|
Now that we have a new thread, in order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a complete and thorough read before posting! NOTE: When providing a source, please provide a very brief summary on what it's about and what purpose it adds to the discussion. The supporting statement should clearly explain why the subject is relevant and needs to be discussed. Please follow this rule especially for tweets.
Your supporting statement should always come BEFORE you provide the source.If you have any questions, comments, concern, or feedback regarding the USPMT, then please use this thread: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/website-feedback/510156-us-politics-thread |
|
|
On July 11 2018 02:04 Kyadytim wrote:Show nested quote +President Donald Trump has pardoned two ranchers whose case sparked the armed occupation of a national wildlife refuge in Oregon. apnews.comTrump has pretty much established a pattern of feeding his base by pardoning its criminal element.
The trend seems to be that criminality will be allows so long as you are conservative or supported by Trump's conservative base. The rules only matter if they allow the conservative movement to win.
|
|
|
On July 11 2018 02:05 Nebuchad wrote:Show nested quote +On July 11 2018 02:02 Sermokala wrote:On July 11 2018 01:59 Nebuchad wrote:
Assuming we've established that capitalism is indeed pretty bad in this conversation (otherwise we would have defenses of capitalism instead of "look the communists did it too"), shouldn't the next step be us working together to find a solution to this rather than us continuing with capitalism unchanged? The answer is to keep doing what we are doing and continue to work with capatalism to make it better for the worker. Europe may have socialist ideals but they're not seriously advocating for a socialism state. That's not what we've been doing at all, and it is a logical consequence of our system that this isn't what we've been doing: the ruling class has the most power and the ruling class can influence the direction of our politics much better than the workers can, which means they have the means and the incentive to make capitalism better for themselves as opposed to the worker. There is a fundamental distance here between your stated goal and the system that you've chosen to obtain it.
Thats exactly what we've been doing. The ruleing class making compromises to the system to keep the plebes happy. In socialism that means people have to die en mass. in Capitalism that means labor rights have to be improved. There isn't an imaginary world order of elites that can make things infinitely better for them whenever they want while they have to listen to the workers at some real point.
|
On July 11 2018 02:09 JimmiC wrote:Show nested quote +On July 11 2018 02:04 Plansix wrote:On July 11 2018 02:00 Sermokala wrote:On July 11 2018 01:52 Plansix wrote:On July 11 2018 01:48 xDaunt wrote:On July 11 2018 01:41 GreenHorizons wrote:
Racism stands in fundamental opposition to socialist principles. You can't be racist and treat people equitably and with dignity. They are mutually exclusive. No one objects to racist's capitalist credentials because they are racist, but being racist is unquestionably not socialist behavior. Yes, please tell us about how Chavez treated his people equitably and with dignity. You apparently like him quite a bit. Or maybe you can elaborate on other socialist institutions like China or the USSR. Only if you tell use the story of the robber barons, Pinkertons, union busters, the imperial supreme court of the 1930, the great depressions and the prosperity gospel. We don’t even need to leave the US to see the worst of capitalism. We took it as far as it could go without destroying the country. This isn't an argument about how Capitalism is bad its an argument about how capitalism is white supremacist and socialism isn't. You don't get points by pointing out how admittedly capitalism has had its faults. You lose points by admitting that socialism has had the same faults. Nothing is more disingenuous then advocating for failed government types based on theoretical "but I'm sure we'll make it work this time" appeals. Socialism in its complete form doesn't work and its never worked. Capitalism doesn't work in its complete form either. But capitalism can be compromised and keep much of its benefits while socialism can't. You are right, that was not my argument. It is a response to bringing up the worst of socialism and communism as an argument against the merits of those systems. Don't bring up Chavez, the USSR or communist China if you don't want the Pinkertons and Union busters thrown back at you in response. For the record I bring them up not to say that socialism itself is bad. But to show that in practice it has had a lot of warts as well. Democratic Socialism has a ton of strengths. However that is not far enough for GH he wants the USSR and seems to believe that everything bad about it was either caused by the west or not bad and just western propaganda.
I'd take Lenin over Trump or Clinton 100 out of 100 times.
