Communism

[Walsingham]

There's a 0.78 correlation between communism and bottom size. Just look at the bushmen of the Kalahari.

[Moose]

You can't force civilization on people, it can destroy their religous values

That was pretty rich.

 

Let's have a bit of mental gymnastics. If forcing civilization on people can destroy their religious values, that means religion and civilization are incompatible, since we also know that an integral part of civilization is tolerance to the values and ideas of others. Diversity of values and ideas actually enriches civilization. Following this, the only possible incompatibilities with civilization arise from barbaric practices.

 

So, the conclusion derived from that statement is that religion equals barbarism?

 

You are a genius.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

lol, five star post

[Pidesco]

Numbers man for the win!

[ShadowPaladin V1.0]

So, the conclusion derived from that statement is that religion equals barbarism?

 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

[astr0creep]

Kinda is, their pushing the middle east to the limit, their looking for a fight not to mention their hidden Agenda with India.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

How do you know about their hidden agenda? It's hidden!

[Elven6]

You can't force civilization on people, it can destroy their religous values

That was pretty rich.

 

Let's have a bit of mental gymnastics. If forcing civilization on people can destroy their religious values, that means religion and civilization are incompatible, since we also know that an integral part of civilization is tolerance to the values and ideas of others. Diversity of values and ideas actually enriches civilization. Following this, the only possible incompatibilities with civilization arise from barbaric practices.

 

So, the conclusion derived from that statement is that religion equals barbarism?

 

You are a genius.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Thats taken care of in Communism

 

I hate to pick on America but their a good example, they have a ton of hate groups their spreading their message, so why dosen't the government do something? Is it because you value your constitution too much?

 

Btw when your making comments like that at me even when I told you this is a neutral discuassion which means the debaters dont have to be what they are you still attack me.

[Elven6]

Mabye you should tell your government your not their slave, thing for your self for a change

 

Well im gonna go sleep so we can probably pick this up tommrow

 

 

Edit: Before I go my dad went to the USSR and he said the people their were happy, in fact they sang songs in Hindi while waiting for their train.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I'm not my government's slave. We are a DEMOCRACY. We have freedoms. We are allowed to think for ourselves, unlike the Soviet Union where having a different opinion could get you killed. We don't get shot or sent to prison camps for speaking out against our government. We aren't like North Korea, where one could get punished for a crime his or her parents committed. See, over here we do have freedom, contrary to what your media might spoonfeed you over there.

 

As for your father's visit to the USSR, the Soviet Union was a colossal collection of countries, so you can't judge it all by one personal experience. And if he went to it during the 1980's, then it was during its revolutionary years where the peoples of the USSR were just experiencing new freedoms. I'd also like to know where exactly he went, seeing as Hindi is spoken in India, not Russia or the USSR. And even if it wasn't during the 1980's, people under brutal governments live in fear. The Iraqis did the same thing before the fall of Saddam Hussein - supporting and celebrating him in front of cameras. But deep down, they all hated him. But they did not publicly denounce him because they feared for their lives.

 

And maybe if it was such a bastion of happiness, then there wouldn't have been a flood of people leaving it after the fall of the Berlin wall. Or maybe there wouldn't have been a flood of writers denouncing Communism and the government after freedom of speech and the press was finally allowed! Maybe you should talk to a relative of someone who was killed under Stalin's rule or one of the millions killed under Mao Tse Tung during China's communist revolution. You've basically defended Communism and the USSR to the point of ignoring facts, or just plain denying them! You haven't even been able to back up a single one of your claims. The best you've done is "well my daddy told me..." and "well, there was this one time, I can't remember, but there was this one law..." Honestly, if you're going to argue your point, you'll have to do a lot better than that.

 

*end rant mode*

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Your still refering to Stalin, thats pathetic that proves you can't do anything without Stailin, without him you would have no argument.

 

 

astr0creep- In 1960 they gave Pakistan weapons weapons which would be used to kill Indians, India retaleated by alling the USSR which pissed America off.

