Guest viewing is limited

All Jews Must See This

Status
Not open for further replies.
I think what makes the Holocaust so horrible is intent. Stalin did go out with the intension of killing so many. Same thing with Pol Pot, Mao, etc. Hitler was different. His intent was to wipe out COMPLETELY several races of people. And even though the number of people killed by him was horrific, it wasn't even close to finishing his intent. Had he succeeded, it is likely well over a billion would have been killed (jews, blacks, homosexuals, catholics, gypsies, communists and many others). You think Stalin killed many of his own people? Hitler wanted to kill every single Soviet. Not a few million, he wanted to kill ALL of them. He basically wanted to wipe out almost the entire world except for those that qualified as "Arian".

THAT was what was so terrible about the Nazis and the Holocaust.
 
lol i was just throwing things into a topic to which its subject has no good theory to go against it. It was admitted, logs were kept very well, even my family was involved, on the other end. It would tough having half of your family fighting for the US and the world and the other half, brothers and cousins putting guns in their mouth.

There was a story my grandfather said that when the news of this mass termination of jews was being done, one reason why given that germany wasn't killing the jews, they told a story that a majority of jews were comming down with crohns desiese and hitler was scared that this would spread to other people so he put them in a safe place. Its just too much of a load of crap. Maybe it could hold SOME water but, the forced labor killed any aspect.
 
Nullifidian said:
I think what makes the Holocaust so horrible is intent. Stalin did go out with the intension of killing so many. Same thing with Pol Pot, Mao, etc. Hitler was different. His intent was to wipe out COMPLETELY several races of people. And even though the number of people killed by him was horrific, it wasn't even close to finishing his intent. Had he succeeded, it is likely well over a billion would have been killed (jews, blacks, homosexuals, catholics, gypsies, communists and many others). You think Stalin killed many of his own people? Hitler wanted to kill every single Soviet. Not a few million, he wanted to kill ALL of them. He basically wanted to wipe out almost the entire world except for those that qualified as "Arian".

THAT was what was so terrible about the Nazis and the Holocaust.
Click to expand...

I don't necessary disagree. But it is basically academic. If you are murdered by the state, then it really makes no difference what the killers' political motives are. It sucks all the same. You sure wouldn't be feeling,"Oh, it isn't as terrible since it is only Uncle Joe's thugs or our beloved Chairman's thugs, killing me. It would only truly suck if they are killing me b/c of my ethnicity."
 
I guess to the victims it doesn't matter, for certain. I think, or I would guess that the historians are the ones who use this catagorization.
 
Jayhawkk said:
I guess to the victims it doesn't matter, for certain. I think, or I would guess that the historians are the ones who use this catagorization.
Click to expand...
That's what I mean by 'academic'. :)
 
fbxdan said:
Exactly. Millions have died because of communism and its leaders.
Click to expand...
This is something I wish more people were aware of...especially the socialist idiots who are always trying to convince us traditional americans we're stupid.

:bruce1:
 
kwyckemynd00 said:
This is something I wish more people were aware of...especially the socialist idiots who are always trying to convince us traditional americans we're stupid.

:bruce1:
Click to expand...

Well, the problem is they don't teach us that in the school systems. Throughout my entire public education, we were never taught about the gulags, the ukrainian famine, "the great leap forward", and many other atrocities. Socialism is like a disease that keeps appearing under the guise of "progress".

On an interesting side note, I was looking through my Grandma's books after she died and I found an interesting book called "None Dare Call It Treason". It was written in the 1960's and is a very good read. It shows how close America was to being utterly taken over by communism. Many people have labeled the author of the book as a "paranoid mccarthyist" but much of what he said turned about to be true.
 
fbxdan said:
Well, the problem is they don't teach us that in the school systems. Throughout my entire public education, we were never taught about the gulags, the ukrainian famine, "the great leap forward", and many other atrocities. Socialism is like a disease that keeps appearing under the guise of "progress" and as a young, ignorant and uneducated kid started to believe it.

On an interesting side note, I was looking through my Grandma's books after she died and I found an interesting book called "None Dare Call It Treason". It was written in the 1960's and is a very good read. It shows how close America was to being utterly taken over by communism. Many people have labeled the author of the book as a "paranoid mccarthyist" but much of what he said turned about to be true.
Click to expand...
Yeah, for sure. I remember LITERALLY having a few of my teachers (from middle school and beyond) explaining to me that "communism is really a good thing". I must have heard it about 3-4 times from 3-4 different teachers.