On July 11 2018 02:10 Sermokala wrote:Show nested quote +On July 11 2018 02:05 Nebuchad wrote:On July 11 2018 02:02 Sermokala wrote:On July 11 2018 01:59 Nebuchad wrote:
Assuming we've established that capitalism is indeed pretty bad in this conversation (otherwise we would have defenses of capitalism instead of "look the communists did it too"), shouldn't the next step be us working together to find a solution to this rather than us continuing with capitalism unchanged? The answer is to keep doing what we are doing and continue to work with capatalism to make it better for the worker. Europe may have socialist ideals but they're not seriously advocating for a socialism state. That's not what we've been doing at all, and it is a logical consequence of our system that this isn't what we've been doing: the ruling class has the most power and the ruling class can influence the direction of our politics much better than the workers can, which means they have the means and the incentive to make capitalism better for themselves as opposed to the worker. There is a fundamental distance here between your stated goal and the system that you've chosen to obtain it. Thats exactly what we've been doing. The ruleing class making compromises to the system to keep the plebes happy. In socialism that means people have to die en mass. in Capitalism that means labor rights have to be improved. There isn't an imaginary world order of elites that can make things infinitely better for them whenever they want while they have to listen to the workers at some real point.
I feel like this argument is willfully ignoring the last ~60 years where there has been a deliberate effort to undermine the foundations of workers rights and ability to influence anything. Literally the only thing making liberals even consider maybe moving inches to the left is the fear of utter chaos and losing all of their power/influence.
Most Democrats would be perfectly content to be living under Clinton right now, despite the horrific exploitation and oppression she would share great responsibilty for.
|
On July 11 2018 02:08 Sermokala wrote:Show nested quote +On July 11 2018 02:04 Plansix wrote:On July 11 2018 02:00 Sermokala wrote:On July 11 2018 01:52 Plansix wrote:On July 11 2018 01:48 xDaunt wrote:On July 11 2018 01:41 GreenHorizons wrote:
Racism stands in fundamental opposition to socialist principles. You can't be racist and treat people equitably and with dignity. They are mutually exclusive. No one objects to racist's capitalist credentials because they are racist, but being racist is unquestionably not socialist behavior. Yes, please tell us about how Chavez treated his people equitably and with dignity. You apparently like him quite a bit. Or maybe you can elaborate on other socialist institutions like China or the USSR. Only if you tell use the story of the robber barons, Pinkertons, union busters, the imperial supreme court of the 1930, the great depressions and the prosperity gospel. We don’t even need to leave the US to see the worst of capitalism. We took it as far as it could go without destroying the country. This isn't an argument about how Capitalism is bad its an argument about how capitalism is white supremacist and socialism isn't. You don't get points by pointing out how admittedly capitalism has had its faults. You lose points by admitting that socialism has had the same faults. Nothing is more disingenuous then advocating for failed government types based on theoretical "but I'm sure we'll make it work this time" appeals. Socialism in its complete form doesn't work and its never worked. Capitalism doesn't work in its complete form either. But capitalism can be compromised and keep much of its benefits while socialism can't. You are right, that was not my argument. It is a response to bringing up the worst of socialism and communism as an argument against the merits of those systems. Don't bring up Chavez, the USSR or communist China if you don't want the Pinkertons and Union busters thrown back at you in response. But that would still be an extremely favorable argument for capitalism. Widespread death vs keeping people poor. The cultural revolution and Stalin vs Rockerfeller and the great depression. How is that an equal argument?