 

So why have the Americans returned

Edited March 17, 2006 by Elven6

[astr0creep]

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

 

astr0creep- In 1960 they gave Pakistan weapons weapons which would be used to kill Indians, India retaleated by alling the USSR which pissed America off.

 

So why have the Americans returned

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

They also put Saddam in power to counter the Ayatolah in Iran and gave him the weapons of mass destruction he needed to do the job. Only he never used them for the purpose the US expected.

Or so I heard.

 

The point is though, if you know about it, it's not a hidden agenda now is it?

[metadigital]

There's a 0.78 correlation between communism and bottom size. Just look at the bushmen of the Kalahari.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I was wondering when someone was going to notice that ... does this mean that the US is on the cusp of a communist revolution? :ph34r:

[Chupacabra]

I'm not my government's slave.  We are a DEMOCRACY.  We have freedoms.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Though you are clearly the slave of the flying menace.

 

Btw, Mao didn't kill millions during the Communist Revolution. (His Red Army was fighting the Japanese occupational forces first and then the very corrupt nationalists party. I don't think the causalties his army inflicted accounted to millions since he barely had one million soldiers at the start of the Chinese Civil War.)

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Yes. You'll note that I was careful to say those who were killed "under Mao" instead of "by Mao". I'm aware that Mao did not personally order all those millions of deaths, which number somewhere in the 70+million. Poverty being a big reason, as sometimes it was so bad people were forced to eat their own children. But my point is that you could say he was a great man because he may have had a desire to help his country, but at what cost does it become unacceptable?

 

Well, I agree with you...but we're a REPUBLIC, not a democracy.  "

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Technically we are a "democratic republic". The people don't decide on everything, but we do have some say in the government aside from who's elected and who's not. And last time I checked, speaking out against the government does not get one shot, nor do protests get dispersed by tanks, as in Tiananmen Square.

 

Your still refering to Stalin, thats pathetic that proves you can't do anything without Stailin, without him you would have no argument.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Um, unless you didn't even read my post, I was referring to more than just Stalin. And the collapse of the Berlin Wall, which I'm hoping you knew, did not occur during Stalin's time. But okay, how about Vladimir Lenin, the man you seem to hold so highly? Or Leon Trotsky, his right hand man, or Fidel Castro, or Kim Jong Il or his father Kim Il Sung? Both of whom are regarded as two of the worst dictators of recent times? I'm still waiting to hear how your father heard them speaking Hindi in the Soviet Union.

[kirottu]

LOL u post had word stalin in it. U lose. LOL

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

FIXED!

[Lucius]

How can you not like a dictator who does his hair like this?

 

C'mon, Jongie-il is a hoot.

[213374U]

Thats taken care of in Communism

Sorry, I don't think that makes sense as a reply to what I wrote. You'll have to try again.

 

 

I hate to pick on America but their a good example, they have a ton of hate groups their spreading their message, so why dosen't the government do something? Is it because you value your constitution too much?

No. It's because suppressing certain groups' civil liberties arbitrarily puts the status quo at risk. And since the main function of any government is to maintain the status quo, it would be counterproductive to do so if one weighs the potential destabilization said groups can cause, against the effects random suppression of civil liberties can have.

 

 

Btw when your making comments like that at me even when I told you this is a neutral discuassion which means the debaters dont have to be what they are you still attack me.

I'm fine with you playing devil's advocate, or taking on any persona you desire. That doesn't grant you a Papal bull to write nonsense, so you shouldn't expect people not to call you on it when you do just because this is a "neutral discussion".

[Fionavar]

/civility'o'meter -15!

 

Play nice all and don't throw sand ...

[Craigboy2]

Ok basiclly all forums you go to will have a topic like this but Obsidan does not lol

 

So 1 side argues on the Communist side (You don't have to be communist to argue) Or the "American side" (Don't have to be Democratic either).

 

If you wanna debate don't post stupid things like "Communism is evil because my government told me". If your going to do that come back when you are civilized enought to have a conversation in soceity.

 

Ok someone start a argument and we can begin

 

(No im not communist, im netural on the whole thing since no system is perfect)

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Corruption screwa up both.

[Craigboy2]

How can you not like a dictator who does his hair like this?