People are funny...they love sticking to the romantic, idealistic, and ignorant belief that just because something can work on paper (communism) that it can work in practice. It has repeatedly failed and lends itself to horrible corruption.
 
kwyckemynd00 said:
Yeah, for sure. I remember LITERALLY having a few of my teachers (from middle school and beyond) explaining to me that "communism is really a good thing". I must have heard it about 3-4 times from 3-4 different teachers.

People are funny...they love sticking to the romantic, idealistic, and ignorant belief that just because something can work on paper (communism) that it can work in practice. It has repeatedly failed and lends itself to horrible corruption.
Click to expand...

Oh, same here. You remember when they told you "Communism is a good idea.. It just has never been done properly"...? I must have heard that quite a few times growing up.
 
fbxdan said:
Well, the problem is they don't teach us that in the school systems. Throughout my entire public education, we were never taught about the gulags, the ukrainian famine, "the great leap forward", and many other atrocities. Socialism is like a disease that keeps appearing under the guise of "progress".

On an interesting side note, I was looking through my Grandma's books after she died and I found an interesting book called "None Dare Call It Treason". It was written in the 1960's and is a very good read. It shows how close America was to being utterly taken over by communism. Many people have labeled the author of the book as a "paranoid mccarthyist" but much of what he said turned about to be true.
Click to expand...

Please do not confuse the ideology of Socialism with the atrocities of those who choose to misuse it as controlling doctrine. What is labelled "communism" today is not as Marx envisioned it by any means, it was an unfortunate transitional phase called Dictatorship of the Proletariat that Marx saw as a neccessity to obtain egalitarianism. Where it stalled and failed was at the point where the Proletariat leaders were to give up power in place of egalitarianism THAT is Communism in it's truest sense.

Now, do I agree with what is labelled as Communism? No, absolutely not. However, it might do you, and the others who have posted about it in this thread to read Das Kapital and The Communist Manifesto by Karl Marx to actually learn what he intended. Communism was by no means to be a ruthless dictatorship at any point, nor was it to be confined to any one country. It was an ideology of worldwide egalitariansm.
 
Mulletsoldier said:
Please do not confuse the ideology of Socialism with the atrocities of those who choose to misuse it as controlling doctrine. What is labelled "communism" today is not as Marx envisioned it by any means, it was an unfortunate transitional phase called Dictatorship of the Proletariat that Marx saw as a neccessity to obtain egalitarianism. Where it stalled and failed was at the point where the Proletariat leaders were to give up power in place of egalitarianism THAT is Communism in it's truest sense.

Now, do I agree with what is labelled as Communism? No, absolutely not. However, it might do you, and the others who have posted about it in this thread to read Das Kapital and The Communist Manifesto by Karl Marx to actually learn what he intended. Communism was by no means to be a ruthless dictatorship at any point, nor was it to be confined to any one country. It was an ideology of worldwide egalitariansm.
Click to expand...

I've read both books btw. Karl Marx was a dreamer and an alcoholic. Egalitarianism is a false premise to begin with. It doesn't matter how much logic you have if your premise is wrong. And "egalitarianism" is completely false. Nothing is equal in nature. Especially not human beings or political systems.
 
And whatever Marx's intentions were, his words have inspired the slaughter and enslavement of millions.
 
fbxdan said:
I've read both books btw. Karl Marx was a dreamer and an alcoholic. Egalitarianism is a false premise to begin with. It doesn't matter how much logic you have if your premise is wrong. And "egalitarianism" is completely false. Nothing is equal in nature. Especially not human beings or political systems.
Click to expand...

False in what way? Perfect egalitarianism i.e., utopitianism is not practical or achievable, no. However, the premise of "giving what one can, taking what one needs" seems to me a far better practice than the Western Standard of "give as little as possible to take all you can". You call him a dreamer because his premise was never fully realized, any theory could be classified as such until it is realized in practice. I find it funny you call him an "alcoholic" and a "dreamer", Sociology is my parent discipline so I choose to call him the Father of my discipline, personal preference I suppose.

fbxdan said:
People are usually so set that they know the truth about something, that they refuse to question it. I am always searching for the truth. And I gave credit to Nullifidan to countering my statistics with some of his own. He knows what he is talking about.
Click to expand...

I find it quite ironic you posted this only two pages back in defense of your beliefs, then blatantly ignore it when it comes to the view of someone else. You are confusing practice with intent. Error is human in this instance, not in the theory itself, not by any means.
 
fbxdan said:
And whatever Marx's intentions were, his words have inspired the slaughter and enslavement of millions.
Click to expand...

