| Author | Message | ||
     Aesquire |
The answer to my question about Western Republics above is. One. Germany. Under leftist, socialist, control. Hitler hated the communists. They were the competition. | ||
| Ft_bstrd |
Three. Don't forget Japan and Italy. | ||
| Hybridmomentspass |
"Your question about soldiers? False and foolish. " who do you think carries out these murders? Was Hitler himself killing all of those Jews with his own hands? Did Stalin execute people? Mao? etc You say its false and foolish because you have no good reply to what you know is true. Sure, maybe they use Communism to get into power, but that doesnt mean communism is what is killing those folks. | ||
| Hybridmomentspass |
ps, yes, I know that Hitler wasnt communist, I was using it as an example. Similar example would be Bush killing Iraqi people etc Its not the leaders who are doing these things, but the mindless soldiers who are following orders | ||
| Aesquire |
Hitler was socialist. Soldiers under orders under Hitler, In Russia and China and Cambodia and...... yes but also secret police. The reason that answer is false and foolish is the difference between War, and political murder of your own people. The fact that most war in the 20th century was started by leftists I leave out. Not all wars were. WW1 was aggravated by the collectivist Russia, but not started by the Communists. How many Australians were rounded up and murdered the last hundred years by Australian soldiers? That's why your answer is false. | ||
| Hybridmomentspass |
Read my post from 21 minutes before yours - I know what Hitler was and wasnt. Oh so now we're going to narrow it down to ONLY political murder...gotcha. So because the low (any?) number of Australians rounded up and murdered in the last hundred years is why my answer is false? HA! God dang boy, you really are dumb | ||
| Aesquire |
Have I mentioned war? No I talk about the murder by the evil bad men of their own people. This isn't restricted to the Marxist faiths. They just have institutionalized it to such an extent that in the 20th century they have killed more than international war. If you can't tell the difference I can explain it to you. Few soldiers are mindless. Your comments reek of emotion without reason. | ||
| Reepicheep |
Wow. That phrase nails SO much of what is wrong with both sides. No emotion with reason is bad. Emotion without reason is worse. | ||
| Aesquire |
My figure of "on the order of a billion murdered" may be off. That's the problem when dealing with habitual liars. They insist the number is zero. The people who escaped and scholarly studies show multiple hundreds of millions.....documented. Arguing that I got the number wrong....and that means they are not mass murderers, is b.s. . So they only murdered a hundred fifty million people? Or forty five million? As scholars penetrate the bamboo curtain we learn more and more how utterly vicious the Chinese are. Not were, in some distant past, are today. To be clear not the Chinese people. The Glorious Leaders. Arguing that the leaders are not responsible for murdering their own people, but it's the mindless soldiers. Is also fallacious reasoning. ( and standard agitprop ) There's an old joke. "Guns don't kill people, it's the little bullets going really fast". Although true in an ironic joking sense, it's the men using the guns that kill people. Absent guns, machetes do just fine, ask a Hutu. It's the glorious leaders who kill. Their hands may only be stained by ink, but it is by their will that others kill. In high school one of the teachers used to shock the students by declaring that George Washington was a treasonous war criminal, but Adolph Hitler made sure everything he did as Chancellor was legal. There's an element of twisted truth in there. One irony of the 20th century is the Nazis were meticulous record keepers and after they were conquered scholars can tell you with high accuracy how many Gypsies, how many gays, etc. were murdered. However, behind the iron & bamboo curtains we do not have access to government records and we also know the public records are lies. Sometimes amazingly blatant ones. It's the nature of the beast. It's in their manuals. Who was it who said "Satan's greatest trick was to convince people he does not exist"????? | ||
| Aesquire |