The whole score card for who is worse is that productive when it comes down to who managed to kill more. I would argue is a more favorable argument toward democracy and against authoritarian governments, rather than capitalism vs socialism. Just because the the robber barons had to use the Pinkertons instead of the US army to bust up strikes shows our goverment was less prone to abuse by those with power. And there is a huge difference between the US population in the 1870s-1930s and the Russian peasant population of the 1930s.
|
|
|
On July 11 2018 02:11 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On July 11 2018 02:09 JimmiC wrote:On July 11 2018 02:04 Plansix wrote:On July 11 2018 02:00 Sermokala wrote:On July 11 2018 01:52 Plansix wrote:On July 11 2018 01:48 xDaunt wrote:On July 11 2018 01:41 GreenHorizons wrote:
Racism stands in fundamental opposition to socialist principles. You can't be racist and treat people equitably and with dignity. They are mutually exclusive. No one objects to racist's capitalist credentials because they are racist, but being racist is unquestionably not socialist behavior. Yes, please tell us about how Chavez treated his people equitably and with dignity. You apparently like him quite a bit. Or maybe you can elaborate on other socialist institutions like China or the USSR. Only if you tell use the story of the robber barons, Pinkertons, union busters, the imperial supreme court of the 1930, the great depressions and the prosperity gospel. We don’t even need to leave the US to see the worst of capitalism. We took it as far as it could go without destroying the country. This isn't an argument about how Capitalism is bad its an argument about how capitalism is white supremacist and socialism isn't. You don't get points by pointing out how admittedly capitalism has had its faults. You lose points by admitting that socialism has had the same faults. Nothing is more disingenuous then advocating for failed government types based on theoretical "but I'm sure we'll make it work this time" appeals. Socialism in its complete form doesn't work and its never worked. Capitalism doesn't work in its complete form either. But capitalism can be compromised and keep much of its benefits while socialism can't. You are right, that was not my argument. It is a response to bringing up the worst of socialism and communism as an argument against the merits of those systems. Don't bring up Chavez, the USSR or communist China if you don't want the Pinkertons and Union busters thrown back at you in response. For the record I bring them up not to say that socialism itself is bad. But to show that in practice it has had a lot of warts as well. Democratic Socialism has a ton of strengths. However that is not far enough for GH he wants the USSR and seems to believe that everything bad about it was either caused by the west or not bad and just western propaganda. I'd take Lenin over Trump or Clinton 100 out of 100 times.
Please read more world history regarding this era. Lenin was just another powerful person taking advantage of the weak.
|
On July 11 2018 01:57 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On July 11 2018 01:54 xDaunt wrote:On July 11 2018 01:50 JimmiC wrote:On July 11 2018 01:41 GreenHorizons wrote:On July 11 2018 01:31 Schmobutzen wrote:
GH, how capitalism inextricably connected to white supremacy?
And, how opposes socialism it fundamentaly? Well... On July 11 2018 01:30 Plansix wrote:
The best argument for socialism is that it provides more systems to address racism and inequality within itself, rather than having to prohibit specific practices in capitalism. That's the TLDR Capitalism has to have systems outside of itself to restrain/modify it, otherwise it would be even more exploitative and there would be more civil unrest (coups, revolutions, war, etc...). Racism stands in fundamental opposition to socialist principles. You can't be racist and treat people equitably and with dignity. They are mutually exclusive. No one objects to racist's capitalist credentials because they are racist, but being racist is unquestionably not socialist behavior. Again "theoretically" in practice humans get in the way. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Racism_in_the_Soviet_Union No kidding. If I had more time, I'd do a detailed post complete with research into how actual socialist and other authoritarian governments acted when it comes to race. This idea that Americans, capitalism, or even white people in general are uniquely racist is offensively absurd. I'm not surprised that you guys would align on the butchering of history, but if someone does something racist that is not a socialist action, but you guys wouldn't say doing a racist thing isn't capitalist. For instance, chattel slavery is fundamentally antithetical to socialism, can you guys say that about capitalism? If I owned slaves I couldn't be a socialist (I could support socialist stuff I guess), but I could totally be a capitalist and own slaves. There is nothing contradictory about that.