Wow, I guess my last above comment really does hold truth. I have gathered from your previous posts that you are a practicing Christian. NEVER has there been a doctrine/belief that has spawned as many needless deaths and conflicts as Christianity and it's offshoots. Do not confuse the corruptibility of saddistic individuals with the ideology they abuse where it is not warranted.
 
Actually your wrong, I am not a christian. And yes christianity has led to the death of many people, I don't disagree with you on that. You've made assumptions about my beliefs, and they aren't true.
 
Mulletsoldier said:
False in what way? Perfect egalitarianism i.e., utopitianism is not practical or achievable, no. However, the premise of "giving what one can, taking what one needs" seems to me a far better practice than the Western Standard of "give as little as possible to take all you can". You call him a dreamer because his premise was never fully realized, any theory could be classified as such until it is realized in practice. I find it funny you call him an "alcoholic" and a "dreamer", Sociology is my parent discipline so I choose to call him the Father of my discipline, personal preference I suppose.



I find it quite ironic you posted this only two pages back in defense of your beliefs, then blatantly ignore it when it comes to the view of someone else. You are confusing practice with intent. Error is human in this instance, not in the theory itself, not by any means.
Click to expand...

What good is a theory if it doesn't work? Marxism doesn't work. And btw the theory is erronous. And how much do you know about the "father of your discipline"? I can tell you some things about him that are quite interesting to say the least.
 
fbxdan said:
Actually your wrong, I am not a christian. And yes christianity has led to the death of many people, I don't disagree with you on that. You've made assumptions about my beliefs, and they aren't true.
Click to expand...

I apologize for my assumption, but the point still holds water. Though I do not agree with it's practices, I do not find fault in the Doctrine for those who have misinterpreted it for their own purposes.

Whenever I make I statements about a religion, political system, social institution, ideology, religion etc., I take into account all social factors involved, both macro and micro. The success or failure of any school of thought is dependent on all the relevant social forces contained in the epoch in which it existed. Those social forces which led to the misrepresentation of Marx's thoughts happened to be human.
 
Mulletsoldier said:
Wow, I guess my last above comment really does hold truth. I have gathered from your previous posts that you are a practicing Christian. NEVER has there been a doctrine/belief that has spawned as many needless deaths and conflicts as Christianity and it's offshoots. Do not confuse the corruptibility of saddistic individuals with the ideology they abuse where it is not warranted.
Click to expand...
True, however, that practice ended long ago and is totally unrepresentative of current day christians. It was a function of corrupt politicians, not so much the church itself.

The popeship was often bought and with each corrupt pope the new testament was twisted into something it was not. There is nothing in the new testament that would function as a base for any of those actions during the dark ages. Old Testament you will find some things that are "odd", but christians make their "new covenant" with Christ and practice the teachings of Jesus Christ the new testament.

This fact of past atrocities by christians in the name of christianity can be viewed in stark contrast to the radical islamofacists of today, who happen to have scriptural foundation for the actions.

Oh, and BTW, I am not a practicing christian either :)
 
Oh, and you're right Mullet. Marx's ideology was not well represented by communist practitioners. However, I think that's simply a function of nature getting in the way of ideology. On paper, it was a functional idea. In the real world...just not gonna happen that way!

We on AM.com know very well that what is supposed to happen on paper doesn't always happen in real life. Hint, hint: testers :D
 
fbxdan said:
What good is a theory if it doesn't work? Marxism doesn't work. And btw the theory is erronous. And how much do you know about your "father of your discipline"? I can tell you some things about him that are quite interesting to say the least.
Click to expand...

Before I address the first comment can I ask you why you put "father of my discipline" in quotations? Karl Marx is widely regarded as one of the first intellectuals who seperated Sociology from Philoshophy, specifically examining the place of any one individual in both his collective and epoch, and what effect that has on his concept of self. Considering I am a double Major in Sociology and Journalism and will graduate next year with a 4.0, I know quite a bit about Marx bro. But thank you for your concern on trying to educate me on him.

You said that you have read the books, but did you actually ingest what was contained within it? I ask because you keep referring to Marxism as if it has actually been achieved, when it never has. As I stated before the closest it came was during the Proletariat Revolution of Lenin, power was never turned to the people themselves-once again, error in the corruptibility of power, not the theory itself. I hope that will be the last time I have to say that.

If you want I can outline how horribly Democracy has failed given it's premise, as what we call Democracy today is a sorry excuse compared to the original intent.:thumbsup:
 
Invalid Link Removed

Oleg Kalugin, former chief of counterintelligence for the KGB, was once a major general who headed the KGB office in Washington. He was stripped of his rank and pension in 1990 after pushing for reforms in the KGB, and was subsequently convicted, in absentia, of high treason.

