Why do most people believe that Communism won't work? Can it?
I say "most" in assumption.
eta: I put this in history so that responses might take history into example.
The Communist State
The Communist State
Where is Communism currently working?
The Communist State
Cuba
and
China
and, spot says,
Libya
though spot also says China is not communist.
and
China
and, spot says,
Libya
though spot also says China is not communist.
The Communist State
Do you think most Cubans and Chinese (other than leadership) believe that Communism is currently working?
The Communist State
koan;559554 wrote: Cuba
and
China
and, spot says,
Libya
though spot also says China is not communist.
They are totalitarian...
What's the difference? :wah:
and
China
and, spot says,
Libya
though spot also says China is not communist.
They are totalitarian...
What's the difference? :wah:
The Communist State
K.Snyder;559566 wrote: They are totalitarian...
What's the difference? :wah:
Bayonets on police rifles?
:D
What's the difference? :wah:
Bayonets on police rifles?
:D
The Communist State
BH672;559560 wrote: Do you think most Cubans and Chinese (other than leadership) believe that Communism is currently working?
There are a lot of happy Cubans.
And there is one guy who comes to FG who claims to love China. :wah:
I believe it falls to corruption, as in Orwell's Animal Farm. I'm looking for information/arguments that might convince me otherwise.
There are a lot of happy Cubans.
And there is one guy who comes to FG who claims to love China. :wah:
I believe it falls to corruption, as in Orwell's Animal Farm. I'm looking for information/arguments that might convince me otherwise.
The Communist State
koan;559573 wrote: There are a lot of happy Cubans.
Yes, we are told that, aren't we? I just can't figure out why so many of them turn up in Miami!
:D
Yes, we are told that, aren't we? I just can't figure out why so many of them turn up in Miami!
:D
The Communist State
BH672;559579 wrote: Yes, we are told that, aren't we? I just can't figure out why so many of them turn up in Miami!The world would, I'm quite sure, be a poorer place without the idealism of the Cuban population as a whole. Socialism in action as opposed to Batista-style corruption. Fidel has been a beacon of hope to the planet, bless him.
Nullius in verba ... ☎||||||||||| ... To Fate I sue, of other means bereft, the only refuge for the wretched left.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
The Communist State
spot;559681 wrote: Fidel has been a beacon of hope to the planet, bless him.
Not for much longer. :wah:
You're puffing on a Cuban as you posted that, yes?
Back to my original response to koan:
Where is Communism currently working?
Not for much longer. :wah:
You're puffing on a Cuban as you posted that, yes?
Back to my original response to koan:
Where is Communism currently working?
The Communist State
So what is the difference between Socialism and Communism, spot? I could look up the definitions but I feel you have a specific set of circumstances in mind. Which do you think is better and why?
The Communist State
koan;559714 wrote: So what is the difference between Socialism and Communism, spot? I could look up the definitions but I feel you have a specific set of circumstances in mind. Which do you think is better and why?
The freedom to make more personal economic choices I would imagine.
The freedom to make more personal economic choices I would imagine.
The Communist State
K.Snyder;559740 wrote: The freedom to make more personal economic choices I would imagine.
Both involve effective social welfare and common ownership of the means of production, they're not that different. Communism involves more commonality of possessions as well, from the instances I can recall. It's thirty years since China moved away from communism though, and fifteen since the Soviet Union and its satellites broke up.
The Romanian regime didn't impress me at all, it was more a fiefdom than an implementation of any communist ideal. I still don't know enough about Enver Hoxha to have an opinion about the Albanian version.
Both involve effective social welfare and common ownership of the means of production, they're not that different. Communism involves more commonality of possessions as well, from the instances I can recall. It's thirty years since China moved away from communism though, and fifteen since the Soviet Union and its satellites broke up.
The Romanian regime didn't impress me at all, it was more a fiefdom than an implementation of any communist ideal. I still don't know enough about Enver Hoxha to have an opinion about the Albanian version.
Nullius in verba ... ☎||||||||||| ... To Fate I sue, of other means bereft, the only refuge for the wretched left.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
The Communist State
The lack of a clear example of a successful Communist state can also be seen as a success of Capitalist states in crushing them to avoid the option being considered valid.
The Communist State
koan;559765 wrote: The lack of a clear example of a successful Communist state can also be seen as a success of Capitalist states in crushing them to avoid the option being considered valid.
The Soviet Union was successful but as you say the arms race broke their back, even though they were the ones playing catch-up all the while.
The Soviet Union was successful but as you say the arms race broke their back, even though they were the ones playing catch-up all the while.
Nullius in verba ... ☎||||||||||| ... To Fate I sue, of other means bereft, the only refuge for the wretched left.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
The Communist State
spot;559758 wrote: Communism involves more commonality of possessions as well, from the instances I can recall.
Is it coincidence that I see a socialist government provide better healthcare, education, and welfare than that of a communist state?
Is it coincidence that I see a socialist government provide better healthcare, education, and welfare than that of a communist state?
The Communist State
That may be either a matter of perception or an attribution of initial economic circumstance to political ideology.
Nullius in verba ... ☎||||||||||| ... To Fate I sue, of other means bereft, the only refuge for the wretched left.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
-
Richard Bell
- Posts: 1228
- Joined: Sun Oct 16, 2005 8:56 am
The Communist State
Marxism called for a dictatorship of the proletariat. Once communal ownership was installed, and all society benefitted from sharing the wealth, the dictatorship was supposed to fade away, as everyone lived in a socialist utopia, there would be no need for bureaucracy. "From each, according to ability, to each, according to need."
When communism took hold in the twentieth century, the dictatorship didn't go away. Socialist ideals gave way to the all too common foibles of human nature, and totalitarianism became the ideology's hallmark.
Marxism was a romanticised and idealised concept from the nineteenth century. Reality and time pretty much killed it.
Best summation of communism comes from Homer Simpson :
"In theory, communism worked...IN THEORY !"
BTW, I am a Marxist ...of the Groucho variety.
When communism took hold in the twentieth century, the dictatorship didn't go away. Socialist ideals gave way to the all too common foibles of human nature, and totalitarianism became the ideology's hallmark.
Marxism was a romanticised and idealised concept from the nineteenth century. Reality and time pretty much killed it.
Best summation of communism comes from Homer Simpson :
"In theory, communism worked...IN THEORY !"
BTW, I am a Marxist ...of the Groucho variety.
