Thepowaofhax's Profile Picture



Visitor Messages

1 to 11 of 11
  1. Hands
    March 13th, 2017 12:20 AM
    I don't even know where to begin with that mess lol. Virtually everything you've said is wrong. Learn to use the quote function because I have no intention of having to re-read all my previous posts to try and decipher what you're wrong about.

    In short, you don't know what communism is, you don't know what capitalism is. Yes Capitalism promotes slavery because it's the direct practice of profit off of another's labour, you don't know what illiteracy means, you don't understand how the NHS works or why you cannot start it under capitalism or even effectively run it under capitalism, you don't know how to read (this is clear after your ridiculous bullcrap claiming I said MLK didn't advance the civil rights movement. Never make up statements for me you disingenuous little cock). You don't know what Juche is, you don't understand how direct democracy works and you know sweet Fanny Adams about Cuba.

    Read that, learn something for once in your life.

    The reason we aren't going back to the Holodomor is because you have zero evidence to back your ridiculous statements. But then i don't suppose that has stopped any of your other idiotic statements.

    I'm done being polite to you, don't you dare try and put words in my mouth about a great socialist mind like Dr King Jr, don't you dare claim i do not understand two political and economic ideologies I've studied extensively especially when the most basic functions and values of both elude you.

    You're wrong on every account. You don't understand how British politics worked in the 1800s, you don't seem to grasp that there wouldn't be a working class voice in Parliament for nearly 60 years after the publication of the Communist Manifesto, or a remotely socialist govt. until the mid 1920s. You don't understand how direct action works. It's a joke, either shape up or ship out. Don't waste my time with anymore deflections or lazy attempts to reply to statements i didn't make. Learn to construct a reply properly or don't reply at all.
  2. Hands
    February 22nd, 2017 12:53 AM
    "Everyone I don't like is a McCarthyist!"
    Don't cop out. You are a genuine McCarthyist.

    Anyways, this isn't a "lack of understanding for basic history"
    Yes it is.

    However, that does not excuse the fact that Marx created an ideology inherently against the proletariat you want to defend
    No, it isn't.

    (as last time I checked, anarchy never goes well)
    Communism =/= Anarchy, in fact, half your post talks about communism always requiring a bourgeoisie dictatorship which is the exact opposite of Anarchy. Make up your mind on what false narrative you want to push.

    even create this utopian anarchy requires a dictatorship
    Do you just not know what the word Anarchy means or?

    Instead of actually trying to negotiate with reasonable debate
    I literally outright explained this to you in the last message. When Marx wrote the manifesto there was no political avenue to ending the oppression of the workers. I understand you are super keen to ignore context in every situation you can but do try to at least pretend that you care about facts.

    your ideology calls for the violent overthrow of anyone who you label bourgeoisie.
    It's actually pretty clear who the bourgeoisie are. It's not just "whoever we label"

    Funny thing is the most successful attempts to fix these problems all happened to be peaceful
    Two examples of two men who pushed for non violent revolution who were both killed by the right wing doesn't mean jack. You know who the right wing couldn't kill? Castro. MLK's great legacy has been tarnished and white washed by dollar store racists who've turned him from an ardent socialist comrade into some "love everyone dream it believe it" social meme to make whites feel better about their awful behaviour throughout American history. And guess what? Unarmed black men are still being gunned down by the law, young black men are still being pushed through the private prison system to then be used as cheap and controllable labour. So remind me again how MLK's kindness saved black America.

    Secondly, this is not true under Capitalism because Capitalism is merely an economic theory.
    Wrong. So wrong. Capitalism is a political system that puts profit first. It promotes slavery, imperialism, racism (how else do you keep the workers from uniting? You stoke the idea that one set of poor is slightly better than the other sets of poor) sexism (see before) and classism. To suggest a system based off of the abuse and exploitation of man is simply a political idea is frankly idiotic.

    we're at war because those "dissidents" either provoked us

    we're petty imperialists
    That's better, it's because you're capitalists who cannot have countries producing and selling cheap oil or ideas of being classed as equal.

    but last time I checked, you must be deluded to think Cuba is anywhere close to anything outside of a pure dictatorship
    Sorry, name me a big Western 'democracy' where the people each get a vote on new laws, new principles, new policy. Name me a Western democracy where every one person's vote is equal. Because that certainly isn't the case in most of Europe, the UK, Canada, Australia, New Zealand or the US.

    In regards to HIV, Capitalism is again not the problem here.
    Yes it is. If the health care, proper education and easy access to affordable contraceptive and medication were available then the west could also widely tackle AIDs and HIV too. I mean, let's look back at how the ultra capitalist Reagan handled it shall we?

    You might want to look up Ron Woodroof whilst you're at it.

    we have to many people with it screwing around
    Don't victim shame.

