Unit 731

[Walsingham]

I knew there had to be an anti-US agit-prop in there somewhere.

Is it propaganda if it's true?

 

It's obviously inferior if it's true. You may want to read up a bit on the history of the Spanish civil war. No doubt you will find it a glorious, knee-trembling account of heroic communist activity.

[lord of flies]

It's obviously inferior if it's true. You may want to read up a bit on the history of the Spanish civil war. No doubt you will find it a glorious, knee-trembling account of heroic communist activity.

Yeah, I will, since it is.

[Gorgon]

I think we, whoever that is in this instance, may be arrogant in only thinking that Ze Germans and the Japs could be so servile and unquestioning as to allow a ruthless fascist dictatorship to literally ruin the country with war. It could happen anywhere, and the lesson is to be on guard for it, always.

[alanschu]

Must be, because both 100K and 100C would be very bad to put your feet in, on two separate ends of the scale.

 

 

science joke!

 

 

It can't be Kelvin. Kelvin aren't measured as a degree

[Gorgon]

The reconciliation between Japan and the US after WW2 was quick, which was a good thing (since you wouldn't have wanted a "treaty of Versailles"), but admittedly there were lots of crimes that were allowed to slip away unpunished. Germany was of course more harshly treated, but because of the partition of Germany it's not really possible to compare the two countries here. Also, I believe the Sino-Japanese war was fought with far more civilian casualties than WW2 in Europe (minus the Soviet Union). I'd say that we should look forward and be happy that Japan currently has no belligerent tendencies.

It's a bit strange to me that it wasn't 'off with the head' for the emperor. When the king plays along with the wrong regime it has had that effect time and again. Fortunately the Japanese have taken to the post war constitution, and are the least worry in that region.

[Walsingham]

I think we, whoever that is in this instance, may be arrogant in only thinking that Ze Germans and the Japs could be so servile and unquestioning as to allow a ruthless fascist dictatorship to literally ruin the country with war. It could happen anywhere, and the lesson is to be on guard for it, always.

 

NO! Go back to sleep. Everything is fine.

[alanschu]

I knew there had to be an anti-US agit-prop in there somewhere.

Is it propaganda if it's true?

 

It's obviously inferior if it's true. You may want to read up a bit on the history of the Spanish civil war. No doubt you will find it a glorious, knee-trembling account of heroic communist activity.

 

 

Why do that, when you can just examine the utter failures of North Korea, China, and the Soviet Union, and pretty much all of Eastern Europe!

Edited September 7, 2009 by alanschu

[lord of flies]

Why do that, when you can just examine the utter failures of North Korea, China, and the Soviet Union, and pretty much all of Eastern Europe!

Pathetic. You can't really think that those nations are all worse than their successors/predecessors, right? I mean, the fall of the USSR alone ****ed up everything in the east, and the only country which is actually better in the post-Soviet era is Romania.

[Purkake]

I think we, whoever that is in this instance, may be arrogant in only thinking that Ze Germans and the Japs could be so servile and unquestioning as to allow a ruthless fascist dictatorship to literally ruin the country with war. It could happen anywhere, and the lesson is to be on guard for it, always.

 

It's called buying into the hype.

 

Why do that, when you can just examine the utter failures of North Korea, China, and the Soviet Union, and pretty much all of Eastern Europe!

Pathetic. You can't really think that those nations are all worse than their successors/predecessors, right? I mean, the fall of the USSR alone ****ed up everything in the east, and the only country which is actually better in the post-Soviet era is Romania.

 

Why does everyone always feel the need to crap on Eastern Europe? It was pretty much under Soviet Unions direct military control, the Baltic states were actually a part of it. Estonia is doing pretty well thank you very much.

[alanschu]

No, I don't think that things are better off now.

 

However, I'm less inclined to believe the propaganda that the reason why they're ****ed up now is based purely because they are no longer communist. With the Soviet Union no longer able (or willing) to exert their extreme influence in the region, it's no surprise that the nations that were pretty much no better than puppets of a different state didn't seamlessly transition out of it.

