Are we communists?!
- Thread starter Grab-bag
- Start date
Ah yes, a man who executed civilians, soldiers and police officers alike without giving them any form of trial. Yup, sounds like a good guy to me.AnarchistFish said:
It matters not wether or not he was fighting for a right cause or not. It's like saying, well. Hitler did well making Germany a fascist nation cause he put Germany back on the map. But hey, the end justifies the means, right?
Because the Swastika originated in Asia, among people who were neither aryan nor Christian. Allowing modern "nazis" (who are pretty much just plain old racists) to use this symbol would create an irony singularity, that would destroy existence as we know it?
Seriously though, saying the idea of communism should be outlawed because Stalin wasn't very nice is comparable to saying we should outlaw the idea of people supporting the British monarchy because of the actions of any one of our awful monarchs, or the idea we should outlaw opposing the British monarchy based on the actions of Cromwell...
Seriously though, saying the idea of communism should be outlawed because Stalin wasn't very nice is comparable to saying we should outlaw the idea of people supporting the British monarchy because of the actions of any one of our awful monarchs, or the idea we should outlaw opposing the British monarchy based on the actions of Cromwell...
No, our economy isn't 'communist', its 'capitalist'. Communism is when the government decides what, how much, and where to produce items such as shoes, clothes, what-have-you, and they get most of the money from the sales. Capitalist, You decide what you want to make or sell, how you're going to produce it, and where you want to sell it.
That is essentially the two of the three kinds of economy (Controlled economy=Communism, Free Market Economy=capitalist) dumbed down. In fact, calling U.S. Capitalist is usually used as term of derangement, seeing as how there are still a few countries that are Communist but are slowly making changes to Capitalist.
EDIT: Also, wearing the Sickle and Hammer stuff isn't usually looked down on, because the USSR didn't try genocide and nearly succeed.
That is essentially the two of the three kinds of economy (Controlled economy=Communism, Free Market Economy=capitalist) dumbed down. In fact, calling U.S. Capitalist is usually used as term of derangement, seeing as how there are still a few countries that are Communist but are slowly making changes to Capitalist.
EDIT: Also, wearing the Sickle and Hammer stuff isn't usually looked down on, because the USSR didn't try genocide and nearly succeed.
The main reason is that communist ideology does usually not include racism, mass murder and military conquest.
The mass suffering and killing brought upon the world by communist regimes was never the goal of communism. It's merely the result of a flawed, delusional ideology.
Racism, genocide and war however are part of National Socialist ideology and therefore directly associated with the swastika.
The mass suffering and killing brought upon the world by communist regimes was never the goal of communism. It's merely the result of a flawed, delusional ideology.
Racism, genocide and war however are part of National Socialist ideology and therefore directly associated with the swastika.
One guy's hero is another one's villain. No one can really live 'til the end of his days as a pure saint- unless somebody doesn't kill him before he can do anything else, of course.BoTTeNBReKeR said:
In other words: leave it.
IT: Methinks it has something to do with the ideal behind it. Communism has that whole 'oh, we're going to live together, hand-in-hand, skipping cheerfully around having fun and living happily', probably with an implied 'and we'll have a swimming pool in the garden too'. It's an idea that everyone loves, so you're more okay with it.
Nazism, on the other hand, while it has a positive ideal, it has a positive ideal for a single restricted group of people.
"Blond guys are cool and deserve to live in a better world": if it stopped here, you'd be shrugging and saying 'whatever'. "Blond guys are cool and everyone else deserves to die to make a better world for them": eeeeh, what about 'fuck off and get off my lawn'?
The Swastika has been since the 40's a symbol of hate, murder and evil because of the crimes Nazi Germany committed. And thats the label that will forever stick to it.
The Hammer & Sickle is the flag of communism, but also the face of the proud, hardworking Russian people. The hammer represents the peoples workers, and the sickle for the peoples agricultural farmers.
Yeh alot of crimes were committed under Communism, but the symbol is one of the peoples pride, not evil. Some say different, but the Soviet Union only devolved when Stalin took power.
The Hammer & Sickle is the flag of communism, but also the face of the proud, hardworking Russian people. The hammer represents the peoples workers, and the sickle for the peoples agricultural farmers.
Yeh alot of crimes were committed under Communism, but the symbol is one of the peoples pride, not evil. Some say different, but the Soviet Union only devolved when Stalin took power.
Pretty much this. Not to mention that Russia were our allies in WWII, and it wouldn't be becoming of America to teach that we joined forces with a mass murderer.AnarchistFish said:
If I remember correctly, the camps we sent the Japanese to during the war used to also be called concentration camps. After we found out about the German concentration camps, we quickly started calling ours internment camps, so that we didn't look like Hitler.
Ghandi did manage to contribute to a "revolution" without any use of force and he definately did not execute people... Yet, you don't see people wearing his face on their shirts.AlloAllo said:
That's because Stalin wasn't insane, he simply did what needed to be done for the time.Grab-bag said:
The thing to understand about Russia at that time was that when the commies took over you began to see the problem with the rhetoric of people like Lenin. Everyone wanted a better life for themselves, and nobody wanted to do things like farm, work in factories, or whatever else. Any society requires far more people doing those things than artists, leaders, and highly skilled labour.