The Communist State
In a perfect world, Communism WOULD work, except for people!! In our history, most successful Capitalistic countries have gone through a period of Communism. It may be necessary to get 'up and running'. I think you'll see that in practice in China right now. (incidently, I also 'love' China..great place to visit) The government is still in control of most industries, but there is a rising middle class and they are striving to make their mark. A few 'mom and pop' enterprises are cropping up, and the people are not so down trodden as they were.
If they can get through this growth period without a revolution they may emerge on the other side more capitalistic. If they move too fast they'll collapse like Russia seems to have done in their seeming move away from Communism.
Our own country would not have survived if those first immigrants hadn't worked together everyone providing for the other as they could. You can call it team effort or co-operation or whatever you want, but it was (is) Communism in practice.
If they can get through this growth period without a revolution they may emerge on the other side more capitalistic. If they move too fast they'll collapse like Russia seems to have done in their seeming move away from Communism.
Our own country would not have survived if those first immigrants hadn't worked together everyone providing for the other as they could. You can call it team effort or co-operation or whatever you want, but it was (is) Communism in practice.
The Communist State
spot;559775 wrote: The Soviet Union was successful but as you say the arms race broke their back, even though they were the ones playing catch-up all the while.
Would it be somewhat accurate to say that Reagan simply outspent them?
libertine;559892 wrote: In a perfect world, Communism WOULD work, except for people!!
This made me think of a Seinfeld quote~ People. They're the worst!
:D
Would it be somewhat accurate to say that Reagan simply outspent them?
libertine;559892 wrote: In a perfect world, Communism WOULD work, except for people!!
This made me think of a Seinfeld quote~ People. They're the worst!
:D
The Communist State
I don't "dig" communism at all, based on history, the totally utopian and unrealistic ideology of the thing, and the experience of living in an ex-soviet satellite country. So in my opinion to put it in a way that is clear to everyone, communism sucks, big time. Un-ideological socialism, when contained within a liberal democracy, balanced by a free market economy and a absolute guarantee of economic freedom and protection of private property under law, is fine with me though actually, as long as its managed well, and is what the population of a country actually want, and is done in their interests and not their political masters.
They are absolutely 2 different ideas, (unlike what many North Americans seem to think). And one is not a direct result of the other or visa versa. As for China, you know China is interesting, its cool that people are being lifted out of poverty, and that they have a system that works in their way, but personally I wouldn't be into it, its totalitarian as far as I am concerned and I am not into one party states, period, whatever the excuses for them are.
As for Fidel, oh yeah he is great, nice hats, but why doesn't he let his people decide that though, even Mr Bush (now referred to simply as "The Evil One") has to put up with tiresome elections, a democratic senate, and will have to leave office next year, whereas Mr Castro has been smoking his Cigars in his Palace pontificating to his people since 1959, is that very equitable or would it be more like a state based on the personal vanity and alleged "intellectual superiority" of this particular great leader, would you like the same arrangement for tony blair for the next 40 years to be PM, spot hmmmmn? Imagine Mr Blair in 20 years in Dungarees and a pipe tramping around the countryside discussing water purification to the peasants, and generally being a condescending git, afterwards returning to the presidential residence in Checkers to write another volume on his "reflections" for his adoring people, good god.
No, thought not. :wah:
They are absolutely 2 different ideas, (unlike what many North Americans seem to think). And one is not a direct result of the other or visa versa. As for China, you know China is interesting, its cool that people are being lifted out of poverty, and that they have a system that works in their way, but personally I wouldn't be into it, its totalitarian as far as I am concerned and I am not into one party states, period, whatever the excuses for them are.
As for Fidel, oh yeah he is great, nice hats, but why doesn't he let his people decide that though, even Mr Bush (now referred to simply as "The Evil One") has to put up with tiresome elections, a democratic senate, and will have to leave office next year, whereas Mr Castro has been smoking his Cigars in his Palace pontificating to his people since 1959, is that very equitable or would it be more like a state based on the personal vanity and alleged "intellectual superiority" of this particular great leader, would you like the same arrangement for tony blair for the next 40 years to be PM, spot hmmmmn? Imagine Mr Blair in 20 years in Dungarees and a pipe tramping around the countryside discussing water purification to the peasants, and generally being a condescending git, afterwards returning to the presidential residence in Checkers to write another volume on his "reflections" for his adoring people, good god.
No, thought not. :wah:
"We are never so happy, never so unhappy, as we imagine"
Le Rochefoucauld.
"A smack in the face settles all arguments, then you can move on kid."
My dad 1986.
Le Rochefoucauld.
"A smack in the face settles all arguments, then you can move on kid."
My dad 1986.
The Communist State
Galbally;560478 wrote: would you like the same arrangement for tony blair for the next 40 years to be PM, spot hmmmmn? Imagine Mr Blair in 20 years in Dungarees and a pipe tramping around the countryside discussing water purification to the peasants, and generally being a condescending git, afterwards returning to the presidential residence in Checkers to write another volume on his "reflections" for his adoring people, good god.
No, thought not. :wah:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elections_in_Cuba describes the public mandate process which legitimises the Cuban National Assembly. Free secret voting, votes counted in public, universal adult suffrage, it's not democracy as we know it Jim but Cuba's only a small island and we can afford a few deviant experiments in the world surely. I think the average Cuban is proud of what's been achieved since the Revolution and so he should be.
The equivalent figure, if you're looking for one in England, is Tony Benn rather than young Blair. Had he been the Prime Minister you describe then, condescending git or not, he'd have been supported by some of us and the country would be a far different place now. It's an attractive pipe-dream, I'd have enjoyed seeing that.
As for the Soviet Union, the achievements of the Party from 1917 into the forties (I deliberately leave later years from my point so as to emphasise the result of World War Two) were unparalleled and I don't believe the country could have got where it did so fast under any other system. Whether anyone other than Stalin could have had the same result as Party Leader we'll never know and I accept that he became more flawed in some ways as time went on.
No, thought not. :wah:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elections_in_Cuba describes the public mandate process which legitimises the Cuban National Assembly. Free secret voting, votes counted in public, universal adult suffrage, it's not democracy as we know it Jim but Cuba's only a small island and we can afford a few deviant experiments in the world surely. I think the average Cuban is proud of what's been achieved since the Revolution and so he should be.