Capitalism and owning slaves does contradict. Capitalism is based on markets and the voluntary exchange of property. Making someone a slave and trading him or her is not a voluntary exchange.
|
On July 11 2018 02:10 Sermokala wrote:Show nested quote +On July 11 2018 02:05 Nebuchad wrote:On July 11 2018 02:02 Sermokala wrote:On July 11 2018 01:59 Nebuchad wrote:
Assuming we've established that capitalism is indeed pretty bad in this conversation (otherwise we would have defenses of capitalism instead of "look the communists did it too"), shouldn't the next step be us working together to find a solution to this rather than us continuing with capitalism unchanged? The answer is to keep doing what we are doing and continue to work with capatalism to make it better for the worker. Europe may have socialist ideals but they're not seriously advocating for a socialism state. That's not what we've been doing at all, and it is a logical consequence of our system that this isn't what we've been doing: the ruling class has the most power and the ruling class can influence the direction of our politics much better than the workers can, which means they have the means and the incentive to make capitalism better for themselves as opposed to the worker. There is a fundamental distance here between your stated goal and the system that you've chosen to obtain it. Thats exactly what we've been doing. The ruleing class making compromises to the system to keep the plebes happy. In socialism that means people have to die en mass. in Capitalism that means labor rights have to be improved. There isn't an imaginary world order of elites that can make things infinitely better for them whenever they want while they have to listen to the workers at some real point.
There are multiple ways to deal with an unhappy plebs, compromise isn't the only one; it's by far the weakest one.
You could also have propagandists convince a bunch of them that if you give money to the ruling class it will trickle down on them. You could convince them that big government is bad, so that more things are privatized and you increase the number of markets where your class makes money. You could crush unions so that workers have less power. You can pretend that you're helping the workers when you cut taxes in a non-progressive fashion so that the ruling class immediately has more money. You even can have a bunch of judges decide that when you give money to politicians you're just exercizing free speech, which is something that corporations totally have, imagine that.
You could also use distractions: pretend your policies are to help small business owners rather than the ruling class. You could pretend that the problem isn't their exploitation, but those people on welfare who don't want to work and are damaging society, maybe we should cut welfare programs to make society better. Pretend that the problem isn't them delocalizing the jobs because they can fuck the workers of elsewhere more than they can fuck you, but instead those pesky immigrants coming here to steal your jobs.
You could do any of those things. Or you could compromise and lose money. If you're in this position it's presumably because you're one of the best at capitalism, so you should be decent at choosing the solutions that make you lose less money (let alone the ones that make you benefit).
|
On July 11 2018 02:15 JimmiC wrote:Show nested quote +On July 11 2018 02:11 GreenHorizons wrote:On July 11 2018 02:09 JimmiC wrote:On July 11 2018 02:04 Plansix wrote:On July 11 2018 02:00 Sermokala wrote:On July 11 2018 01:52 Plansix wrote:On July 11 2018 01:48 xDaunt wrote:On July 11 2018 01:41 GreenHorizons wrote:
Racism stands in fundamental opposition to socialist principles. You can't be racist and treat people equitably and with dignity. They are mutually exclusive. No one objects to racist's capitalist credentials because they are racist, but being racist is unquestionably not socialist behavior. Yes, please tell us about how Chavez treated his people equitably and with dignity. You apparently like him quite a bit. Or maybe you can elaborate on other socialist institutions like China or the USSR. Only if you tell use the story of the robber barons, Pinkertons, union busters, the imperial supreme court of the 1930, the great depressions and the prosperity gospel. We don’t even need to leave the US to see the worst of capitalism. We took it as far as it could go without destroying the country. This isn't an argument about how Capitalism is bad its an argument about how capitalism is white supremacist and socialism isn't. You don't get points by pointing out how admittedly capitalism has had its faults. You lose points by admitting that socialism has had the same faults. Nothing is more disingenuous then advocating for failed government types based on theoretical "but I'm sure we'll make it work this time" appeals. Socialism in its complete form doesn't work and its never worked. Capitalism doesn't work in its complete form either. But capitalism can be compromised and keep much of its benefits while socialism can't. You are right, that was not my argument. It