deem it as this great and grand Utopian system?

Mufasa

38

Come on, let’s stop it with this old canard that only hippy professors (and apparently the Spanish) still hang on to: “Communism was a great idea that just didn’t work out.”

IT WAS NOT A GREAT IDEA!

The proof is in the pudding, as they say. We have nearly a century of empirical evidence from countries and cultures all around the world that tried it. It was and remains an unmitigated disaster. It led to an incomprehensible, unequalled amount of slaughter (read my previous posts). It led almost everywhere to a lower standard of living, Byzantine corruption, and hugely reduced per-capita productivity.

Here’s the worst (and most obvious) problem with communism – it always leads to dictatorship, because the people involved are real people and so bear no resemblance to Marx’s ramblings. If your economy is based on the redistribution of wealth, you have to have somebody to redistribute this, right? So guess what happened in EVERY SINGLE INSTANCE it was ever tried? The redistributors (the government, the party, or whatever they chose to call it) had all the power! And they used every means neccessary (85-110 million citizens murdered from 1917-2000) to keep it.

Let me put it to you in Testosterone terms – let’s say that I was a strength coach, and I came up with a really neat looking plan that had all kinds of crazy graphs and ground-breaking techniques and inverse-wave loading and all kinds of colorful shiny things to excite the ignorant. Now, you might or might not realize this when you read it, but although it looks cute I did not take into account any of the obvious and well-known principles of exercise science.

Now let’s say you and your buddies try my Program. Instead of getting the 1000% gains that the Program promised, you all get ill, and a bunch of you die. Regardless, all of you lose muscle mass, strength, and muscular endurance. When a few of you try to get help or join another gym I kill you and hang your dead body in the corner as a reminder to the others not to try any other methods than the Program. Eventually you all overpower me, kick me out, and go back to trying to figure things out on your own. Let’s also say that I move from gym to gym trying the same Program and getting the same results – death, sarcopenia, and my eventual ouster.

Would anyone be coming on here and saying “Gee, it looked really good on paper, it could have been a great program but it just wasn’t tried in the right places?” Of course not, unless you had an utter lack of cognitive function. You would look at my trail of destroyed physiques and decomposing corpses and say “The Program was a true nightmare. While my current program might not be the best, at least it isn’t going to kill me!”

39

[quote]graphicsMan wrote:
And for that short time when Bush’s stupid words enter my ears, I think that living in a more socialist country wouldn’t be all that bad.

Whew.[/quote]

Don’t let the door hit you in the ass.

40

Creme:

Interesting how all the “For the People and the Motherland” types tend to “redistribute” wealth… right back into their own pockets!

Go figure!

Mufasa