The equivalent figure, if you're looking for one in England, is Tony Benn rather than young Blair. Had he been the Prime Minister you describe then, condescending git or not, he'd have been supported by some of us and the country would be a far different place now. It's an attractive pipe-dream, I'd have enjoyed seeing that.
As for the Soviet Union, the achievements of the Party from 1917 into the forties (I deliberately leave later years from my point so as to emphasise the result of World War Two) were unparalleled and I don't believe the country could have got where it did so fast under any other system. Whether anyone other than Stalin could have had the same result as Party Leader we'll never know and I accept that he became more flawed in some ways as time went on.
Nullius in verba ... ☎||||||||||| ... To Fate I sue, of other means bereft, the only refuge for the wretched left.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
The Communist State
spot;560502 wrote: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elections_in_Cuba describes the public mandate process which legitimises the Cuban National Assembly. Free secret voting, votes counted in public, universal adult suffrage, it's not democracy as we know it Jim but Cuba's only a small island and we can afford a few deviant experiments in the world surely. I think the average Cuban is proud of what's been achieved since the Revolution and so he should be.
The equivalent figure, if you're looking for one in England, is Tony Benn rather than young Blair. Had he been the Prime Minister you describe then, condescending git or not, he'd have been supported by some of us and the country would be a far different place now. It's an attractive pipe-dream, I'd have enjoyed seeing that.
As for the Soviet Union, the achievements of the Party from 1917 into the forties (I deliberately leave later years from my point so as to emphasise the result of World War Two) were unparalleled and I don't believe the country could have got where it did so fast under any other system. Whether anyone other than Stalin could have had the same result as Party Leader we'll never know and I accept that he became more flawed in some ways as time went on.
I understand the points you are making but you are missing the wood for the trees, OK lets leave Cuba down to an experiment, (though I am not sure all Cubans would be very happy at that), but in terms of the Soviet Union, you are taking about a state that ran one of the most brutal police states in history, murdered hundreds of thousands of its own people, then millions, exiled the rest of them, destroyed entire nations and ethnicities in the caucuses and Balkans, raped and pillaged its neighbours, destroyed entire economic classes of people in the brutal Russian civil war and the aftermath, stifled all intellectual and political freedom, abolished religion, confiscated (ie robbed) all the private property belonging to Russians, and lived off the proceeds like a latter day gang of feudal lords based in a castle in Moscow, engineered a famine in which its estimated at least 30 million people may have died. Invaded poland, attacked finland, Romania, Moldova, etc etc, signed a friendship deal with Nazi germany, and also executed so many of its officers in purges that it very nearly lost the war and only won because it was callous enough to sacrafice about another 25 million of the lives of its own people, and because the US and Britain gave it untold billions of aid (which was promptly forgotten), and then they spread their hateful society deep into the heart of Europe following their triumph over Nazi Germany, and just because they industrialized really fast thats supposed to be progress, funny attitude for someone normally so moral about things.
The equivalent figure, if you're looking for one in England, is Tony Benn rather than young Blair. Had he been the Prime Minister you describe then, condescending git or not, he'd have been supported by some of us and the country would be a far different place now. It's an attractive pipe-dream, I'd have enjoyed seeing that.
As for the Soviet Union, the achievements of the Party from 1917 into the forties (I deliberately leave later years from my point so as to emphasise the result of World War Two) were unparalleled and I don't believe the country could have got where it did so fast under any other system. Whether anyone other than Stalin could have had the same result as Party Leader we'll never know and I accept that he became more flawed in some ways as time went on.
I understand the points you are making but you are missing the wood for the trees, OK lets leave Cuba down to an experiment, (though I am not sure all Cubans would be very happy at that), but in terms of the Soviet Union, you are taking about a state that ran one of the most brutal police states in history, murdered hundreds of thousands of its own people, then millions, exiled the rest of them, destroyed entire nations and ethnicities in the caucuses and Balkans, raped and pillaged its neighbours, destroyed entire economic classes of people in the brutal Russian civil war and the aftermath, stifled all intellectual and political freedom, abolished religion, confiscated (ie robbed) all the private property belonging to Russians, and lived off the proceeds like a latter day gang of feudal lords based in a castle in Moscow, engineered a famine in which its estimated at least 30 million people may have died. Invaded poland, attacked finland, Romania, Moldova, etc etc, signed a friendship deal with Nazi germany, and also executed so many of its officers in purges that it very nearly lost the war and only won because it was callous enough to sacrafice about another 25 million of the lives of its own people, and because the US and Britain gave it untold billions of aid (which was promptly forgotten), and then they spread their hateful society deep into the heart of Europe following their triumph over Nazi Germany, and just because they industrialized really fast thats supposed to be progress,
funny attitude for someone normally so moral about things. "We are never so happy, never so unhappy, as we imagine"
Le Rochefoucauld.
"A smack in the face settles all arguments, then you can move on kid."
My dad 1986.
Le Rochefoucauld.
"A smack in the face settles all arguments, then you can move on kid."
My dad 1986.
The Communist State
Galbally;560539 wrote: funny attitude for someone normally so moral about things. I'll concede I'm ambivalent about certain aspects of Soviet history but seriously, I don't see how else they'd have developed so fast and I do think it was essential to the health of Europe that they did.
I'll concede I'm ambivalent about certain aspects of Soviet history but seriously, I don't see how else they'd have developed so fast and I do think it was essential to the health of Europe that they did.Nullius in verba ... ☎||||||||||| ... To Fate I sue, of other means bereft, the only refuge for the wretched left.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
The Communist State
One of the things we are missing is seeing Communism in a vacuum. It has been affected by Capitalist societies banging against it from all sides. Inevitably when a person suggests change to the current society no one is willing to try anything that hasn't already been successful. That is hardly a good way to make advancements.
The Communist State
The probem with this very interesting discussion is that we keep mixing Communism vs Capitalism ( the original argument) with Democracy vs totalitarianism....two very separate arguments, or should be. However, in our less than perfect world, Communistic societies SEEM to turn our to be totalitarian, thus the Stalins and the Castros and all the other terrible dictators we've seen in our 'short' lives
The Communist State
I'm having trouble seeing Castro as a "terrible dictator"
The Communist State
koan;560859 wrote: I'm having trouble seeing Castro as a "terrible dictator"
Why?