is a response to bringing up the worst of socialism and communism as an argument against the merits of those systems. Don't bring up Chavez, the USSR or communist China if you don't want the Pinkertons and Union busters thrown back at you in response. For the record I bring them up not to say that socialism itself is bad. But to show that in practice it has had a lot of warts as well. Democratic Socialism has a ton of strengths. However that is not far enough for GH he wants the USSR and seems to believe that everything bad about it was either caused by the west or not bad and just western propaganda. I'd take Lenin over Trump or Clinton 100 out of 100 times. I'm not sure he was such a great guy. + Show Spoiler +Red Terror was a period of political repression and executions carried out by Bolsheviks after the beginning of the Russian Civil War in 1918. During this period, the political police, the Cheka had conducted summary executions of tens of thousands of "enemies of the people".[96][97][98][99] Many victims were 'bourgeois hostages' rounded up and held in readiness for summary execution in reprisal for any alleged counter-revolutionary provocation.[100] Many were put to death during and after the suppression of revolts, such as the Kronstadt rebellion and the Tambov Rebellion. Professor Donald Rayfield claims that "the repression that followed the rebellions in Kronstadt and Tambov alone resulted in tens of thousands of executions."[101] A large number of Orthodox clergymen were also killed.[102][103]
The policy of decossackization amounted to an attempt by Soviet leaders to "eliminate, exterminate, and deport the population of a whole territory," according to Nicolas Werth.[104] In the early months of 1919, some 10,000 to 12,000 Cossacks were executed[105][106] and many more deported after their villages were razed to the ground.[107] According to historian Michael Kort, "During 1919 and 1920, out of a population of approximately 1.5 million Don Cossacks, the Bolshevik regime killed or deported an estimated 300,000 to 500,000".[108] I'm not a Trump or Clinton person myself either but I do prefer a system of government that keeps people from rounding up people and executing them based on anything.
lol...
You remember how that all started?
|
|
|
On July 11 2018 02:29 JimmiC wrote:Show nested quote +On July 11 2018 02:27 GreenHorizons wrote:On July 11 2018 02:15 JimmiC wrote:On July 11 2018 02:11 GreenHorizons wrote:On July 11 2018 02:09 JimmiC wrote:On July 11 2018 02:04 Plansix wrote:On July 11 2018 02:00 Sermokala wrote:On July 11 2018 01:52 Plansix wrote:On July 11 2018 01:48 xDaunt wrote:On July 11 2018 01:41 GreenHorizons wrote:
Racism stands in fundamental opposition to socialist principles. You can't be racist and treat people equitably and with dignity. They are mutually exclusive. No one objects to racist's capitalist credentials because they are racist, but being racist is unquestionably not socialist behavior. Yes, please tell us about how Chavez treated his people equitably and with dignity. You apparently like him quite a bit. Or maybe you can elaborate on other socialist institutions like China or the USSR. Only if you tell use the story of the robber barons, Pinkertons, union busters, the imperial supreme court of the 1930, the great depressions and the prosperity gospel. We don’t even need to leave the US to see the worst of capitalism. We took it as far as it could go without destroying the country. This isn't an argument about how Capitalism is bad its an argument about how capitalism is white supremacist and socialism isn't. You don't get points by pointing out how admittedly capitalism has had its faults. You lose points by admitting that socialism has had the same faults. Nothing is more disingenuous then advocating for failed government types based on theoretical "but I'm sure we'll make it work this time" appeals. Socialism in its complete form doesn't work and its never worked. Capitalism doesn't work in its complete form either. But capitalism can be compromised and keep much of its benefits while socialism can't. You are right, that was not my argument. It is a response to bringing up the worst of socialism and communism as an argument against the merits of those systems. Don't bring up Chavez, the USSR or communist China if you don't want the Pinkertons and Union busters thrown back at you in response. For the record I bring them up not to say that socialism itself is bad. But to show that in practice it has had a lot of warts as well. Democratic Socialism has a ton of strengths. However that is not far enough for GH he wants the USSR and seems to believe that everything bad about it was either caused by the west or not bad and just western propaganda. I'd take Lenin over Trump or Clinton 100 out of 100 times. I'm not sure he was such a great guy. + Show Spoiler +Red Terror was a period of political repression and executions carried out by Bolsheviks after the beginning of the Russian Civil War in 1918. During this period, the political police, the Cheka had conducted summary executions of tens of thousands of "enemies of the people".[96][97][98][99] Many victims were 'bourgeois hostages' rounded up and held in readiness for summary execution in reprisal for any alleged counter-revolutionary provocation.[100] Many were put to death during and after the suppression of revolts, such as the Kronstadt rebellion and the Tambov Rebellion. Professor Donald Rayfield claims that "the repression that followed the rebellions in Kronstadt and Tambov alone resulted in tens of thousands of executions."[101] A large number of Orthodox clergymen were also killed.[102][103]