 

C'mon, Jongie-il is a hoot.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I can picture him saying "Haaaaaaaaaayyyyy" and hitting a record player.

[~Di]

America has to many dreams, like Manifest Destiny and most of them are undoable

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

? I don't understand, what "dreams" do you consider "undoable?" Actually, the "American Dream" was a phrase coined in the 1950's, IIRC, to describe the emerging middle class, who owned a home, a car, and had 2.5 children. Europeans seem to have given the term their own meaning, which I'll confess I don't totally understand.

 

Anyway, America is about opportunity, not absolutes. Not everyone who works hard will succeed or reach their own goals. Life isn't like that. However, America... and frankly a good many other nations as well... offers a society that provides opportunities and choices to its citizens. People are able to make choices, select goals, and work toward those goals. For the most part, effort is rewarded. Those who work hard usually have more than those who do not.

 

Communism, in its purest form, does not reward effort. The lazy bum who picks lint out of his navel will be given exactly the same lifestyle as the energetic, hard-working person beside him. Ownership of anything, from land to products to living quarters, belongs to the government. The government alone distributes these things so that in theory, everyone has exactly the same thing... no more, no less than anyone else. This supposedly removes envy and greed; but it also removes incentive. The lack of societal incentive is, in my opinion, one of the main reasons that pure communism is doomed to collapse in upon itself, and fail.

[~Di]

...They also put Saddam in power to counter the Ayatolah in Iran and gave him the weapons of mass destruction he needed to do the job. Only he never used them for the purpose the US expected.

Or so I heard.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Small correction here, for accuracy. America never put Saddam in power. He put himself in power by overthrowing his boss, whom he later had executed. Over a decade AFTER that, during Iraq's war with Iran, America did indeed give arms to Iraq (as did a whole bunch of European nations). America and Europe did that because Iran's new Ayatollah government was alarming, to say the least... and America in particular was pissed with Iran because it had invaded our embassy, kidnapped our diplomats and held them hostage for over a year.

 

But America never had a thing to do with Saddam coming to power. Period.

[~Di]

I don't really mean to pick on you, but I do have some questions and comments about some of your statements.

 

America trained Bin Laden and Al Quedia to fight the Soviet troops in Afganistan

 

Again, that's rather inaccurate. During the 1980's Afghan/Soviet war, Muslims from many nations flooded in to fight. The opposition to the Soviets were called the Mujahadeen. Al Qaeda didn't even exist, and bin Laden was just one of thousands of outside fighters in that country... albeit probably the richest one! America didn't know him from Adam at that point, and supplied weapons to all of the Mujahadeen, foreign and domestic, to assist them in repelling the Soviet invasion. Again, so did many other European countries. Bin Laden never had a problem with America until the Gulf War, when America allied with bin Laden's mortal enemies, the Saudi royal family, and placed American/Infidel boots on the ground in Saudi Arabia. That is when Al Qaeda as we now know it was formed.

 

 

Shadow, Americans torture Rebels, they shoot bystanders

 

If that was supposed to be funny... it isn't. If it was supposed to be serious, then your credibility has taken a big hit.

 

 

Look at what America did with Iraq, they forced Democracy on them and it caused riots and bombings

 

Absolutely accurate and true.

 

For all you American posters if Communism is pathetic why did it make your presidents shake in their boots

 

Well, for one reason because the Soviets claimed that they intended to destroy us. Kruschev even beat his shoe at the UN to prove it! But primarily, the goal of communism was global domination, and the overthrow of all democratic governments, including our own. Surely you wouldn't expect us to take that with particular good grace, now would you?

 

Before I go my dad went to the USSR and he said the people their were happy, in fact they sang songs in Hindi while waiting for their train

 

Aww, that's sweet. I went to New York City once, and saw people playing music and dancing in the subway stations. Therefore, I must logically conclude that all 290 million Americans are happy!

 

...Kinda is, their pushing the middle east to the limit, their looking for a fight not to mention their hidden Agenda with India. ... In 1960 they gave Pakistan weapons weapons which would be used to kill Indians, India retaleated by alling the USSR which pissed America off.