 

 

Perhaps...you know....they're still reeling from the aftermath of being communist. I do believe that they'll recover in time though. Heck, Purkake has even indicated so. It's not like they have generations of living under a completely different socioeconomic climate to overcome or anything.

 

 

EDIT: Purkake, just to be clear, my "crapping" of the Eastern European nations is more just commentary that they were communist because they pretty much had no choice in the matter. Ol' SU wouldn't have had it any other way.

Edited September 7, 2009 by alanschu

[Purkake]

EDIT: Purkake, just to be clear, my "crapping" of the Eastern European nations is more just commentary that they were communist because they pretty much had no choice in the matter. Ol' SU wouldn't have had it any other way.

 

Yes and at least some of them are way better off now, you know like real developed countries n stuff.

[lord of flies]

No, I don't think that things are better off now.

 

However, I'm less inclined to believe the propaganda that the reason why they're ****ed up now is based purely because they are no longer communist. With the Soviet Union no longer able (or willing) to exert their extreme influence in the region, it's no surprise that the nations that were pretty much no better than puppets of a different state didn't seamlessly transition out of it.

 

 

Perhaps...you know....they're still reeling from the aftermath of being communist. I do believe that they'll recover in time though. Heck, Purkake has even indicated so. It's not like they have generations of living under a completely different socioeconomic climate to overcome or anything.

People always pull this. It's been nearly twenty years since the collapse of the Soviet Union. In that time, the Russian Empire was destroyed, rebuilt twice over, and collapsed into civil war only to see Lenin emerge the victor, and then, the nation engaged in a policy of rapid industrialization on a hugely successful scale. What's the difference here?

[alanschu]

Yes and at least some of them are way better off now, you know like real developed countries n stuff.

 

Don't let the propagandists hear you say that!

 

 

 

in a policy of rapid industrialization on a hugely successful scale

 

It's impressive what can happen when National Unity is brought together in response to an aggressor (such as Germany). No doubt the same national unity helped Japan rebuild (in addition to assistance from the US).

 

Luckily for the Soviet Union, winter came.

Edited September 7, 2009 by alanschu

[lord of flies]

It's impressive what can happen when National Unity is brought together in response to an aggressor (such as Germany). No doubt the same national unity helped Japan rebuild (in addition to assistance from the US).

 

Luckily for the Soviet Union, winter came.

Stop swallowing this propaganda. The military of the USSR was without a doubt its weakest accomplishment, with the mass purges and all. Prior to WW2, there was little doubt in the west that the USSR was an emergent power. In 1937, it was the second industrial power in the world. It took over 20 years for the USSR to be plunged into the Great Patriotic War, and it was without a doubt brutalized. But, I remind you, it beat back the very same nation which conquered half of Europe, and which had previously broken the entirety of Russia over its leg (at the time significantly larger).

[Purkake]

Stop swallowing this propaganda. The military of the USSR was without a doubt its weakest accomplishment, with the mass purges and all. Prior to WW2, there was little doubt in the west that the USSR was an emergent power. In 1937, it was the second industrial power in the world. It took over 20 years for the USSR to be plunged into the Great Patriotic War, and it was without a doubt brutalized. But, I remind you, it beat back the very same nation which conquered half of Europe, and which had previously broken the entirety of Russia over its leg (at the time significantly larger).

 

The real lulz came when the Communist Party had a series of old, incompetent and corrupt leaders who died one after another and led to stagnation and eventually the collapse of the SU

Edited September 7, 2009 by Purkake

[lord of flies]

The real lulz came when the Communist Party had a series of old, incompetent and corrupt leaders who died one after another and led to stagnation and eventually the collapse of the SU

No, that was caused by its military overextending itself into Afghanistan, hardly a trait impossible to see in capitalist countries.

[Purkake]

It wasn't only that, their economic model was already suffering and because of the incompetent leadership the reforms that came were too little too late.

 

Gorbachev was pretty much handed a sinking ship and went down with it.