When were the last elections in Cuba? Would you be happy to have such a system in Canada or the U.K. where you live now? I doubt it, Cuba is just tourist socialism, everyone loves to have a "cool" holiday there, listen to good music, see the 50s cars, and pretend they are revolutionaries, but I don't see them lining up to go and actually work there or raise families, I wonder why?
Why?
When were the last elections in Cuba? Would you be happy to have such a system in Canada or the U.K. where you live now? I doubt it, Cuba is just tourist socialism, everyone loves to have a "cool" holiday there, listen to good music, see the 50s cars, and pretend they are revolutionaries, but I don't see them lining up to go and actually work there or raise families, I wonder why?
"We are never so happy, never so unhappy, as we imagine"
Le Rochefoucauld.
"A smack in the face settles all arguments, then you can move on kid."
My dad 1986.
Le Rochefoucauld.
"A smack in the face settles all arguments, then you can move on kid."
My dad 1986.
The Communist State
Galbally;560893 wrote: Why?
When were the last elections in Cuba? Would you be happy to have such a system in Canada or the U.K. where you live now? I doubt it, Cuba is just tourist socialism, everyone loves to have a "cool" holiday there, listen to good music, see the 50s cars, and pretend they are revolutionaries, but I don't see them lining up to go and actually work there or raise families, I wonder why?
Nelson Mandela sure had a lot of nice things to say about him.
When were the last elections in Cuba? Would you be happy to have such a system in Canada or the U.K. where you live now? I doubt it, Cuba is just tourist socialism, everyone loves to have a "cool" holiday there, listen to good music, see the 50s cars, and pretend they are revolutionaries, but I don't see them lining up to go and actually work there or raise families, I wonder why?
Nelson Mandela sure had a lot of nice things to say about him.
The Communist State
koan;560859 wrote: I'm having trouble seeing Castro as a "terrible dictator"koan;560908 wrote: Nelson Mandela sure had a lot of nice things to say about him.
Perhaps he couldn't Google in prison.
Perhaps he couldn't Google in prison.
The Communist State
koan;560908 wrote: Nelson Mandela sure had a lot of nice things to say about him.
And Nelson is an honourable man, but thats not the point.
And Nelson is an honourable man, but thats not the point.
"We are never so happy, never so unhappy, as we imagine"
Le Rochefoucauld.
"A smack in the face settles all arguments, then you can move on kid."
My dad 1986.
Le Rochefoucauld.
"A smack in the face settles all arguments, then you can move on kid."
My dad 1986.
The Communist State
Galbally;560930 wrote: And Nelson is an honourable man, but thats not the point.
Sure it is.
There are Cubans who left and scream about the injustice there and there are Cubans who turn out in droves to honour him and wish him a speedy recovery. The point is that he can not be clearly painted a "terrible dictator".
Sure it is.
There are Cubans who left and scream about the injustice there and there are Cubans who turn out in droves to honour him and wish him a speedy recovery. The point is that he can not be clearly painted a "terrible dictator".
The Communist State
koan;560934 wrote: Sure it is.
There are Cubans who left and scream about the injustice there and there are Cubans who turn out in droves to honour him and wish him a speedy recovery. The point is that he can not be clearly painted a "terrible dictator".
No it isn't, Dictators are dictators whether they are nasty or nice, and the point is that they get to decide how they are going to act, not the law, or an electorate, thats the problem and always has been since Augustus in Rome. Personally I think Castro sucks and he has fooled a lot of left wing Europeans and world leaders into thinking he is some "right on" dude, he isn't, if he was he would have held meaningful elections in 1960 and allowed the people of Cuba to decide the future of their country, not him, what gives him the right to make such decisions, (aside from personally controlling men with lots of guns and not being afraid to threaten and kill and exile all political oponents?) you flirt with such people and their ideas at your peril, trust me.
There are Cubans who left and scream about the injustice there and there are Cubans who turn out in droves to honour him and wish him a speedy recovery. The point is that he can not be clearly painted a "terrible dictator".
No it isn't, Dictators are dictators whether they are nasty or nice, and the point is that they get to decide how they are going to act, not the law, or an electorate, thats the problem and always has been since Augustus in Rome. Personally I think Castro sucks and he has fooled a lot of left wing Europeans and world leaders into thinking he is some "right on" dude, he isn't, if he was he would have held meaningful elections in 1960 and allowed the people of Cuba to decide the future of their country, not him, what gives him the right to make such decisions, (aside from personally controlling men with lots of guns and not being afraid to threaten and kill and exile all political oponents?) you flirt with such people and their ideas at your peril, trust me.
"We are never so happy, never so unhappy, as we imagine"
Le Rochefoucauld.
"A smack in the face settles all arguments, then you can move on kid."
My dad 1986.
Le Rochefoucauld.
"A smack in the face settles all arguments, then you can move on kid."
My dad 1986.
The Communist State
koan;560934 wrote: The point is that he can not be clearly painted a "terrible dictator".
The Human Rights Watch disagrees. Aren't these the very atrocities Bush is being hammered over? What is the difference?
The Human Rights Watch disagrees. Aren't these the very atrocities Bush is being hammered over? What is the difference?
The Communist State
BH672;560944 wrote: The Human Rights Watch disagrees. Aren't these the very atrocities Bush is being hammered over? What is the difference?
The difference is that as of November 2008, Mr Bush can no longer remain in office whatever he thinks, and someone else will be elected by a majority of the American people, thank god. Fidel will be in Havana till he dies, then his cronies will try and make his son president, failing that some other self-worshiping macho-man with an assault rifle and assorted fellow travelers with dreams of giving orders to peasants and wrapping it up in some pseudo intellectual claptrap will be in charge, unless the Cubans themselves decide to seize the opportunity to actually govern themselves, (and somehow these people have some kinda moral authority that is greater than Georgie boy, what nonsense). Its the same old story as always.
The difference is that as of November 2008, Mr Bush can no longer remain in office whatever he thinks, and someone else will be elected by a majority of the American people, thank god. Fidel will be in Havana till he dies, then his cronies will try and make his son president, failing that some other self-worshiping macho-man with an assault rifle and assorted fellow travelers with dreams of giving orders to peasants and wrapping it up in some pseudo intellectual claptrap will be in charge, unless the Cubans themselves decide to seize the opportunity to actually govern themselves, (and somehow these people have some kinda moral authority that is greater than Georgie boy, what nonsense). Its the same old story as always.
"We are never so happy, never so unhappy, as we imagine"
Le Rochefoucauld.