    Also, that same health care system can happen under a capitalist system
    The best example of it happening in the West is in Britain with the NHS. The NHS was formed under the Socialist Labour Govt. of the post war period. It was only down the hard work of Prime Minister Attlee and the health minister Nye Bevan that we managed to beat the capitalists back who wanted to kill the NHS in its infancy.

    And now we have a hyper capitalist Govt. look what;s happening. Swathes of the NHS are being sold off to private companies, the service is being deliberately under funded and the govt are doing their best to push Nurses and Doctors out of the profession via ridiculous contract changes and attacks on them as individuals through their allies in the right wing media.

    and illiteracy is not 100% eradicated because we still have people alive from the time where African Americans were discriminated against and could not receive a decent education
    There are white people in America who consistently type crap like "THIS IS ARE COUNTRY!". Don't make this a race exclusive issue.

    (which is not capitalism, it had to do with the bull**** racialist ideals of the time).
    No, it's capitalism. Education costs money. It's not profitable or beneficial to the elite to have a well educated working class.

    The Amish are not communist because they haven't either installed anarchy (if they even manage to get that far) or installed a one-party totalitarian system.
    Communism requires neither.

    Just because they raise a barn together doesn't make them communist
    No, it doesn't. Sharing the work, producing for what is needed by all in their society with no motive but to meet the needs of the people, shunning money, shunning classism, shunning the state and sharing the spoils of labour makes them close to Communist. Not that I ever called them commies and not that you understand what Communism (or, judging by your summary, the Amish) actually consists of.

    look at Juche
    Juche is not Communism because it relies on a class system. It is at best, National Socialism. Communism has no place for ardent nationalism.

    Also, considering you're openly defending anarcho-Communists
    Oh so now Communism and Anarcho-Communism are different things? Weren't they the same earlier?

    especially since you even suggested once that the definition of alt-Right to you is centre-Right,
    What an absolute bunch of crap. Either you can't read or you're a disingenuous toad. I said the definition of the Alt-Right is so wide and loose that what BadSheep considers to be the Alt-Right could be what I class as the centre-right. It's not a hard concept, I never said the Centre-Right and Alt-Right were the same, I've always maintained the Alt-Right are far right shut ins.

    Also, that isn't revisionism at all. I'm calling it a potato blight because the famine was caused by a water mold that infected potatoes. Therefore, it is technically a blight that cause the famine, in which the terminology is still correct.
    It's semantics, you deliberately tried to frame the Irish famine as lesser.

    Also, that isn't revisionism at all. I'm calling it a potato blight because the famine was caused by a water mold that infected potatoes. Therefore, it is technically a blight that cause the famine, in which the terminology is still correct.
    Again, this was already explained to you. There is a difference between not believing someone and sending your own people in, or in the case of the French Prime Minister, going yourself, compiling research on the issue and forming a conclusion based on said first hand research

    Just because Stalin is an idiot does not absolve him from his crimes
    Of course it doesn't, but there's a wild difference between a pigheaded leader who handled a natural famine terribly and a man who orchestrated a famine from the ground up.

    He still forcibly starved a rebelling part of his country.
    Ukraine is a country of it's own.

    While yes, the Kulaks did burn the crops
    During a famine, where less could be grown and the country was under significant strain to produce. Incredible how you blame Stalin entirely yet, even though you acknowledge the Kulak's treasonous acts to their own people, you don't blame them in the slightest for reducing already scarce resources to make a point whilst hoarding all the grain they could. Whilst their neighbours and those working under them starved.

    even during the drought
    Remind me again how Communism could stop the rain.

    lso, the foreign aid was in response to the general famine at that time period. The Holodomor is a specific part of this famine; just because they don't find it "man-made" doesn't stop them from giving the USSR foreign aid to alleviate the situation. The actual thing does not mention any specific country, however this website takes it from the UN Convention on the Prevention of Genocide of 1948.
    Your link provides little, of the three testimonies, one is something a child apparently overheard (and did not provide until 2001 so completely irrelevant to the foreign aid myth) and one only mentions the likelihood of Russia using the famine as an excuse to annex Ukraine. That testimony came from the Italian Fascist Govt of Mussolini, an actual Fascist Dictatorship. Furthermore, this convention appears to have been held almost 15 years after the Holodomor. Incredible how you chastise me for taking the factual, first hand analysis from the French and British Governments of the 30s yet you yourself are relying on the words of a fascist lapdog.

    Actually, 1984 wasn't specifically talking about ultra-nationalism but the threat of oligarchy
    Oligarchy is, by nature, a capitalist construct. Royal Families, politically influential families and big business families cannot exist in Communism. In fact, the Tsar and his family were the very definition of Oligarchs.