Excerpts from a recent interview with Al Eisele follow:


Communism's Fraud

Q: Do you have any regrets about your life as a spy?

A: No, none. I did my job well. I never cheated. I seriously served a cause I believed in. … I believed in communism. It was based on the best economic and philosophical theories. It was essentially rooted in Christianity, social justice, brotherhood, love of people, equality and freedom.

It turned out to be all slogans. It was discredited by a bloody and brutal and cheating [leadership].


Note: Given its track record of resulting in mass murder (20 million Russians, 20 million Chinese, 2 million Cambodians, countless wars that killed millions and millions more), and generations of destroyed lives in Eastern Europe, North Korea, China, it is safe to say, communism is one of the worst plaque to have visited upon humanity. All the excuses do not change its absolute disastrous record in real life experiment. All the whitewashing cannot change the bloody result.

Karl Marx was a mental masturbator who waxed philosophy with no real life knowledge to validate it, and the resulting Communism and socialism are pie in the sky unrealistic dream. When people tried to implement this pie in the sky philosophy of his, the result has been nothing but absolute disaster.
 
Mulletsoldier said:
If you want I can outline how horribly Democracy has failed given it's premise, as what we call Democracy today is a sorry excuse compared to the original intent.:thumbsup:
Click to expand...
This is because of the exact same reasons communism COMPLETELY FLOPPED. On paper v. real life are totally different. No matter how much research you do into a theoretical social structure, you'll never know how well it works until it is put into practice.

In adddition, we're not a "democracy". We're a democratic republic! There is a difference.

There is NO COMPARISON between the failures of communism and the failures of our democratic-republic. One is still a working form of government which has given birth to the some of the most powerful nations in the worlds history.
 
BioHazzard said:
Note: Given its track record of resulting in mass murder (20 million Russians, 20 million Chinese, 2 million Cambodians, countless wars that killed millions and millions more), and generations of destroyed lives in Eastern Europe, North Korea, China, it is safe to say, communism is one of the worst plaque to have visited upon humanity. All the excuses do not change its absolute disastrous record in real life experiment. All the whitewashing cannot change the bloody result.

Karl Marx was a mental masturbator who waxed philosophy with no real life knowledge to validate it, and the resulting Communism and socialism are pie in the sky unrealistic dream. When people tried to implement this pie in the sky philosophy of his, the result has been nothing but absolute disaster.
Click to expand...

Wow. This blatant disregard for what I have said repeatedly over the past 2 pages about how what was put into practice was not Communism is not worth retort.

To what's bolded, I am not even going to comment.
 
kwyckemynd00 said:
This is because of the exact same reasons communism COMPLETELY FLOPPED. On paper v. real life are totally different. No matter how much research you do into a theoretical social structure, you'll never know how well it works until it is put into practice.

In adddition, we're not a "democracy". We're a democratic republic! There is a difference.

There is NO COMPARISON between the failures of communism and the failures of our democratic-republic. One is still a working form of government which has given birth to the some of the most powerful nations in the worlds history.
Click to expand...

Exactly, so you telling me that Communism though it never existed in it's true form completely flopped is a self defeating comment. You are completely right, we cannot know how well Communism would have worked because it was never carried out.

If I am not mistaken this is the 10th time I have said this, and it feels like I am speaking to myself, regurgitating the same intellectual debate and having it thrown back at me with the same disregard.

On the note of our democratic republic, I am not contained within that republic as I am Canadian, and was not referring to the United States in anyway, just democracy as a whole given the purpose of it's inception.

On the note of one being a functional form of government, though I do not acknowledge what they believe as true Communism China's officially still carries "Communism" as it's official doctrine and they will undoubtedly be the world's economic superpower in 10-15 years. Granted, that is not the Communism I have been referring to, yet the "Communism" you guys keep referring to, which I guess actually proves my point better.
 
Well a semi-rational voice at this moment. I'm going to chime in and remind us all how the ones debating right now are friends. Politics and religion etc can ruin those fast.

I'm gonna shut the thread down while I eat a sammitch and will open it up in a bit so everyone, including myself, has time to relax.

We're all friends here guys, even if a virtual reality kind. Words cut very easy when there's no body language or tone to soften their blow/meaning.
 
BioHazzard said:
Invalid Link Removed

Oleg Kalugin, former chief of counterintelligence for the KGB, was once a major general who headed the KGB office in Washington. He was stripped of his rank and pension in 1990 after pushing for reforms in the KGB, and was subsequently convicted, in absentia, of high treason.