"A smack in the face settles all arguments, then you can move on kid."
My dad 1986.
Le Rochefoucauld.
"A smack in the face settles all arguments, then you can move on kid."
My dad 1986.
The Communist State
Yes, G, that was perhaps a poor comparison. It is interesting though, don't you think, that the discussion of the impeachment of Bush takes place in the shadow of the fawning by many over despots like Castro?
The Communist State
BH672;560960 wrote: Yes, G, that was perhaps a poor comparison. It is interesting though, don't you think, that the discussion of the impeachment of Bush takes place in the shadow of the fawning by many over despots like Castro?
Yes, indeed, I don't like Bush myself, but he is a democratically elected leader, whatever people's opinion of him are, and he will peacefully step down and hand his office over to another leader in about a year, thats not a small thing, its just that people take it for granted. And as for these ridiculous double standards, yes its just hypocrisy or at best short-sightedness about what is really the agenda behind many people in power around the world, if you ask me.
Though the fact that there are far, far worse people in power than George Bush around the world doesn't excuse him for being not very good either, it is interesting alright.
Yes, indeed, I don't like Bush myself, but he is a democratically elected leader, whatever people's opinion of him are, and he will peacefully step down and hand his office over to another leader in about a year, thats not a small thing, its just that people take it for granted. And as for these ridiculous double standards, yes its just hypocrisy or at best short-sightedness about what is really the agenda behind many people in power around the world, if you ask me.
Though the fact that there are far, far worse people in power than George Bush around the world doesn't excuse him for being not very good either, it is interesting alright.
"We are never so happy, never so unhappy, as we imagine"
Le Rochefoucauld.
"A smack in the face settles all arguments, then you can move on kid."
My dad 1986.
Le Rochefoucauld.
"A smack in the face settles all arguments, then you can move on kid."
My dad 1986.
The Communist State
Talking about whether or not the UK would be better off like Cuba... the BBC printed this article:
In the first part of Newsnight's world's best public services series, we ask what Britain and the rest of the world can learn from Cuba's medical system.
...
The underlying logic of the Cuban system is amazingly simple. Thanks chiefly to the American economic blockade, but partly also to the web of strange rules and regulations that constrict Cuban life, the economy is in a terrible mess: national income per head is miniscule, and resources are amazingly tight.
...
Comparisons
If you want quick proof of how well all this works, consider Cuba's health indicators.
Its life expectancy and infant mortality rates are pretty much the same as the USA's. Its doctor-to-patient ratios stand comparison to any country in Western Europe.
Its annual total health spend per head, however, comes in at $251; just over a tenth of the UK's.
Mr Blair's aforementioned speech, it should be noted, was partly aimed at launching the government's latest bolt-on innovation to an NHS that seems to be fragmenting at speed: surgeries located inside branches of Boots. Will they fancy doing surprise house calls? Can they root themselves in communities the way the Cuban consultorios do? Could they fit in with the kind of organizational simplicity that seems to hold the key to Cuba's success?
If left-right prejudices really are as redundant as the prime minister reckons, his best-advised policy shift should be rather different.
Within reason - and though hell will freeze over, while pigs cruise over Downing Street - he should go Cuban.
It should be noted that the author states he does not intend to endorse the greater political system of Cuba, that the article is in reference to their health care system. I, however, offer it as a defense of socialist systems.
In the first part of Newsnight's world's best public services series, we ask what Britain and the rest of the world can learn from Cuba's medical system.
...
The underlying logic of the Cuban system is amazingly simple. Thanks chiefly to the American economic blockade, but partly also to the web of strange rules and regulations that constrict Cuban life, the economy is in a terrible mess: national income per head is miniscule, and resources are amazingly tight.
...
Comparisons
If you want quick proof of how well all this works, consider Cuba's health indicators.
Its life expectancy and infant mortality rates are pretty much the same as the USA's. Its doctor-to-patient ratios stand comparison to any country in Western Europe.
Its annual total health spend per head, however, comes in at $251; just over a tenth of the UK's.
Mr Blair's aforementioned speech, it should be noted, was partly aimed at launching the government's latest bolt-on innovation to an NHS that seems to be fragmenting at speed: surgeries located inside branches of Boots. Will they fancy doing surprise house calls? Can they root themselves in communities the way the Cuban consultorios do? Could they fit in with the kind of organizational simplicity that seems to hold the key to Cuba's success?
If left-right prejudices really are as redundant as the prime minister reckons, his best-advised policy shift should be rather different.
Within reason - and though hell will freeze over, while pigs cruise over Downing Street - he should go Cuban.
It should be noted that the author states he does not intend to endorse the greater political system of Cuba, that the article is in reference to their health care system. I, however, offer it as a defense of socialist systems.
The Communist State
koan;560970 wrote: Talking about whether or not the UK would be better off like Cuba... the BBC printed this article:
In the first part of Newsnight's world's best public services series, we ask what Britain and the rest of the world can learn from Cuba's medical system.
...
The underlying logic of the Cuban system is amazingly simple. Thanks chiefly to the American economic blockade, but partly also to the web of strange rules and regulations that constrict Cuban life, the economy is in a terrible mess: national income per head is miniscule, and resources are amazingly tight.
...
Comparisons
If you want quick proof of how well all this works, consider Cuba's health indicators.
Its life expectancy and infant mortality rates are pretty much the same as the USA's. Its doctor-to-patient ratios stand comparison to any country in Western Europe.
Its annual total health spend per head, however, comes in at $251; just over a tenth of the UK's.
Mr Blair's aforementioned speech, it should be noted, was partly aimed at launching the government's latest bolt-on innovation to an NHS that seems to be fragmenting at speed: surgeries located inside branches of Boots. Will they fancy doing surprise house calls? Can they root themselves in communities the way the Cuban consultorios do? Could they fit in with the kind of organizational simplicity that seems to hold the key to Cuba's success?
If left-right prejudices really are as redundant as the prime minister reckons, his best-advised policy shift should be rather different.
Within reason - and though hell will freeze over, while pigs cruise over Downing Street - he should go Cuban.
It should be noted that the author states he does not intend to endorse the greater political system of Cuba, that the article is in reference to their health care system. I, however, offer it as a defense of socialist systems.
No, I would hold it as a tribute to the medical doctors, nurses, and community care workers in Cuba who do an outstanding job with f-all resources, and in the face of the crazy, crazy economic system in Cuba, not the man who sits above it all, in his pampered little flat in the presidential palace in Havana, its a ridiculous argument Koan.