The policy of decossackization amounted to an attempt by Soviet leaders to "eliminate, exterminate, and deport the population of a whole territory," according to Nicolas Werth.[104] In the early months of 1919, some 10,000 to 12,000 Cossacks were executed[105][106] and many more deported after their villages were razed to the ground.[107] According to historian Michael Kort, "During 1919 and 1920, out of a population of approximately 1.5 million Don Cossacks, the Bolshevik regime killed or deported an estimated 300,000 to 500,000".[108] I'm not a Trump or Clinton person myself either but I do prefer a system of government that keeps people from rounding up people and executing them based on anything. lol... You remember how that all started? No I don't I was not born yet, nor am I from Russia. But I have read about it yes. And I don't think that going in, rounding up the people doing shitty stuff and killing them all is justified. Like right now I wouldn't want some group to go into Venezuela round up all of Maduro's friends, family, their families and murder them all.
I meant remember as in you didn't just google that and copy paste it. Like you actually studied that history at some point before this conversation.
Because it doesn't seem like you did. It seems like you're oblivious that you're talking about a civil war or are completely unaware of how warfare was executed in the early 1900's.
|
|
|
On July 11 2018 02:36 JimmiC wrote:Show nested quote +On July 11 2018 02:33 GreenHorizons wrote:On July 11 2018 02:29 JimmiC wrote:On July 11 2018 02:27 GreenHorizons wrote:On July 11 2018 02:15 JimmiC wrote:On July 11 2018 02:11 GreenHorizons wrote:On July 11 2018 02:09 JimmiC wrote:On July 11 2018 02:04 Plansix wrote:On July 11 2018 02:00 Sermokala wrote:On July 11 2018 01:52 Plansix wrote:
[quote]
Only if you tell use the story of the robber barons, Pinkertons, union busters, the imperial supreme court of the 1930, the great depressions and the prosperity gospel. We don’t even need to leave the US to see the worst of capitalism. We took it as far as it could go without destroying the country. This isn't an argument about how Capitalism is bad its an argument about how capitalism is white supremacist and socialism isn't. You don't get points by pointing out how admittedly capitalism has had its faults. You lose points by admitting that socialism has had the same faults. Nothing is more disingenuous then advocating for failed government types based on theoretical "but I'm sure we'll make it work this time" appeals. Socialism in its complete form doesn't work and its never worked. Capitalism doesn't work in its complete form either. But capitalism can be compromised and keep much of its benefits while socialism can't. You are right, that was not my argument. It is a response to bringing up the worst of socialism and communism as an argument against the merits of those systems. Don't bring up Chavez, the USSR or communist China if you don't want the Pinkertons and Union busters thrown back at you in response. For the record I bring them up not to say that socialism itself is bad. But to show that in practice it has had a lot of warts as well. Democratic Socialism has a ton of strengths. However that is not far enough for GH he wants the USSR and seems to believe that everything bad about it was either caused by the west or not bad and just western propaganda. I'd take Lenin over Trump or Clinton 100 out of 100 times. I'm not sure he was such a great guy. + Show Spoiler +Red Terror was a period of political repression and executions carried out by Bolsheviks after the beginning of the Russian Civil War in 1918. During this period, the political police, the Cheka had conducted summary executions of tens of thousands of "enemies of the people".[96][97][98][99] Many victims were 'bourgeois hostages' rounded up and held in readiness for summary execution in reprisal for any alleged counter-revolutionary provocation.[100] Many were put to death during and after the suppression of revolts, such as the Kronstadt rebellion and the Tambov Rebellion. Professor Donald Rayfield claims that "the repression that followed the rebellions in Kronstadt and Tambov alone resulted in tens of thousands of executions."[101] A large number of Orthodox clergymen were also killed.[102][103]