Excerpts from a recent interview with Al Eisele follow:


Communism's Fraud

Q: Do you have any regrets about your life as a spy?

A: No, none. I did my job well. I never cheated. I seriously served a cause I believed in. … I believed in communism. It was based on the best economic and philosophical theories. It was essentially rooted in Christianity, social justice, brotherhood, love of people, equality and freedom.

It turned out to be all slogans. It was discredited by a bloody and brutal and cheating [leadership].


Note: Given its track record of resulting in mass murder (20 million Russians, 20 million Chinese, 2 million Cambodians, countless wars that killed millions and millions more), and generations of destroyed lives in Eastern Europe, North Korea, China, it is safe to say, communism is one of the worst plaque to have visited upon humanity. All the excuses do not change its absolute disastrous record in real life experiment. All the whitewashing cannot change the bloody result.

Karl Marx was a mental masturbator who waxed philosophy with no real life knowledge to validate it, and the resulting Communism and socialism are pie in the sky unrealistic dream. When people tried to implement this pie in the sky philosophy of his, the result has been nothing but absolute disaster.
Click to expand...


What I find so hilarious about this, is that you quote an interview from a man that challenged how that "Communist" party was completely misrepresenting the teachings of Karl Marx.
 
Mulletsoldier said:
Exactly, so you telling me that Communism though it never existed in it's true form completely flopped is a self defeating comment. You are completely right, we cannot know how well Communism would have worked because it was never carried out.
Click to expand...
And it never will be. Unless we somehow resurrect Karl Marx and give him power over the world. That's the point. From what has been implemented, there is a clear division of success between communism and democracy (and democratic republics).

If I am not mistaken this is the 10th time I have said this, and it feels like I am speaking to myself, regurgitating the same intellectual debate and having it thrown back at me with the same disregard.
Click to expand...
And as I have stated, expecting it to be put into practice as is written on paper is ridiculous. It won't happen, and there is no guarantee of success even if it did. All we have to work with are the attempts at communism--all of which have failed the people horribly.

On the note of our democratic republic, I am not contained within that republic as I am Canadian, and was not referring to the United States in anyway, just democracy as a whole given the purpose of it's inception.
Click to expand...
My bad.

On the note of one being a functional form of government, though I do not acknowledge what they believe as true Communism China's officially still carries "Communism" as it's official doctrine and they will undoubtedly be the world's economic superpower in 10-15 years. Granted, that is not the Communism I have been referring to, yet the "Communism" you guys keep referring to, which I guess actually proves my point better.
Click to expand...
If it can beat off inflation, it is a possibility.

BUT, how are the people benifiting from this? Last I checked, the chinese people weren't exactly in tip-top condition.

And no, it doesn't better serve your point. IMO its just ignorant to assume that if Marx's works were put into practice everything would be fancy. Especially if you are basing that estimation off of the belief that because the tainted forms of communism China practice are semi-successful.

It would actually be the opposite, if one were to make such an assertion. A free market economy is not in agreement with Marx's hypothesis! China has been moving toward a semi-free market economy and with this change it has been have some major successes (no, its not totally free market yet). It had nothing to do with communism.
 
Mulletsoldier said:
What I find so hilarious about this, is that you quote an interview from a man that challenged how that "Communist" party was completely misrepresenting the teachings of Karl Marx.
Click to expand...
That guy never specifically stated that he was referring to the USSR's form of communism. He said "communism". And, he never once brought up Marx. But, it could be argued (for and against) that he personally was misrepresenting the teachings of Marx when he brings up such things as christianity, etc. But, Marx also did not regard Christianity and religion in general as an enemy to communism! He was often sympathetic toward religious peoples, so in theory Marx's teachings were not totally incompatible with religion.

If you take his words at face value, instead of reading between the lines, he simply said that the theory of communism was discredited after its implementation.

Did he misspeak? Possibly. But, there is no indication in what was written that he did so. You are reading between the lines. If you read the entire article you would probably come to the conclusion that although its "possible" he misspoke, its "improbable":

The Ignorant and Envious Hate America

Q: You sound like an American politician.

A: I was interviewed by a major Russian newspaper two weeks ago, Commerzant. The first question was, “Why do you hate America?” I said, “I love America.” They asked, “How come everyone hates America?” I said: “Because of their ignorance. They do not know America and American history, or they may be envious. Envy and ignorance create hostility.”