    So really the book isn't about Communism at all, Animal farm is about Communism, 1984 is not. Just because you're so pitifully desperate to hate every inch of communism (despite showing a shockingly poor grasp of what it is) does not mean you can change the nature of a book to (very poorly) fit your narrative.

    You still haven't addressed why it was ok for the Capitalist British Govt. to behave as bad as, if not worse than, Stalin through multiple famines.
  3. Hands
    February 21st, 2017 7:19 AM
    >Communism not evil.
    Don't greentext, we're not on some low tier image board.

    >The actual ****ing document that created the ideology calls for the violent overthrow of anyone labeled "bourgeoisie".
    Standard low level understanding of basic history from a McCarthyist. The Communist Manifesto was written in 1848, a time where the British still enslaved orphans and forced them into horrific workhouses owned by the Bourgeois for free labour and where the American Bourgeois class still enslaved and massively abused black Americans and Africans. Marx spent most of his adult life in London where he got to observe the horrific treatment of the poor, the disabled, the elderly and children first hand. There were very few organisations that cared for anyone but the rich and there was absolutely no one in Parliament willing to work to a non violent solution (it would be over 60 years before Kier Hardie would be elected, giving Britain her first Socialist MP)

    Of course, you're not interested in factual or contextual analysis of the works of Marx, that'd involve thinking outside of what you've been told.

    >Every single manifestation of Communism that has ever existed and will exist in the future has lead to a despotic dictatorship in which thousands of dissidents are killed because they're sympathetic to the bourgeoisie.
    This is equally true of Capitalism, of course, the dissidents we're killing are brown people overseas but we're still killing them for not "sharing our values". Cuba, unlike the West, has direct democracy when it comes to policy. Every citizen gets a vote. Of course, Cuba's story is another that you'd be very happy to remove context from. See Cuba already had a brutal, US backed, capitalist dictator in Batista. The people overthrew him, Castro sought to mend US-Cuba relations and have a peaceful existence between the two but Eisenhower refused to meet with him and instead America put a crippling embargo on Cuba. They also tried to assassinate a head of state to a country they had no right to be in over 600 times. Given the constant threat to his life, the lack of international trade opportunity, the CIA backed Batista loyalists and the need to appear strong to the Russians as to not be swallowed up by them it is really no surprise that Castro had to rule through strength.

    Despite all this, the monthly utility bill for a family in Cuba is less than $5, their annual income tripled, every citizen has access to health care, free at the point of use, they're the first country on record to completely eradicate mother to infant transmission of HIV, Homelessness does not exist in Cuba anymore and not a single person is illiterate. Capitalism hasn't achieved a single one of these and has, more often than not, caused the problem in the first place.

    >Communism will never work if humans are involved due to rampant corruption.
    The Amish are, essentially, a communist society. Communism will work only after a transitional period (at least 50 years I should think) of progressive Socialism in the West. The only reason people are so selfish and corrupt is their reliance on the evils of capitalism.

    Golly gee batman, it's totally not violent, amirite?
    Are you somewhat forgetful or? I've openly supported violence against the oppressors. The bourgeois who profit off of the broken backs of the working class deserve to be stripped of their assets, and if they resist, they can be met with the same violence they have doled out time and again via Police, Military and Austerity measures.

    Also, you're comparing multiple famines in the second most population-dense place in the world. You can't compare the damage of the two.
    That's funny, because when BadSheep listed the overall deaths under Communist leaderships worldwide you didn't feel the need to highlight to him that the most populous country in the world was on that list. Either way, I'll play your pedantic game. The famine of 1783-1784 saw 11 Million dead. In South India alone. Incredible though how that was your only retort, that you felt no need to address the fact the British used incredibly similar methods to Stalin.

    If I compare Mao's great famine to the potato blight in Ireland
    There it is, that dirty, nasty revisionism. Reducing Ireland's famine that wiped out 25% of their population to a simple "blight". People like you are the real evil, who blame some boogeyman whilst defending a real monster.

    Also, you're trusting the same countries that did not believe the ****ing Holocaust's damage when Witold Pilecki told them what the hell the Nazis were doing in Auschwitz during the war.
    How can you say apples and oranges to the famines but then bring up this? Not believing someone is not the same as doing your own research, sending your own people to investigate, compiling several reports form different sources and reaching a conclusion. You're getting really desperate here.

    And again, if this famine was not man-made, why would the Soviet government give quotas that Ukraine would not be able to follow
    Because Stalin was an idiot. Also the quotas wouldn't of been so hard to meet if the Kulaks didn't burn the bleeding fields

    having the government take all the grain they produce
    again, if the Kulaks didn't burn the fields and hoard the grain then there would of been more grain than was taken.