The policy of decossackization amounted to an attempt by Soviet leaders to "eliminate, exterminate, and deport the population of a whole territory," according to Nicolas Werth.[104] In the early months of 1919, some 10,000 to 12,000 Cossacks were executed[105][106] and many more deported after their villages were razed to the ground.[107] According to historian Michael Kort, "During 1919 and 1920, out of a population of approximately 1.5 million Don Cossacks, the Bolshevik regime killed or deported an estimated 300,000 to 500,000".[108] I'm not a Trump or Clinton person myself either but I do prefer a system of government that keeps people from rounding up people and executing them based on anything. lol... You remember how that all started? No I don't I was not born yet, nor am I from Russia. But I have read about it yes. And I don't think that going in, rounding up the people doing shitty stuff and killing them all is justified. Like right now I wouldn't want some group to go into Venezuela round up all of Maduro's friends, family, their families and murder them all. I meant remember as in you didn't just google that and copy paste it. Like you actually studied that history at some point before this conversation. Because it doesn't seem like you did. It seems like you're oblivious that you're talking about a civil war or are completely unaware of how warfare was executed in the early 1900's. It more like if a person claims they are a socialist you are willing to either justify or pretend that they didn't do anything horrible despite the incredible mountains of evidence otherwise.
Yup, #1 Hitler defender right here lol.
User was warned for this post.
|
|
|
On July 11 2018 02:41 JimmiC wrote:Show nested quote +On July 11 2018 02:39 GreenHorizons wrote:On July 11 2018 02:36 JimmiC wrote:On July 11 2018 02:33 GreenHorizons wrote:On July 11 2018 02:29 JimmiC wrote:On July 11 2018 02:27 GreenHorizons wrote:On July 11 2018 02:15 JimmiC wrote:On July 11 2018 02:11 GreenHorizons wrote:On July 11 2018 02:09 JimmiC wrote:On July 11 2018 02:04 Plansix wrote:
[quote]
You are right, that was not my argument. It is a response to bringing up the worst of socialism and communism as an argument against the merits of those systems. Don't bring up Chavez, the USSR or communist China if you don't want the Pinkertons and Union busters thrown back at you in response. For the record I bring them up not to say that socialism itself is bad. But to show that in practice it has had a lot of warts as well. Democratic Socialism has a ton of strengths. However that is not far enough for GH he wants the USSR and seems to believe that everything bad about it was either caused by the west or not bad and just western propaganda. I'd take Lenin over Trump or Clinton 100 out of 100 times. I'm not sure he was such a great guy. + Show Spoiler +Red Terror was a period of political repression and executions carried out by Bolsheviks after the beginning of the Russian Civil War in 1918. During this period, the political police, the Cheka had conducted summary executions of tens of thousands of "enemies of the people".[96][97][98][99] Many victims were 'bourgeois hostages' rounded up and held in readiness for summary execution in reprisal for any alleged counter-revolutionary provocation.[100] Many were put to death during and after the suppression of revolts, such as the Kronstadt rebellion and the Tambov Rebellion. Professor Donald Rayfield claims that "the repression that followed the rebellions in Kronstadt and Tambov alone resulted in tens of thousands of executions."[101] A large number of Orthodox clergymen were also killed.[102][103]
The policy of decossackization amounted to an attempt by Soviet leaders to "eliminate, exterminate, and deport the population of a whole territory," according to Nicolas Werth.[104] In the early months of 1919, some 10,000 to 12,000 Cossacks were executed[105][106] and many more deported after their villages were razed to the ground.[107] According to historian Michael Kort, "During 1919 and 1920, out of a population of approximately 1.5 million Don Cossacks, the Bolshevik regime killed or deported an estimated 300,000 to 500,000".[108] I'm not a Trump or Clinton person myself either but I do prefer a system of government that keeps people from rounding up people and executing them based on anything. lol... You remember how that all started? No I don't I was not born yet, nor am I from Russia. But I have read about it yes. And I don't think that going in, rounding up the people doing shitty stuff and killing them all is justified. Like right now I wouldn't want some group to go into Venezuela round up all of Maduro's friends, family, their families and murder them all. I meant remember as in you didn't just google that and copy paste it. Like you actually studied that history at some point before this conversation. Because it doesn't seem like you did. It seems like you're oblivious that you're talking about a civil war or are completely unaware of how warfare was executed in the early 1900's. It more like if a person claims they are a socialist you are willing to either justify or pretend that they didn't do anything horrible despite the incredible mountains of evidence otherwise. Yup, #1 Hitler defender right here lol. Stallin was just as bad, if you are talking pure numbers he was worse, and you are his #1 defender at least on this forum.