I said: “America has created a society which may be the model for the world. It’s not perfect; you have all the contradictions and conflicts. But it’s allowed millions of people of all beliefs and religious views to come together and live in peace, and created a powerful and viable America.”

Q: Are you optimistic about the future of U.S.-Russian relations?

A: In the long term, yes. Russia today is too weak to compete. Russia has an obsolete industrial base. Almost 80 percent of its manufacturing base is obsolete.

There’s a huge opportunity for the United States to invest in Russia. America has great potential to help in reconstruction of that base. Russia has 143 million people, and they have one-and-a-half-million computers. There are no phones 50 miles outside Moscow. We need the United States.
Click to expand...

On a side note: I'm not trying to bash Marx or theoretical communism. I thought Marx was a classic character. Communism is, in essence, as close as we'll ever get to utopian society and IMO human nature and utopian society don't mix. I remember when I watched the Matrix I and Morpheus talked to Neo about the first matrix being a utopian society, but the humans rejected it. I was lmao when i heard that b/c it is exactly what I have always believed.

Just look at human society at its most basic structure...the family. If families can't get along and work together, how the hell can 6.5 billion people?
 
Last edited:
Mulletsoldier said:
....we cannot know how well Communism would have worked because it was never carried out. .....
Click to expand...

And it will never be tried again, because every where it has been tried, it has produced nothing but absolute disaster and mass murder. You can chew your lips till their bleed and it still won't change a thing. It doesn't matter what a pie in the sky you claim it to be, communism and socialism has produced nothing but brutality, stupidity and catastrophy. It doesn't matter how you claim the real communism has never been tried. Don't bother, it has been tried, and it has gone off track every time. 100% disaster. What a record. May be you should spend your effort in enlightening yourself as to why on the way to your pie in the sky, communism and socialism have always (100% track record) detoured to hell instead. And less effort on trying to impress us as to how smart you think you are. That's right. Does it ever occur to you that when there is a 100% track record of absolute failure, that there may be something wrong with it? That's right, Mr GPA 4.00. (I have a Masters degree, double majored in Finance and Economics, from one of the top institutions in the States. Graduated with distinction. Yeah, that's right. Come to flaunt your GPA after you have finished graduate school, Mr Journalism major. ) There is an inherent flaw in Communism and socialism. It has been discovered. Let's see if you are smart enough to tell us what it is.
 
Mulletsoldier said:
What I find so hilarious about this, is that you quote an interview from a man that challenged how that "Communist" party was completely misrepresenting the teachings of Karl Marx.
Click to expand...
You obviously don't read very well. Stop trying to impress people as to how smart you think you are. Then may be you can focus on reading comprehension.
 
kwyckemynd00 said:
.....If you take his words at face value, instead of reading between the lines, he simply said that the theory of communism was discredited after its implementation....
Click to expand...
That is exactly correct. The whole point is, where ever and when ever communism and socialism have been put to practice, the controlled economy model has always, not some times or often, but ALWAYS, gone off track and went to hell, causing untold misery and produced nothing but absolute catastrophy.

The question is, what is inherently wrong in communism that resulted in a 100% track record of going off track and went to hell instead of reaching the pie in the sky utopia.

You can't just say 'Well, the real communism has never been implemented". DUH! It has been tried, repeatedly, and went off track every time. The question is, what that is so! What is inherently wrong with this ideology that its implementation record has been a 100% disaster.

I will let our Mr GPA 4.00 Journalism major enlighten us on this. :D :D :lol: :lol:

May be all the commies have all been fvcking braindead that they didn't know what real communism is. Yeah, may be they fvcked up and didn't get 4.0 GPA from Journalism school.....


P.S. Got to spread some rep point before repping KW.. :lol: I got your msg. :lol: That's right. Who the hell need your school? Piece of cake, huh? :lol:
 
This thread has gone from discussion on Nazi and the Holocaust to the failure of communism..... Talk about going off track....
 
BioHazzard said:
And it will never be tried again, because every where it has been tried, it has produced nothing but absolute disaster and mass murder. You can chew your lips till their bleed and it still won't change a thing. It doesn't matter what a pie in the sky you claim it to be, communism and socialism has produced nothing but brutality, stupidity and catastrophy. It doesn't matter how you claim the real communism has never been tried. Don't bother, it has been tried, and it has gone off track every time. 100% disaster. What a record. May be you should spend your effort in enlightening yourself as to why on the way to your pie in the sky, communism and socialism have always (100% track record) detoured to hell instead. And less effort on trying to impress us as to how smart you think you are. That's right. Does it ever occur to you that when there is a 100% track record of absolute failure, that there may be something wrong with it? That's right, Mr GPA 4.00. (I have a Masters degree, double majored in Finance and Economics, from one of the top institutions in the States. Graduated with distinction. Yeah, that's right. Come to flaunt your GPA after you have finished graduate school, Mr Journalism major. ) There is an inherent flaw in Communism and socialism. It has been discovered. Let's see if you are smart enough to tell us what it is.
Click to expand...