    Why did he PURPOSELY ignore foreign aid that would potentially prevent such a tragedy?
    What foreign aid was this? The British and French concluded there was no man made famine. Germany certainly could not help in 33 and America was in the pits of the great depression (another marvel of capitalism) so what foreign aid are you talking about? Be specific.

    How about the fact that he wanted to punish Ukraine for being the most rebellious state in the USSR?
    He wanted to punish the Kulaks, which he did, by throwing them in the Gulags. The famine was not a punishment and Stalin himself commented about how awful the famine was when discussing the state of the Union with Churchill during the second world war.

    learly the gods of Marxism would never want to destroy individualism and actually give you what 1984 warns about, right?
    More pedantic nonsense from someone acting like a petulant child. 1984 was a book about ultra nationalism, not Communism. Animal Farm was about Communism. It might help if you had actually read either of Orwell's (himself a socialist) big works.
  4. Hands
    February 20th, 2017 1:38 AM
    Sorry for the delay in reply, had a weird week/weekend.

    Kulaks are equally as responsible, if not moreso, than the state. In their pigheaded attempt to destabilize the union by hoarding already tight resources and destroying crops and fields during a bloody drought they turned what would of been a less deadly famine into an epidemic. Of course, you're a bare McCarthyist so there's little point mentioning any fact that goes against those against Stalin, no matter how true.

    At the time, in 1933, the British appointed famine expert Sir John Maynard stated that there was no forced famine, and rubbished what he called "tales of famine-genocide propagated by the Ukrainian Nationalists". The British house of Lords also came to the conclusion from their research during the famine that the Soviet Govt. had not orchestrated it.

    French Prime Minister Édouard Herriot also claimed there was no man made famine after his visit to the Ukraine in 1933.

    Claims of a forced famine did not exist outside of Ukrainian nationalist movements until after the end of the Second World War where Russia's fickle alliance with the western powers had collapsed, around the same time we saw "Reefer Madness" racist propaganda and American revisionism of history.

    A famine happened, Stalin handled it awfully and absolutely contributed to the deaths of millions through his arrogant and hardline actions but he did not cause or manufacture the famine and he did not consciously aim to commit genocide against the Ukraine. There is zero evidence or testimony from the time, zero documentation from the Soviet archives and zero foreign testimonies from the time to back the claim of a man made famine with the intent of genocide against the Ukrainians.

    On top of all of this, even if a man made famine existed, that would be on Stalin and the Soviets, not on Communism as a theory, system or practice.

    Coincidentally, how do you feel about the great Famine of Ireland? Is capitalism to blame for that because Britain acted in the same way Stalin did in response to a famine? How about the numerous famines in British controlled India? There were 15 internationally recognized famines in India under British rule, most were avoidable and in most cases the British reacted in similar fashion to Stalin to the Ukraine famine of the early 30s. The Indian famines resulted in the deaths of at least 56million people. Six million died in the "holodomor". But tell me again how Communism is inherently evil and Capitalism is not.
  5. Hands
    February 15th, 2017 9:51 PM
    What evidence do you have that it was man-made? The Kulaks horded grain and burnt crops in an attempt to rebel,limiting ready scarce food supplies during a natural famine. U less you're suggesting (and it really wouldn't surprise me right now) that Stalin was somehow causing a drought?
  6. Hands
    February 14th, 2017 10:14 PM
    Wrong. The famine happened, it wasn't politically motivated, it wasn't an attempt at ethnic genocide. It was a famine. Virtually every contemporary source from the time cites this as the case. It is only in the era of McCarthyism that this 'planned famine's story came about
  7. Hands
    February 14th, 2017 3:07 AM
    I've stopped replying in the thread because Gimmiepie has pointed out we had changed the topic. However, I am happy to continue here, especially in regards to the myth of the Holodomor.
  8. acatfrommars
    February 5th, 2016 11:25 PM
    Unfortunately we all are, life is a box of cherries :p
  9. acatfrommars
    February 5th, 2016 7:35 PM
    Hey, how'e you doing tonight? :)
  10. Raihan's Cutie Pie
    December 26th, 2015 7:46 PM
    Raihan's Cutie Pie
    Yeah. It's a really awesome game! I play it more than FFX/X-2 on my Vita. XD
  11. Raihan's Cutie Pie
    December 26th, 2015 9:57 AM
    Raihan's Cutie Pie
    I just wanted to say that you're going to love Persona 4 Golden. :3 I own the game myself, and it's one of my favorites I don't meet many people who know/own the game to be honest lol.


Total Posts
Activity by Forum
Visitor Messages
General Information
  • Join Date: November 12th, 2015
  • Referrals: 0


Showing Friends 1 to 1 of 1



Mini Statistics

Join Date
November 12th, 2015
Total Posts
Blog Entries
Thepowaofhax's Avatar