Thepowaofhax

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.

http://www.cambridge.org/gb/academic/subjects/politics-international-relations/comparative-politics/direct-democracy-worldwide?format=HB&isbn=9781107001640

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.

Don't cop out. You are a genuine McCarthyist.


Yes it is.


No, it isn't.


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.


Do you just not know what the word Anarchy means or?


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.


It's actually pretty clear who the bourgeoisie are. It's not just "whoever we label"


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.


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.


Wrong.


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.


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.


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.


Don't victim shame.


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.


There are white people in America who consistently type crap like "THIS IS ARE COUNTRY!". Don't make this a race exclusive issue.


No, it's capitalism. Education costs money. It's not profitable or beneficial to the elite to have a well educated working class.


Communism requires neither.


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.


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


Oh so now Communism and Anarcho-Communism are different things? Weren't they the same earlier?


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.


It's semantics, you deliberately tried to frame the Irish famine as lesser.


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


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.


Ukraine is a country of it's own.


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.


Remind me again how Communism could stop the rain.


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.


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.

Don't greentext, we're not on some low tier image board.


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.


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.


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.


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.


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.


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.


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.


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


again, if the Kulaks didn't burn the fields and hoard the grain then there would of been more grain than was taken.


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.


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.


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.

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.

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?

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

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.

Unfortunately we all are, life is a box of cherries :p

Hey, how'e you doing tonight? :)

Yeah. It's a really awesome game! I play it more than FFX/X-2 on my Vita. XD

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.