The French have an excellent health system, as do the Germans, and the Swedes, and also they have democratic governments, accountability, and functioning economies, would that not be a better ideal to aspire to, or do you just fancy a one-party revolutionary left wing government in Britain, that is going to save the NHS while destroying the country as a going concern??? I do remember that Jack Straw was a right little trotskyist when he was a young bovver boy in the 1970's, maybe he could reinvent himself as your new glorious leader?? :wah:
In the first part of Newsnight's world's best public services series, we ask what Britain and the rest of the world can learn from Cuba's medical system.
...
The underlying logic of the Cuban system is amazingly simple. Thanks chiefly to the American economic blockade, but partly also to the web of strange rules and regulations that constrict Cuban life, the economy is in a terrible mess: national income per head is miniscule, and resources are amazingly tight.
...
Comparisons
If you want quick proof of how well all this works, consider Cuba's health indicators.
Its life expectancy and infant mortality rates are pretty much the same as the USA's. Its doctor-to-patient ratios stand comparison to any country in Western Europe.
Its annual total health spend per head, however, comes in at $251; just over a tenth of the UK's.
Mr Blair's aforementioned speech, it should be noted, was partly aimed at launching the government's latest bolt-on innovation to an NHS that seems to be fragmenting at speed: surgeries located inside branches of Boots. Will they fancy doing surprise house calls? Can they root themselves in communities the way the Cuban consultorios do? Could they fit in with the kind of organizational simplicity that seems to hold the key to Cuba's success?
If left-right prejudices really are as redundant as the prime minister reckons, his best-advised policy shift should be rather different.
Within reason - and though hell will freeze over, while pigs cruise over Downing Street - he should go Cuban.
It should be noted that the author states he does not intend to endorse the greater political system of Cuba, that the article is in reference to their health care system. I, however, offer it as a defense of socialist systems.
No, I would hold it as a tribute to the medical doctors, nurses, and community care workers in Cuba who do an outstanding job with f-all resources, and in the face of the crazy, crazy economic system in Cuba, not the man who sits above it all, in his pampered little flat in the presidential palace in Havana, its a ridiculous argument Koan.
The French have an excellent health system, as do the Germans, and the Swedes, and also they have democratic governments, accountability, and functioning economies, would that not be a better ideal to aspire to, or do you just fancy a one-party revolutionary left wing government in Britain, that is going to save the NHS while destroying the country as a going concern??? I do remember that Jack Straw was a right little trotskyist when he was a young bovver boy in the 1970's, maybe he could reinvent himself as your new glorious leader?? :wah:
"We are never so happy, never so unhappy, as we imagine"
Le Rochefoucauld.
"A smack in the face settles all arguments, then you can move on kid."
My dad 1986.
Le Rochefoucauld.
"A smack in the face settles all arguments, then you can move on kid."
My dad 1986.
The Communist State
Galbally;560976 wrote: No, I would hold it as a tribute to the medical doctors, nurses, and community care workers in Cuba who do an outstanding job with f-all resources, and in the face of the crazy, crazy economic system in Cuba, not the man who sits above it all, in his pampered little flat in the presidential palace in Havana, its a ridiculous argument Koan.
The French have an excellent health system, as do the Germans, and the Swedes, and also they have democratic governments, accountability, and functioning economies, would that not be a better ideal to aspire to, or do you just fancy a one-party revolutionary left wing government in Britain, that is going to save the NHS while destroying the country as a going concern??? I do remember that Jack Straw was a right little trotskyist when he was a young bovver boy in the 1970's, maybe he could reinvent himself as your new glorious leader?? :wah:
I see our misunderstanding.
I thought we were discussing Communism.
The French have an excellent health system, as do the Germans, and the Swedes, and also they have democratic governments, accountability, and functioning economies, would that not be a better ideal to aspire to, or do you just fancy a one-party revolutionary left wing government in Britain, that is going to save the NHS while destroying the country as a going concern??? I do remember that Jack Straw was a right little trotskyist when he was a young bovver boy in the 1970's, maybe he could reinvent himself as your new glorious leader?? :wah:
I see our misunderstanding.
I thought we were discussing Communism.
The Communist State
koan;560979 wrote: I see our misunderstanding.
I thought we were discussing Communism.
Yes we are, and Cuba is a communist dictatorship, and many British Labour cabinet members were little mini-marxists, or members of the communist party when they were angry, poor, students, until they got semi-proper jobs being pretend socialists in a democratic party like Labour. I am all for European socialism, as long as its not the only choice on offer, but I am certainly not into communism, even when I was young and a bit foolish I never went for that turkey.
I thought we were discussing Communism.
Yes we are, and Cuba is a communist dictatorship, and many British Labour cabinet members were little mini-marxists, or members of the communist party when they were angry, poor, students, until they got semi-proper jobs being pretend socialists in a democratic party like Labour. I am all for European socialism, as long as its not the only choice on offer, but I am certainly not into communism, even when I was young and a bit foolish I never went for that turkey.
"We are never so happy, never so unhappy, as we imagine"
Le Rochefoucauld.
"A smack in the face settles all arguments, then you can move on kid."
My dad 1986.
Le Rochefoucauld.
"A smack in the face settles all arguments, then you can move on kid."
My dad 1986.
The Communist State
Just to contrast left and right wing attitudes and behaviour in those parts, I'll post this brief extract from "Killing Hope" by William Blum. I think it makes a point about the morality of the Cuban revolution, those who were inspired by it and those who opposed them.Testimony of an Indian woman:My name is Rigoberta Menchu Tum. I am a representative of the "Vincente Menchu" [her father] Revolutionary Christians ... On 9 December 1979, my 16-year-old brother Patrocino was captured and tortured for several days and then taken with twenty other young men to the square in Chajul ... An officer of [President] Lucas Garcia's army of murderers ordered the prisoners to be paraded in a line. Then he started to insult and threaten the inhabitants of the village, who were forced to come out of their houses to witness the event. I was with my mother, and we saw Patrocino; he had had his tongue cut out and his toes cut off. The officer jackal made a speech. Every time he paused the soldiers beat the Indian prisoners.
