Polish president's plane crashes in Russia + head of the Central Bank

Wookster

Generali wrote: »

There seems to be a recurrent theme: Communists are bad but Communism is good or at least ok.

I still don't see how the actions of a few despots tar the whole ideology?

There is no difference between the likes of Stalin & Pol Pot, compared to Hitler, Mugabe et. al.

They are all murderous, power hungry despots who wholly oppress and cow their population. Some are capitalists and others communists but that doesn't mean that either system is good or bad.

nickmason

Degenerate wrote: »

Frankly Gen, your contributions to this thread are the most intellectually dishonest claptrap I have ever seen you post.

I do not believe in communism. A command economy can never work, and a one-party state is far too susceptible to the ambitions of lunatics like Stalin. You however, are making a blatant straw-man argument. The founding principles of communism did not include mass murder. Those people that have been expressing sympathies with communist ideals have not been advocating such. And you damn well know it.

The founding principles of communism are about the fair distribution of wealth among the people. Little to argue with there. If you want to attack it, you should be concentrating on the fact that it actually does no better than capitalism in that regard, rather it cripples economic activity thereby making everyone poorer, and is prone to exploitation by despots. To accuse people of advocating despotism is just lazy.

I am very disappointed with you.

I'm not.

"The founding principles of communism are about the fair distribution of wealth among the people."
- vs -
"The founding principles of fascism are about the improvement of the welfare of those in the society, and national pride."

(Okay, so no doubt someone will dispute this, but that's roughly how I remember it - from Plato's Republic onwards).

"In attempting fair ditribution of wealth among the people through antidemocratic methods - Communism has typically caused mass starvation and economic failure."
- vs -
"In prioritising the welfare of individuals within, and the nation state itself, through antidemocratic methods - Fascism has typically caused wrongs against individuals (and groups thereof) and international conflict."

The key point is that they are both authoritarian and slip into totalitarian regimes; through their grand vision they remove democratic accountability, and virtually demand the despotic regimes that follow.

StevieJ

nickmason wrote: »

"In attempting fair ditribution of wealth among the people through antidemocratic methods - Communism has typically caused mass starvation and economic failure."
"

You say that but the only way the communists in Russia achieved power was because the people of Russia were suffering from 'mass starvation and economic failure."

nickmason

StevieJ wrote: »

You say that but the only way the communists in Russia achieved power was because the people of Russia were suffering from 'mass starvation and economic failure."

That's as may be, but I'm not sure how it affects the example - all I'm trying to show is the equivalence of the difference between the two ideologies and their implementations.

Put more pithily - fascism is an expansionory-state collectivism. Communism is anti-state collectivism. The only difference then is the amount of sex.

Asheron

Cleaver wrote: »

The last time I looked Hawaii isn't in Kenya.

D- for geography Asheron. Must try harder. You big daft moron.

I never said Hawaii was in Kenya. D for English Cleaver.

Must try harder to dis-credit me. You big fool

tomterm8

Generali wrote: »

The difference as I see it between Communist despots and the likes of Hitler, Amin and Pinochet are that for some reason, otherwise apparently intelligent and sane people remain as apologists for the hateful thing the communists did to their own people whereas few if any commit the same act of collaboration towards the rightist horrors.

Would you make the same post for example if someone had castigated Hitler, "Yeah Hitler was bad but then so were Blair and Bush"? I have my doubts. Why do people equivocate about the heinous acts committed under the name of socialism? I just don't get it.

Firstly, communism and socialism are very different beasts. They are not the same thing; despite fascists who say otherwise:D

It's rather like equating the conservative party, and mussolini, and national socialism... they are different things.

The reason people think there is a difference between Communism, and what stalin did, is that - to put it simply - if you go back to Marx's writings, the USSR was not a Communist state. Despite all the propaganda, the USSR was actually an plutarchy where the ruling elite took over from the previous ruling elite by force. The reason Nazism and communism look the same to you is that, to all intents and purposes, they were the same. They just had different propaganda, and different ruling elites.

Or to put it another way, do people believe national socialism was actually socialist, or was it just a propaganda device used to gain power?

I don't think a true communist state can exist... I tend to take a more primitive view of the situation, I don't think any new forms of government have been created since machiavelli... we have tyranny, democracy, oligarchy, anarchy, and aristocracy, and of these democracy tends to suck least.

Asheron

Russian correspodent, Luke Harding, from Guadian now corrected the number of death from 132 to 96. This idiot Luke Harding commited plagiarism several times so Guardian offically had to apolozise. He deliberatly misled the public, lying Russia invaded Georgia in 2008. I don’t understand why the Guardian didn’t fire him.

StevieJ

Asheron wrote: »

I never said Hawaii was in Kenya. D for English Cleaver.

Must try harder to dis-credit me. You big fool

Why did you think he was born in Kenya?

chewmylegoff

StevieJ wrote: »

Is this a first non-conspiracy post? or do you think the Illuminati was behind it?

it's part of a global plan to manipulate the price of precious metals, innit.

Asheron

Poland’s Leaders Move to Weaken Currency, Then Die in Plane Crash

There’s no telling if the two events are connected, but their timing is mighty interesting.
The Polish government and the National Bank of Poland, in a “rare moment of unity,” agree to weaken Poland’s currency, the zloty, in an act that would benefit Poland’s exporters at the expense of Poland’s trading partners—that is, the European Union, among others. Then, the next day, Poland’s president and the president of its national bank die in a plane crash.