Sooo
if a person claims they are a socialist you are willing to either justify or pretend that they didn't do anything horrible despite the incredible mountains of evidence otherwise.
that's not accurate is it?
|
|
|
On July 11 2018 02:44 JimmiC wrote:Show nested quote +On July 11 2018 02:43 GreenHorizons wrote:On July 11 2018 02:41 JimmiC wrote:On July 11 2018 02:39 GreenHorizons wrote:On July 11 2018 02:36 JimmiC wrote:On July 11 2018 02:33 GreenHorizons wrote:On July 11 2018 02:29 JimmiC wrote:On July 11 2018 02:27 GreenHorizons wrote:On July 11 2018 02:15 JimmiC wrote:On July 11 2018 02:11 GreenHorizons wrote:
[quote]
I'd take Lenin over Trump or Clinton 100 out of 100 times.
I'm not sure he was such a great guy. + Show Spoiler +Red Terror was a period of political repression and executions carried out by Bolsheviks after the beginning of the Russian Civil War in 1918. During this period, the political police, the Cheka had conducted summary executions of tens of thousands of "enemies of the people".[96][97][98][99] Many victims were 'bourgeois hostages' rounded up and held in readiness for summary execution in reprisal for any alleged counter-revolutionary provocation.[100] Many were put to death during and after the suppression of revolts, such as the Kronstadt rebellion and the Tambov Rebellion. Professor Donald Rayfield claims that "the repression that followed the rebellions in Kronstadt and Tambov alone resulted in tens of thousands of executions."[101] A large number of Orthodox clergymen were also killed.[102][103]
The policy of decossackization amounted to an attempt by Soviet leaders to "eliminate, exterminate, and deport the population of a whole territory," according to Nicolas Werth.[104] In the early months of 1919, some 10,000 to 12,000 Cossacks were executed[105][106] and many more deported after their villages were razed to the ground.[107] According to historian Michael Kort, "During 1919 and 1920, out of a population of approximately 1.5 million Don Cossacks, the Bolshevik regime killed or deported an estimated 300,000 to 500,000".[108] I'm not a Trump or Clinton person myself either but I do prefer a system of government that keeps people from rounding up people and executing them based on anything. lol... You remember how that all started? No I don't I was not born yet, nor am I from Russia. But I have read about it yes. And I don't think that going in, rounding up the people doing shitty stuff and killing them all is justified. Like right now I wouldn't want some group to go into Venezuela round up all of Maduro's friends, family, their families and murder them all. I meant remember as in you didn't just google that and copy paste it. Like you actually studied that history at some point before this conversation. Because it doesn't seem like you did. It seems like you're oblivious that you're talking about a civil war or are completely unaware of how warfare was executed in the early 1900's. It more like if a person claims they are a socialist you are willing to either justify or pretend that they didn't do anything horrible despite the incredible mountains of evidence otherwise. Yup, #1 Hitler defender right here lol. Stallin was just as bad, if you are talking pure numbers he was worse, and you are his #1 defender at least on this forum. Sooo if a person claims they are a socialist you are willing to either justify or pretend that they didn't do anything horrible despite the incredible mountains of evidence otherwise. that's not accurate is it? How is it not?
lol it's pretty simple, Hitler called himself a socialist, I am not willing to justify or pretend he didn't do anything horrible.
How can you not understand that?
|
As someone who was born in ukraine, with parents who grew up during the soviet era, I can tell you that those who have seen communism do not want it. I can also tell you that GH has a much higher opinion of stalin than just about any educated russian does.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