 

Could you explain this, please? Not doubting you, it's just that I've never heard of this before and wondered if you could expand upon the situation, and perhaps offer a link or two that I could use to educate myself. Thanks.

[Elven6]

I'm not my government's slave.  We are a DEMOCRACY.  We have freedoms.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Though you are clearly the slave of the flying menace.

 

Btw, Mao didn't kill millions during the Communist Revolution. (His Red Army was fighting the Japanese occupational forces first and then the very corrupt nationalists party. I don't think the causalties his army inflicted accounted to millions since he barely had one million soldiers at the start of the Chinese Civil War.)

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Yes. You'll note that I was careful to say those who were killed "under Mao" instead of "by Mao". I'm aware that Mao did not personally order all those millions of deaths, which number somewhere in the 70+million. Poverty being a big reason, as sometimes it was so bad people were forced to eat their own children. But my point is that you could say he was a great man because he may have had a desire to help his country, but at what cost does it become unacceptable?

 

Well, I agree with you...but we're a REPUBLIC, not a democracy.  "

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Technically we are a "democratic republic". The people don't decide on everything, but we do have some say in the government aside from who's elected and who's not. And last time I checked, speaking out against the government does not get one shot, nor do protests get dispersed by tanks, as in Tiananmen Square.

 

Your still refering to Stalin, thats pathetic that proves you can't do anything without Stailin, without him you would have no argument.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Um, unless you didn't even read my post, I was referring to more than just Stalin. And the collapse of the Berlin Wall, which I'm hoping you knew, did not occur during Stalin's time. But okay, how about Vladimir Lenin, the man you seem to hold so highly? Or Leon Trotsky, his right hand man, or Fidel Castro, or Kim Jong Il or his father Kim Il Sung? Both of whom are regarded as two of the worst dictators of recent times? I'm still waiting to hear how your father heard them speaking Hindi in the Soviet Union.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

 

Lol they were having a conversation in Hindi I can't make it clearer then that can I

 

How can you call Trotsky and Lenin dictators? I mean after Bloody Sunday people found out Communism could be a good decision. After Stalin there weren't "true" dictators.

 

True meaning mass killings, etc

 

Edit: Whats with these personal attacks? Stupid Americans!

Edited March 17, 2006 by Elven6

[Lucius]

Where are you from anyway?

 

And note, a lot of the posters here are actually europeans as well.

[Elven6]

I live in Canada, live in America before, my origins are Indian not red but brown lol

 

Since Americans have a big hatred to people who utter the words Communism I infered ha

 

If you read my first post did I not say be mature and YOU DON'T HAVE TO IDOLIZE THE SYSTEM YOU DEBATE! Like I said I am netural because no system is perfect thats no reason for you to attack me

[LoneWolf16]

Well, I agree with you...but we're a REPUBLIC, not a democracy.  "

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Technically we are a "democratic republic". The people don't decide on everything, but we do have some say in the government aside from who's elected and who's not. And last time I checked, speaking out against the government does not get one shot, nor do protests get dispersed by tanks, as in Tiananmen Square.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

The Chinese aren't really a Republic. There's damn near zero "choice" there. When given two candidates who are the same, and are all about the exact same things...it's only the illusion of choice, nothing more.

 

And I know we're a democratic republic, leaning more toward the latter. Just felt the need to annoy.

[Elven6]

Well, I agree with you...but we're a REPUBLIC, not a democracy.  "

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Technically we are a "democratic republic". The people don't decide on everything, but we do have some say in the government aside from who's elected and who's not. And last time I checked, speaking out against the government does not get one shot, nor do protests get dispersed by tanks, as in Tiananmen Square.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

The Chinese aren't really a Republic. There's damn near zero "choice" there. When given two candidates who are the same, and are all about the exact same things...it's only the illusion of choice, nothing more.

 

And I know we're a democratic republic, leaning more toward the latter. Just felt the need to annoy.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Duh their Communist

[LoneWolf16]

No they're not. Socialist. Not Communist.

Edited March 17, 2006 by LoneWolf16