Tod, Re: Che is a rapist. I recalled this info being in Che's letters or diary. A quick internet search failed to find the quote. I don't have time to go to the University I donated the documents to and read them again. ( if available ) An individual had confirmed that allegation, and it's taken some time to get a hold of their S.O.. he or she is not in country or contact. So I cannot ask for verification, references, or permission to quote or reference. Thus I have no documentation. Thus. Despite my personal beliefs on this particular subject. I publicly apologise and withdraw the allegation that Che was a rapist. It's important when criticizing a public figure that the criticism be factual. For example some mock President Barack Obama for thinking there are 57 states. He does not in fact so believe. He clearly stated there were 60. And he was joking. It's on YouTube. It was actually a fairly clever joke. Credit where it is due. Sure, the delivery could have been better, but he was handicapped by a fairly stupid audience. . | ||
| Strokizator |
Yes Aesquire, repeat after me, "Four legs good, two legs better". And Bill Ayers liked to play with fire crackers but he was never a terrorist bomber. Ain't revisionist history fun? | ||
| Aesquire |
No, no, this is fair. No one disputes the mass murderer part, though some excuse it. Racist we've covered. I'm not buying a t-shirt. I personally think the cartoon versions of Animal Farm is the best. | ||
| Aesquire |
Hybrid...... I wasn't knocking you about Hitler being socialist. I find I have to emphasize that the Nazi's were NOT right wing extremists. ....... since that's the "deconstruction" modern edutainment pushes, and it's a lie. Yes Adolph hated the Communists, they were competition. But I disagree with you that it's not "communism" that's bad but instead the soldiers and police that are the murderers. It is indeed the communism that every time murders the people. Deconstruct communism. It's not an economic system, that's just the mask. It sure isn't a functional system, it never has worked, ask the Pilgrims, they tried communal life and almost all died. Communism is a system for a few to Rule the many. One Ex-Soviet leader even said so. It's a religious cult that is utterly intolerant of any other Gods. See Vladimir and Pushy Power (sic... darn phone autocorrect) . Yes there have been other aggressive powers with a history of mass murder, Islam, the treatment of aboriginals in the U.S. and Australia, Imperial Japan..... But count the dead and it's no contest. You can make a case that the Warlords of China were worse than a centralized imperium, but Mao set new records that we can only pray don't get broken. Sic Semper Tyrannis. | ||
| Hybridmomentspass |
I agree that it hasnt worked, and will never work. We are greedy, selfish, people will always want more for less etc. Yes, many COMMUNISTS have done terrible things, but that doesnt mean it was COMMUNISM that did it. As I said, Marx and Engels didnt kill a single person, and it was their idea ha. We'll have to agree to disagree and thats alright by me | ||
| Aesquire |
Catholics did bad things but it isn't Catholicism? Normally I'd say you have a point there. Like any religion communism can be exploited. So what was the original purpose and what is it now? The following will offend someone. Suck it up. The Catholic church started as a means to spread the word of Jesus. Since then it's dabbled heavy in politics and in it's own quest for dominance. No matter your opinion the original goal was benign, but it's been bumpy ever since... to be fair it dabbled in politics originally to keep alive. Rome, arena, lions..... Scientology started as a bar bet. Was implemented as a con game, now several murders later.....is a con game. Islam started as an operating manual for life as desired by a warlord. It's been mutated since by generations of warlords and warlord wannabes. It's purpose is power and it's name is submission. Communism was a technique for internal conquest, revolution, and to impose a New aristocracy to rule. The idealistic idea of enlightened anarchy that was the end goal. .... never happened. Built into it from day one was an anti society/religious creed of intolerance and deception. No different today. Destroy the existing systems, supplant them with itself. The Lie is the foundation. Yes communes have existed and. Mostly failed because the human behavior science behind the idea is wrong. Some people just want to rule. They can be fun while it lasts. See also The Terror aka the French Revolution, The Killing Fields ( pol pot ), Nazi Germany..... modern Ecuador. (Message edited by aesquire on January 03, 2015) | ||
| Hughlysses |
One of my favorite political quotes is something to the effect of "The form of government is unimportant as long as the leaders are wise and benevolent". For example, there's nothing wrong with a dictatorship as long as it's ruled by a kind-hearted genius, but that's the catch, isn't it? Some forms of government lend themselves to exploitation by stupid and/or evil leaders much more than other forms. | ||
| Sifo |