Edited September 7, 2009 by Purkake

[Walsingham]

Gentlemen, please. LoF has been quite clear on the matter. He doesn't recognise an inevitable connection between totalitarian rule and communism. He therefore doesn't recognise the inevitable abuse of power, laziness, and mismanagement which arises from (totalitarian) communism. It is senseless to pursue it further.

[Purkake]

Just because it pretty impossible to do in practice doesn't mean that the idea is inherently bad, it's just another pipe dream.

Edited September 7, 2009 by Purkake

[alanschu]

Stop swallowing this propaganda.

 

I will if you will. It's clear you're swallowing up just as much anti-capitalism propaganda as anyone else. Coupled with the poor rationalized excuses you make up to excuse your contributions to the capitalist system, it's comical.

 

 

Prior to WW2, there was little doubt in the west that the USSR was an emergent power. In 1937, it was the second industrial power in the world.

 

I actually know this, it's just fun to poke you. The 5 year plans did a great job of industrializing the state. It's just too bad that the people weren't the benefactors. The state was. Totalitarian regimes can be very efficient at improving industrial capacity in the short term (look at Germany too. They weren't communist, though they also saw the same rapid growth and rebuilding on the heels of the ridiculous Treaty of Versailles, and the total collapse of its economy by the Wiemar Republic). However, when collectivization comes at the cost of murdering and torturing your citizens, is it worth it? Oh wait, that's just propaganda too isn't it. Is it also just propaganda that Stalin forcibly took the land from the people, resulting in a famine in a world economy that was already being ravaged by The Great Depression?

 

 

But, I remind you, it beat back the very same nation which conquered half of Europe, and which had previously broken the entirety of Russia over its leg (at the time significantly larger).

 

You don't need to remind me about anything, least of all World War II information. The silver lining of Stalin's methods is that it did provide his nation with the industrial capacity to fight off Germany. Though make no mistake, the result of the World War 2 was a joint effort. Soviet Union would not have succeeded without assistance from the West, and the West wouldn't have succeeded without the grit and determination of the Soviet military. It certainly didn't hurt that the Soviet Union was able to focus construction on war materiel, while receiving foodstuffs and logistics from the United States via Lend-Lease, just like it didn't hurt the United States that the war was no where close to home. It was also fantastic of the Soviet Union to literally shift the bulk of their industrial base east.

 

The purges that you brought up though, extend far beyond the military though. It's too bad that Stalin figured that the people you champion from the 1917 revolution didn't need to live anymore. The second 5 year plan saw an increase in industrial output, but a decrease in standard of living. Isn't this what you dislike about those pesky capitalists?

[alanschu]

Just because it pretty impossible to do in practice doesn't mean that the idea is inherently bad

 

I agree. Unfortunately Marx was naive and genuinely believed that there'd be a withering of the state.

[lord of flies]

Gentlemen, please. LoF has been quite clear on the matter. He doesn't recognise an inevitable connection between totalitarian rule and communism. He therefore doesn't recognise the inevitable abuse of power, laziness, and mismanagement which arises from (totalitarian) communism. It is senseless to pursue it further.

Let me just, ah, make **** up here. Right, there we go. Why don't you offer a reason why "totalitarian rule" and communism are inevitably connected? Oh, right, because you can't.

[taks]

because, as long as humans have free will, there is no other way to get them to agree to the slavery that is communism other than through the force of totalitarian rule.

 

oops, guess you didn't think about that one good reason. you're really not that bright, are you?

 

taks

[lord of flies]

because, as long as humans have free will, there is no other way to get them to agree to the slavery that is communism other than through the force of totalitarian rule.

 

oops, guess you didn't think about that one good reason. you're really not that bright, are you?

 

taks

What the **** is this ****. Helping other people is slavery? Working on behalf of the state is slavery?

 

"Hurr, well, in a capitalist system you can choose from a wide variety of oppressors, all of whom have a vested interest in ****ing you in the ass. But more than one, eh!!!"

 

In the communist system, man works for the community. In the capitalist system, man works for the capitalist class. Which would you choose?

[Purkake]

I think this is the part where we back away slowly while avoiding direct eye contact.

Edited September 7, 2009 by Purkake