The GPA comment was to another poster who was going to "teach me" about Marx. Soc. is one of my majors and have learned a little more than I would like to about him. Not too flaunt it, ass. I am proud for you, apparently your degrees did not teach you any sense of maturity.

Discovered? Did you discover it two pages back when I stated it in retort to fbxdan? It is possible that in your childish posts you didn't digest my points in favour of insulting my major's and education, that is fine. I will concede, as I did before, utopianism and pure egalitarianism are not achievable, so in it's very purest form Marx's teachings could not be realized. Yet, my entire argument that what has been represented is a sorry excuse for Communism, and I believe that a better representation is possible.

You are a child, that is pretty clear.
 
Last edited:
To anybody that treated me with respect during this debate, thankyou. To Biohazzard, it is unfortunate you decided to insult my Major's and Education like a child. I am done with this thread.
 
Wow... a workable communism is not achievable. Ain't that an oxymoron? How the hell is something workable if it is not achievable? What kind of bullsh1t is that? See what I mean when I said Marx was a mental masturbator who waxed useless philosophy?

But guess what? You tried but didn't get it right. The reason communism has a 100% failure rate is not b/c of some bullsh1t ideas about egaritariansim or utopian. It is something else. Wanna try again? :D

P.S. No body insulted your education. You throw it around as if it has any real significance. You tried to imply that you know better about communism because you have gone to college for a couple of years. I just pointed out to you that, it means nothing. Nothing wrong with a journalism major and everything to be proud of a high GPA. But that doesn't make you an expert on communism or anything else for that matter. You have a bright future, but you have a long way to go. And you are only at the beginning. You may feel insulted, but that is the brutal reality you are actually in, whether you like it or not.
 
If people want to learn about how and why communism fails, there is a good book.

Invalid Link Removed

Happy reading!

With that, we should get back on track. :D
 
Well, this is an interesting topic. I think far too much of this is based on biased speculation and rather dubious historical evidence. Did Adolf Hitler hate the Jews? Yes. The question is why? The political and social motivations of Hitler are too often simplified or brushed off as the work of a madman. In fact, he was a brilliant speaker and followed a train of rational thought.

Through his writings and personal conversations, it becomes clear that this is a man who was an extreme patriot and nationalist. His goal was not to kill the world but to gain for Germany what England had beforehand: an empire upon which the sun never sets. Removing the racial sentiments of his tenure, what you find in the NSDAP's guidelines are pragmatic and solid nationalist goals with concise reasoning. Hitler believed that Communism was the great evil that must be eradicated. He also knew that post-WWI Germany was in a position of weakness and in order to challenge Stalin's growing empire he would need time. Time for his army to grow strong. He was greatly focused on German women bearing children, because he knew when managed correctly, his country's strength would grow proportionately to its population. He saw himself surrounded by threats, by enemies waiting for the right moment to bring their fist down on his homeland. He initially believed that England would choose to ally with him against the threat of France and later, of Russia. Later, he felt that England merely needed defeat at German hands because they had never been soundly defeated on their home soil and it would discourage them from further hostility and arrogance. He even stated that it was not his goal to rule England, merely to change its political stance. The great difference between Hitler's National Socialism and Stalin's Soviet Socialism can be summed up as that Hitler believed that if he fed his people well, they would repay him in loyalty and Stalin believed that if he starved his people, they would be forced to obey him.

Miles away, at the same time as Hitler was gaining power in Germany, another man was rapidly implementing Communist organizations and laws, attempting to force his people to fully embrace the goals of Marxism. That man was Franklin Roosevelt. To say that the United States won World War II is a mistake. We didn't even go after our biggest threat. FDR didn't even want to. In fact, he did everything possible to let Eastern Europe fall right into Stalin's hands. For all of his politicizing and witch hunting, McCarthy was in many ways right. Read The Revolution Was written by Garret Garrett in 1938. The facts of the state of the world around 1940 are far more complex than most care to delve.
 
Thank God! Someone else who realizes FDR was a joke. The entire world sat back and watched as Germany and Japan grew to unbelievable proportions...the US and the rest of the world were FORCED to act.
 