When he finished his ranting, the bodies of my brother and the other prisoners were swollen, bloody, unrecognizable. It was monstrous, but they were still alive. They were thrown on the ground and drenched with gasoline. The soldiers set fire to the wretched bodies with torches and the captain laughed like a hyena and forced the inhabitants of Chajul to watch. This was his objective—that they should be terrified and witness the punishment given to the "guerrillas".In 1992, Rigoberta Menchu Tum was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize.
Testimony of Fred Sherwood (CIA pilot during the overthrow of the Arbenz government in 1954 who settled in Guatemala and became president of the American Chamber of Commerce), speaking in Guatemala, September 1980:Why should we be worried about the death squads? They're bumping off the commies, our enemies. I'd give them more power. Hell, I'd get some cartridges if I could, and everyone else would too ... Why should we criticize them? The death squad—I'm for it ... ****! There's no question, we can't wait `til Reagan gets in. We hope Carter falls in the ocean real quick ... We all feel that he [Reagan] is our saviour.
When he finished his ranting, the bodies of my brother and the other prisoners were swollen, bloody, unrecognizable. It was monstrous, but they were still alive. They were thrown on the ground and drenched with gasoline. The soldiers set fire to the wretched bodies with torches and the captain laughed like a hyena and forced the inhabitants of Chajul to watch. This was his objective—that they should be terrified and witness the punishment given to the "guerrillas".In 1992, Rigoberta Menchu Tum was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize.
Testimony of Fred Sherwood (CIA pilot during the overthrow of the Arbenz government in 1954 who settled in Guatemala and became president of the American Chamber of Commerce), speaking in Guatemala, September 1980:Why should we be worried about the death squads? They're bumping off the commies, our enemies. I'd give them more power. Hell, I'd get some cartridges if I could, and everyone else would too ... Why should we criticize them? The death squad—I'm for it ... ****! There's no question, we can't wait `til Reagan gets in. We hope Carter falls in the ocean real quick ... We all feel that he [Reagan] is our saviour.
Nullius in verba ... ☎||||||||||| ... To Fate I sue, of other means bereft, the only refuge for the wretched left.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
The Communist State
I'm not convinced that Communism would work any better as a political system than Capitalism does. But I am convinced that Capitalism only works for the minority and destroys whatever gets in its way.
I do also believe that Communism is sneered upon because of propaganda campaigns and twisted history. I don't really think it has been proven one way or the other.
I do also believe that Communism is sneered upon because of propaganda campaigns and twisted history. I don't really think it has been proven one way or the other.
-
Richard Bell
- Posts: 1228
- Joined: Sun Oct 16, 2005 8:56 am
The Communist State
Galbally;560943 wrote: No it isn't, Dictators are dictators whether they are nasty or nice, and the point is that they get to decide how they are going to act, not the law, or an electorate, thats the problem and always has been since Augustus in Rome. Personally I think Castro sucks and he has fooled a lot of left wing Europeans and world leaders into thinking he is some "right on" dude
He is a dictator, but he's a hell of a lot better than Battista, and I'll live in Cuba any day, rather than in the newly "democratic" Iraq.
FWIW, I know a Canadian that just moved to Cuba. Took an early retirement. I also know a Cuban who has lived in Canada for two years. She spends a lot of time in Cuba with her extended family. They are Castro supporters.
I can't help but think if Cuba had a gazillion factories producing cheap consumer goods, the USA would be singing a different tune about Fidel.
He is a dictator, but he's a hell of a lot better than Battista, and I'll live in Cuba any day, rather than in the newly "democratic" Iraq.
FWIW, I know a Canadian that just moved to Cuba. Took an early retirement. I also know a Cuban who has lived in Canada for two years. She spends a lot of time in Cuba with her extended family. They are Castro supporters.
I can't help but think if Cuba had a gazillion factories producing cheap consumer goods, the USA would be singing a different tune about Fidel.
-
Richard Bell
- Posts: 1228
- Joined: Sun Oct 16, 2005 8:56 am
The Communist State
koan;560859 wrote: I'm having trouble seeing Castro as a "terrible dictator"
Castro is regarded in a different light by many Canadians. I personally don't know any rabid anti-Castro people. OTOH, I haven't met any rabidly pro-Castro people.
He's certainly no saint, but I don't think he's the evil monster that seems to be the other side of the debate.
Castro is regarded in a different light by many Canadians. I personally don't know any rabid anti-Castro people. OTOH, I haven't met any rabidly pro-Castro people.
He's certainly no saint, but I don't think he's the evil monster that seems to be the other side of the debate.
The Communist State
Richard Bell;561061 wrote: Castro is regarded in a different light by many Canadians. I personally don't know any rabid anti-Castro people. OTOH, I haven't met any rabidly pro-Castro people.
He's certainly no saint, but I don't think he's the evil monster that seems to be the other side of the debate.
Well said.
He's certainly no saint, but I don't think he's the evil monster that seems to be the other side of the debate.
Well said.
The Communist State
Richard Bell;561048 wrote: He is a dictator, but he's a hell of a lot better than Battista, and I'll live in Cuba any day, rather than in the newly "democratic" Iraq.
FWIW, I know a Canadian that just moved to Cuba. Took an early retirement. I also know a Cuban who has lived in Canada for two years. She spends a lot of time in Cuba with her extended family. They are Castro supporters.
I can't help but think if Cuba had a gazillion factories producing cheap consumer goods, the USA would be singing a different tune about Fidel.
I think that what you are saying is correct in that if Cuba was like China, and not so close to Florida no one would bat an eyelid, but I personally still wouldn't be into Castro or any dictatorship, no matter how its excused, or whether it was left-wing or right-wing either. Also just because there has been some unsavory American policies toward Cuba, thats no excuse for Castro's darker actions, or his refusal to give his people the right to elect their own leaders, no more than Bush or Blair have any for their more stupid and dangerous ideas. But they are accountable ultimately, Castro is not, I do not understand why this very simple point is being ignored, thats the point of the system we have, not who is in charge, but the law by which they govern, the Castro model is called "Caesarism" or the rule of the "strong man" who only wants whats best (of course), and will kill all comers to ensure the people get what they need, its a common theme in the ex Spanish and Portuguese empires and perhaps is a relic of the spirit of the conquistadors, as much as a reaction to the brutality of these original empire builders.
Its always the same actually whether its left or right, Chile, El Salvador, Argentina, Columbia, Nicaragua, Mexico, Cuba, its a common theme, and one of the reasons why Latin and South America has been the breeding ground for basket case political systems and economies for centuries, long before the U.S. became so potent an influence in the hemisphere.