George Washington may have made a good king. It was his for the taking. He was wise enough, and benevolent enough to understand that in the best of circumstances, the good times would be short term. I would say that few decisions in the course of history have worked out so well. | ||
| Aesquire |
Hughlysses, that's the problem with monarchy. Good King Ralph may be a great ruler but Ralph 2 usually is mediocre, and Ralph 3 is a spoiled brat with no interest in the peasant's well being. Just his own pleasure. For real world examples ( lots out there ) see Prince Charles or Kim Jong Un. I may be unfair to one of the above  | ||
| Aesquire |
Btw the official line in Cuba is that they won and Obama surrendered. I sorta agree...... but it's more that Comrade O was always on Cuba's side. | ||
| Hughlysses |
Hughlysses, that's the problem with monarchy. Good King Ralph may be a great ruler but Ralph 2 usually is mediocre, and Ralph 3 is a spoiled brat with no interest in the peasant's well being. Just his own pleasure. Exactly. It's also the problem with communism. If you had honest, intelligent, and kind people in charge, it might work. But you have no way of guaranteeing those sort of people ever get in power much less stay in power. So in practice, communism turns out to be a miserable form of government. Until recently, our democratic republic seemed to be one of the best ideas to prevent this sort of thing, but lately, you have to wonder. | ||
| Aesquire |
The problems are many but I'll pick on just two. The current President was endorsed by the Communist Party USA. He has often admired, out loud, the worst regimes in history and envied their absolute power. The campaign finance reform laws, especially McCain-Feingold, allow massive bribes and in Obama's case hundreds of millions from foreign countries. Syria, Russia, Dakar, pretty much OPEC..... Check out Jerry Pournelle's "Iron law of Bureaucracy". | ||
| Tootal |
The only form of Communism that ever worked was on the show Star Trek when monetary things didn't matter and it was only the betterment of ones self as the goal in life. Made a great story but unfortunately it doesn't work in the real world. The discussion of Hitler and communism being opposites or actually different is not really the case. Either one is a form of Big Government. The poor German's really didn't have much of choice did they? I believe it was Mau that said, "Political power grows out of the barrel of a gun." If you have a set of RR tracks that go from point A to point B. A==========================================B A stands for Anarchy and B stands for Big Government. So Communism and Socialism are both forms of Big Government so are basically the same thing only on the other side of the tracks from each other. Anarchy__________________________Communism A==========================================B No government____________________Socialism Our founding fathers were closer to Anarchy than big Government but slowly we have been creeping further toward Socialism or Big Government. This is what is wrong with America. When we started allowing Senators to be voted on by the people they were no longer representatives of the State. This is a big reason why the Federal Government has grown so big, the States don't have any representation anymore and it is ruining the best system of government ever created. When a woman asked Benjamin Franklin what kind of government did they decide on he said, "A Republic ma'am, if you can keep it." | ||
| Hughlysses |
Tootal- here's a good chart that I think describes what you're thinking that came from Jerry Pournelle:  His point is that one axis is not sufficient to describe political views. Example- communists are considered extremely "left wing", Nazis are considered extremely "right wing", yet the two political systems have many things in common. Pournelle has stated that he sure doesn't consider this to be perfect, but you can uniquely place any existing political belief system on this chart. | ||
| Mr_grumpy |
Any of you who know Terry Pratchett's disc world will understand about benign dictatorship. To those of you who haven't discovered him yet I highly recommend that you do. He's one the greatest thinkers of this or any century and laugh out loud funny to boot. | ||
| Aesquire |
Pratchett is great. http://www.politicalcompass.org/ Every time I take the test, honestly, I come out left libertarian. Anyone surprised? | ||
| Mr_grumpy |
Me to, how odd. I come out about the same as the Dalai Lama. | ||
| Sifo |
 Funny thing, I think there are many who would consider me to be radical right. | ||
| Hughlysses |
Sifo, I'm not too far off from you:  | ||
| Sifo |
Crazy radical left winger!  | ||
| Reindog |
I didn't save my test but it was virtually the same as Sifo's score. |