While everyone seems to find it refreshing that someone else believes the way they do while also citing books and other literature for backing arguements. Did you all happen to find enlightenment on your own or through another of your view?
 
Independent studies, independent conclusion :) And, I've never found a source of historical information that was critical of the US and the Alliance (although the LON was criticized at length).

I was just reading tidbits here and there about WWII and eventually came to realize that FDR was a chump, the LON was a disaster (LON -> UN), and the entire alliance was a total joke. Millions of needless deaths could have potentially been spared with a little bit of proaction against the aggressors before they built great momentum. But, as they say...history is written by the victors (despite their shortcomings).

I think Winston Churchill was the only guy who actually "got it" while the rest of the world focused on a "open appeasement" or a "neutral stance" (aka silent appeasement).
 
My reason for posting that Kwyk was that too many people forget that they too had a change of sight and it usually came from another source and not from you just waking up one morning and having a lightbulb go off.

Wording and tone can go a long way when trying to share a point of view. FDR was a HACK!!! While it may be completely true isn't going too far in opening other's ears.
 
WWII didn't exactly end in total victory. Patton was right. It just ended with the beginning of mass enslavement of several generations of Eastern Europeans. It also planted the seeds for the Vietnam war which costed 50000 American casualties. So, yeah, FDR was a hack.
 
Jayhawkk said:
Damn it, wrong thread!
Click to expand...
WTF?! I said people should just go read that if they wanted to study the failure of communism, AND we can get back on track, with the original topic. What do you think 'on track' means? Which track could that possibly be? lol
 
BioHazzard said:
Wow... a workable communism is not achievable. Ain't that an oxymoron? How the hell is something workable if it is not achievable? What kind of bullsh1t is that? See what I mean when I said Marx was a mental masturbator who waxed useless philosophy?

But guess what? You tried but didn't get it right. The reason communism has a 100% failure rate is not b/c of some bullsh1t ideas about egaritariansim or utopian. It is something else. Wanna try again? :D

P.S. No body insulted your education. You throw it around as if it has any real significance. You tried to imply that you know better about communism because you have gone to college for a couple of years. I just pointed out to you that, it means nothing. Nothing wrong with a journalism major and everything to be proud of a high GPA. But that doesn't make you an expert on communism or anything else for that matter. You have a bright future, but you have a long way to go. And you are only at the beginning. You may feel insulted, but that is the brutal reality you are actually in, whether you like it or not.
Click to expand...


Last comment off track Jay, I promise. Now that you are actually being mature I will be too. Go back and read my posts. Not just one, or part of one, all of them. I have talked about how power was never restored fully to the people, how "Communism" was always stuck in the Proletariat Dictatorship, and I think I mentioned about three times the corrupting force of absolute power.


And I have read Orwell lots bro. He's my fav. author..Do you want to try again?

:D
 
Mulletsoldier said:
Last comment off track Jay, I promise. Now that you are actually being mature I will be too. Go back and read my posts. Not just one, or part of one, all of them. I have talked about how power was never restored fully to the people, how "Communism" was always stuck in the Proletariat Dictatorship, and I think I mentioned about three times the corrupting force of absolute power.


And I have read Orwell lots bro. He's my fav. author..Do you want to try again?

:D
Click to expand...
Don't patronize me, young man. I am old enough to order you to your room. :D

I have lived in a country that has fought and won against communist insurgency. No offense, but I seriously doubt a college kid has anything of value to enlighten me on topics such as communism. Not to be rude, I am really not interested in what you think you may know about communism and certainly would not be inclined to "Go back and read my posts. Not just one, or part of one, all of them".

But I do like to argue, sometimes and when I am bored. :D :D

Sorry, I am sure this is not what you like to hear.

You throw out these cool little chic concepts like "Communism in its purest form is utopia", "Utopia and egalitarianism is not achievable", and "absolute power corrupts"... Well.. that is all good. But why? How? Why wouldn't it work? How can an ideology that worships, promotes and dedicates itself to the establishment of egalitarianism always goes off track into 'absolute power'? Doesn't that sound contradictory? Why is that so? Why is 'absolute power' even there in the first place, when the whole ideology is based on egalitarianism? What has communist system always brought rise to tyranny? What is the inherent fatal flaw in the system that results in this tendency? Please don't just say 'oh yeah, somebody didn't return the power to the people'? It is not that simple. B/c, the next question is, 'Why didn't the people take the power then?" :D Afterall, it is always 'the people's revolution" to be begin with. For a high school essay, that may do. But you are not in high school anymore.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top