Also, yes, I would also rather live in Cuba than Iraq any day, (as would any sane human being, I would rather live on the moon than Iraq to be perfectly honest) but then thats not a very valid comparison as people in either of these countries would hardly have that choice would they. Also there are plenty of far nicer places in Europe to live than either of these countries so I fortunately don't have to make a "lesser of two evils" type choice. That said, I am sure that there are many aspects of Cuban life that are great, its culture, its people, its climate, some of the more enlightened aspects of the regime, but its still a dictatorship, and Castro is a despot, not the worst one, but he still is one, and I don't like that type of political idea or leader, because it (and they) suck. But an interesting topic indeed.
FWIW, I know a Canadian that just moved to Cuba. Took an early retirement. I also know a Cuban who has lived in Canada for two years. She spends a lot of time in Cuba with her extended family. They are Castro supporters.
I can't help but think if Cuba had a gazillion factories producing cheap consumer goods, the USA would be singing a different tune about Fidel.
I think that what you are saying is correct in that if Cuba was like China, and not so close to Florida no one would bat an eyelid, but I personally still wouldn't be into Castro or any dictatorship, no matter how its excused, or whether it was left-wing or right-wing either. Also just because there has been some unsavory American policies toward Cuba, thats no excuse for Castro's darker actions, or his refusal to give his people the right to elect their own leaders, no more than Bush or Blair have any for their more stupid and dangerous ideas. But they are accountable ultimately, Castro is not, I do not understand why this very simple point is being ignored, thats the point of the system we have, not who is in charge, but the law by which they govern, the Castro model is called "Caesarism" or the rule of the "strong man" who only wants whats best (of course), and will kill all comers to ensure the people get what they need, its a common theme in the ex Spanish and Portuguese empires and perhaps is a relic of the spirit of the conquistadors, as much as a reaction to the brutality of these original empire builders.
Its always the same actually whether its left or right, Chile, El Salvador, Argentina, Columbia, Nicaragua, Mexico, Cuba, its a common theme, and one of the reasons why Latin and South America has been the breeding ground for basket case political systems and economies for centuries, long before the U.S. became so potent an influence in the hemisphere.
Also, yes, I would also rather live in Cuba than Iraq any day, (as would any sane human being, I would rather live on the moon than Iraq to be perfectly honest) but then thats not a very valid comparison as people in either of these countries would hardly have that choice would they. Also there are plenty of far nicer places in Europe to live than either of these countries so I fortunately don't have to make a "lesser of two evils" type choice. That said, I am sure that there are many aspects of Cuban life that are great, its culture, its people, its climate, some of the more enlightened aspects of the regime, but its still a dictatorship, and Castro is a despot, not the worst one, but he still is one, and I don't like that type of political idea or leader, because it (and they) suck. But an interesting topic indeed.
"We are never so happy, never so unhappy, as we imagine"
Le Rochefoucauld.
"A smack in the face settles all arguments, then you can move on kid."
My dad 1986.
Le Rochefoucauld.
"A smack in the face settles all arguments, then you can move on kid."
My dad 1986.
The Communist State
koan;561031 wrote: I'm not convinced that Communism would work any better as a political system than Capitalism does. But I am convinced that Capitalism only works for the minority and destroys whatever gets in its way.
I do also believe that Communism is sneered upon because of propaganda campaigns and twisted history. I don't really think it has been proven one way or the other.
I understand where you are coming from, and I respect your opinion, but the history of the Soviet Union is one of unbelievable barbarism (every bit the equal of the Nazi's who were the right-wing alter-ego of this system, hence the enmity) and full of true human-organized evil, and thats not propaganda, (also its not all strictly because of communism, but it didn't help Russia at all), and in general I don't think communism works because human beings don't work that way either, therefore any truly communist system requires enormous coercion to make it someway workable, and even then its still not viable because economically trying to control the economic activity of tens of millions of people on a microscopic level by an army of economically-illiterate, time-filling, disinterested politico-bureaucrat apparachiks is a truly nonsense idea that only someone who has read Kafka or Solzhenitsyn, and seen or (god help them), actually grown up in such god forsaken places like the less well-known suburbs of Bratislava, Ljubljana, Crackow, or Kaliningrad or the hinterlands of such places can really appreciate, (and see the true desolation wrought upon Europe by Russian popular "Socialism").
Also I met quite a few people who had lived through the Prague Spring of 1968, been brought up under the tender gaze of the Stasi of East Germany and their army of informers (including indoctrinated school children), and Ceausescu's awful and bewildering Romanian regime and endured its its violent demise, and if you are ever in doubt of what life for ordinary men and women inside the Soviet Empire was really like, you should talk to such people.
I do also believe that Communism is sneered upon because of propaganda campaigns and twisted history. I don't really think it has been proven one way or the other.
I understand where you are coming from, and I respect your opinion, but the history of the Soviet Union is one of unbelievable barbarism (every bit the equal of the Nazi's who were the right-wing alter-ego of this system, hence the enmity) and full of true human-organized evil, and thats not propaganda, (also its not all strictly because of communism, but it didn't help Russia at all), and in general I don't think communism works because human beings don't work that way either, therefore any truly communist system requires enormous coercion to make it someway workable, and even then its still not viable because economically trying to control the economic activity of tens of millions of people on a microscopic level by an army of economically-illiterate, time-filling, disinterested politico-bureaucrat apparachiks is a truly nonsense idea that only someone who has read Kafka or Solzhenitsyn, and seen or (god help them), actually grown up in such god forsaken places like the less well-known suburbs of Bratislava, Ljubljana, Crackow, or Kaliningrad or the hinterlands of such places can really appreciate, (and see the true desolation wrought upon Europe by Russian popular "Socialism").
Also I met quite a few people who had lived through the Prague Spring of 1968, been brought up under the tender gaze of the Stasi of East Germany and their army of informers (including indoctrinated school children), and Ceausescu's awful and bewildering Romanian regime and endured its its violent demise, and if you are ever in doubt of what life for ordinary men and women inside the Soviet Empire was really like, you should talk to such people.
"We are never so happy, never so unhappy, as we imagine"
Le Rochefoucauld.
"A smack in the face settles all arguments, then you can move on kid."
My dad 1986.
Le Rochefoucauld.
"A smack in the face settles all arguments, then you can move on kid."
My dad 1986.