Stalin was a socialist who pretty much came in with the attitude that the needs of the individual needed to be subserviant to the needs of the state. His attitude was that if his re-education camps killed 99% of the people who went through them, that 1% that came out as productive workers would be worth it.
Do to nobody doing what needed to be done for the survival of Russia, communism almost killed it, but Stalin's actions arguably saved the country, prevented the people from starving to death, and ultimatly resulted in Russia becoming a world power.
See, the differance is that Hitler was killing people off largely because he didn't like them and they didn't fit in with his plans for a "master race" of blonde-haired, blue-eyed, psionic giants governed by Thulian occult principles. Stalin in comparison did it to save his country, and he was not wrong, and it actually succeeded.
Hitler is remembered as a psychopath, Stalin is remembered in a more mixed fashion, people want to dismiss him as a mass murderer, but he's also called "The Steel Angel" due to having saved Russia, and there are still statues of him around.
Interestingly as much as I disagree with the central principles of communism, and socialism, I can respect Stalin, and feel he's a good example of why sometimes you DO need to wipe out millions of people for the greater good (and despite left wing propaganda, greater good DID come of this, with far more people benefitting in the long run).
As they say, the devil is in the details, WHY you do something like this, and how it turns out mean more than the act itself. Nobody likes mass murder, but Stalin saved a country and turned it into a superpower (and it's still a world power even if it's not a superpower), there was literally nothing else that would have worked since nobody was willingly going to endure going back to being a farmer or doing backbreaking labour, and the people were fanatical at the time about NOT having to do that, as that was what they fought for during the communist takeover.
What happend with Russia, and also with China (though things turned out a bit differantly) is one of the big reasons why I have little respect for left-wing, socialist idealogy (which is what it is, even if people deny it). Any society needs far more people at the bottom than at the top, in the end you need millions of farmers to feed everyone, millions of workers to craft goods, and millions of low-end workers to distribute them to everyone (including other people at the low end). You need far more of these people than artists, doctors, lawyers, or leaders... though those skilled professions, including administrators/politicians to keep things running ARE needed. In the end the people at the bottom are never going to be happy and are going to look at the people who have more with envy, and another system is always going to see appealing, but in the end no matter what system is used the majority of people are going to have to stay right there at the bottom as society's foundation. At least with a capitalist society who winds up doing what is based on competition, as opposed to a socialist society where in the end the administrators wind up assigning people based on need one way or another. Both systems lead to corruption of course, in socialist systems the people in charge conspire to stay in charge, and take care of friends and family first (so you wind up with what amounts to a leadership caste where the best jobs tend to stay based on a sort of "old boys" system based on family and who you know), in a capitalist system you wind up with a
few greedy arseholes who ruin it for everyone else and wind up controlling most of the wealth and using it to ultimatly prevent the competition the society is based on. There is no perfect way of doing things.
This is getting further away from the subject of Stalin... but I'm explaining it so you can understand the differances between him and Hitler or say Pol Pot. Why he killed the people and what the results were matters more than the number of people he actually killed. Even if I don't care for his idealogy, he is kind of heroic for stomaching this and doing what needed to be done, even if it was horrible. That's where the "Steel Angel" name comes from apparently.
Technically, there never was a "true" communist nation in the entire history of humanity.
Countries like the USSR,Cuba,Vietnam,North Korea and a small period of time in China (more precisely,between 1949 and 1982) were collectivist counties.
Countries like the USSR,Cuba,Vietnam,North Korea and a small period of time in China (more precisely,between 1949 and 1982) were collectivist counties.
The hammer sign isn't a USSR sign, its communist. People can be communist and not USSR. Wheras the swastika was ecsclusively Nazi.
The United States is, in reality, a social democratic nation (wrapped in the blanket of a Federated Republic). We have generally expressed the will to perform acts for "The Greater Good" both locally and abroad (despite the decrying of naysayers). The very tenants that the US is founded on echos this sympathy.
"We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America."
Somewhere along the way, we've gotten too wrapped up and involved with our own success and most of America has lost sight of what matters. Now very few wish to admit their socialist tendencies because in American popular opinion it has been turned into a insult, having be heavily abused as propaganda against Soviet fascism.
Virtually every problem with America today can be directly attributed to our excessive response to the Soviet Union, but that is a discussion for another time.
"We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America."
Somewhere along the way, we've gotten too wrapped up and involved with our own success and most of America has lost sight of what matters. Now very few wish to admit their socialist tendencies because in American popular opinion it has been turned into a insult, having be heavily abused as propaganda against Soviet fascism.
Virtually every problem with America today can be directly attributed to our excessive response to the Soviet Union, but that is a discussion for another time.
But it still isn'tgellert1984 said:
Do you still not get the point??BoTTeNBReKeR said:
Godwinned. And Guevara wasn't fighting for a totalitarian government. You really think that he intended those countries to become like that?BoTTeNBReKeR said:
No he didn't. See above.Blablahb said:
That makes absolutely no senseBlablahb said:
Communist ideology has nothing to do with what those people have done. And North Korea isn't communist.Blablahb said: