Ask me about Communism.

[Purkake]

Oh poor LoF, you'll never be able to sell communism as communism, the Soviet Union pretty much ruined it. You might want to repackage it as something cool.

 

Maybe "Extreme sharing 2000"?

[Zoraptor]

I have read an article in the local newspaper today that Communist government of China..

Really, the communist government of China is roughly as Communist as that of the Democratic People's Republic of Korea is democratic. ie it isn't. Totalitarian, for sure, it was communist in the past and the state retains a lot of controls but otherwise it's basically standard capitalism with private ownership, stock markets etc. They just haven't got around to rebranding the Communist out of their name yet.

[Walsingham]

Oh poor LoF, you'll never be able to sell communism as communism, the Soviet Union pretty much ruined it. You might want to repackage it as something cool.

 

Maybe "Extreme sharing 2000"?

 

 

Purkake wins. ROFLMAO. That's awesome. Can you rebrand any other defuinct philosophies? What about flat Earthers?

[Masterfade]

I'd love to hear LoF's opinion on the recent move by North Korea to wipe out most of its citizens personal savings through currency revaluation.

[213374U]

Hmm, okay, here, how many governments do you think lasted seventy years in the 20th century?

Why, the United States, of course. You know, the same US that finished the USSR off?

 

 

lol, yeah, massive draft armies rely on good economies. Thanks for the tip. The Soviet Union and Russia maintained huge draft based armies through all of this somehow. You can try to resort to your moon bat logic where a bad economy means a bad military, but it won't work on this guy. Please avoid such massive red herrings, all the words in the world don't disguise them from me.

Hmm, sorry you don't like historical facts. Seems to be a common occurrence among pseudo-intellectual ideologues and charlatans, for some reason, so I'm not completely surprised. However, your "rebuttal" is far more perplexing. I'm starting to believe that you actually, really think that money is a superfluous invention.

 

Well, I suppose it's possible to imagine a 100% drafted army equipped with sticks and stones that walks their way to battles. But that just wasn't the case with the Soviet army. Massive motorized and tank armies are logistical nightmares, and that means $$$. An air force with thousands of aircraft between fighters, attack and support craft? An independent strategic missile arm? The Soviet Navy? The investment in research to try and keep up with the US? In Soviet Russia those things pay for you?

 

Bah.

 

http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/wor...a/mo-budget.htm

[Walsingham]

I missed that gem about massive conscript armies being independent of economies. If LoF ever left his desk in the library he might have actually met some former Russian conscripts as I have. I believe they would be inclined to lock you in an unheated barracks and eat nothing but potato, then send you home having stolen your clothes and refuse to pay you.

[Killian Kalthorne]

You still haven't answered my questions, LoF.

Why are communist dictators afraid of civil rights? Because all leaders are afraid of civil rights.

 

Barack Obama is afraid of civil rights? I think you are quite wrong on this.

[lord of flies]

Barack Obama is afraid of civil rights? I think you are quite wrong on this.

Yes, and I'm sure Guard Dog has my back on this one.

Hmm, sorry you don't like historical facts. Seems to be a common occurrence among pseudo-intellectual ideologues and charlatans, for some reason, so I'm not completely surprised. However, your "rebuttal" is far more perplexing. I'm starting to believe that you actually, really think that money is a superfluous invention.

 

Well, I suppose it's possible to imagine a 100% drafted army equipped with sticks and stones that walks their way to battles. But that just wasn't the case with the Soviet army. Massive motorized and tank armies are logistical nightmares, and that means $$$. An air force with thousands of aircraft between fighters, attack and support craft? An independent strategic missile arm? The Soviet Navy? The investment in research to try and keep up with the US? In Soviet Russia those things pay for you?

You can keep up military spending constantly no matter how ****ty your economy is going. Indeed, it's very common to do so. See for example, Germany in the late 1930s, and the Soviets during the "Brezhnev stagnation." Your reference to their economy is still irrelevant.

[Hurlshort]

You still haven't answered my questions, LoF.

Why are communist dictators afraid of civil rights? Because all leaders are afraid of civil rights.

 

Barack Obama is afraid of civil rights? I think you are quite wrong on this.

 

I disagree a bit on this. All leaders are hesitant to deal with civil rights because of the fear of the mob rule. Tyranny of the masses is a very real concern, and there have been few leaders in our history that have been willing to ignore the masses in order to protect the civil rights of minorities.

 

I read a few years back about George W. Bush's personal stance on gay rights, and it was shocking that he actually sounded fairly pro-gay rights. He was in office for 8 years and he didn't do anything on a federal level that actually showed that. The excuse given is that he has to represent a constituency, but there have been a few leaders that have ignored their constituency to address civil rights. It's all part of being a politician, I suppose.

[Killian Kalthorne]

All politicians lie. Its how the game is played.

[Walsingham]

Barack Obama is afraid of civil rights? I think you are quite wrong on this.

Yes, and I'm sure Guard Dog has my back on this one.

Hmm, sorry you don't like historical facts. Seems to be a common occurrence among pseudo-intellectual ideologues and charlatans, for some reason, so I'm not completely surprised. However, your "rebuttal" is far more perplexing. I'm starting to believe that you actually, really think that money is a superfluous invention.

 

Well, I suppose it's possible to imagine a 100% drafted army equipped with sticks and stones that walks their way to battles. But that just wasn't the case with the Soviet army. Massive motorized and tank armies are logistical nightmares, and that means $$$. An air force with thousands of aircraft between fighters, attack and support craft? An independent strategic missile arm? The Soviet Navy? The investment in research to try and keep up with the US? In Soviet Russia those things pay for you?

You can keep up military spending constantly no matter how ****ty your economy is going. Indeed, it's very common to do so. See for example, Germany in the late 1930s, and the Soviets during the "Brezhnev stagnation." Your reference to their economy is still irrelevant.

 

No, you can't you. Spending doesn't come from nowhere, but then - and again I'm speculating - I'd wager you've never gone properly hungry for want of money. Economies make stuff. Militaries are made of stuff. Comprende?

[I want teh kotor 3]

You still haven't answered my questions, LoF.

Why are communist dictators afraid of civil rights? Because all leaders are afraid of civil rights.

 

Barack Obama is afraid of civil rights? I think you are quite wrong on this.

 

Obama is afraid of civil rights. The same is not true of all leaders. Most democratically elected leaders realize that, if you take away civil liberties, you get: a) an unhappy electorate or b)the American Revolution all over again.

[Trenitay]

Obama is afraid of civil rights.

 

No more so than any other leader.

 

The same is not true of all leaders.

 

They all are to some extent.

[lord of flies]

No, you can't you. Spending doesn't come from nowhere, but then - and again I'm speculating - I'd wager you've never gone properly hungry for want of money. Economies make stuff. Militaries are made of stuff. Comprende?

Only a small portion of the economy is dedicated to the military. It is entirely possible to maintain military spending while your economy goes down.

 

As to Obama and civil rights, let me just remind you about illegal, warrantless wiretaps.

The Obama administration fell in line with the Bush administration Thursday when it urged a federal judge to set aside a ruling in a closely watched spy case weighing whether a U.S. president may bypass Congress and establish a program of eavesdropping on Americans without warrants.

Terrorists are not a strategic threat to the United States. So let me ask you a simple question: what is?

[Killian Kalthorne]

Terrorists are a strategic threat against the US. Homegrown terrorists like Timothy McVeigh are just as dangerous as the imported ones.

[Meshugger]

What numberman forgot to mention, was that in the Soviet Union there was no logistics plan. Without it, it was a wonder that the Union held together for 70 years or so. It simply collapsed on its own infrastructure. Anyone remember the missing nukes and missile silos?

[Walsingham]

A man who avows passionate hate for our system and states tells us that something isn't a strategic threat? Forgive me for not being entirely reassured.

[lord of flies]

A man who avows passionate hate for our system and states tells us that something isn't a strategic threat? Forgive me for not being entirely reassured.

Terrorists, foreign or domestic, are not capable of dealing any kind of serious harm to the United States' government, strategic interests abroad, or populace. The best they could hope for is to direct the political system's normal means, i.e. get a President elected or not, or to temporarily hurt its economy by attacks on major nerve centers of the United States.

[Oblarg]

A man who avows passionate hate for our system and states tells us that something isn't a strategic threat? Forgive me for not being entirely reassured.

Terrorists, foreign or domestic, are not capable of dealing any kind of serious harm to the United States' government, strategic interests abroad, or populace. The best they could hope for is to direct the political system's normal means, i.e. get a President elected or not, or to temporarily hurt its economy by attacks on major nerve centers of the United States.

 

I'm glad someone actually came out and said this.

[Walsingham]

You eedjits have completely zero concept of how complicated and fragile the modern world is, do you?

 

Frankly, I have to say I'm pleased, because that's less ideologically deranged halfwits trying to wreck it using terror.

[Oblarg]

You eedjits have completely zero concept of how complicated and fragile the modern world is, do you?

 

Frankly, I have to say I'm pleased, because that's less ideologically deranged halfwits trying to wreck it using terror.

 

You actually believe a (relatively small) pack of radical muslim terrorists pose a serious threat to our national security, even to the point of actually destabilizing the country?

 

You're very mistaken there, bud.

 

This is off topic, anyway.

 

LoF, people seem to be conflating communism and socialism. Give a clear and well-defined explanation of both.

[Walsingham]

You eedjits have completely zero concept of how complicated and fragile the modern world is, do you?

 

Frankly, I have to say I'm pleased, because that's less ideologically deranged halfwits trying to wreck it using terror.

 

You actually believe a (relatively small) pack of radical muslim terrorists pose a serious threat to our national security, even to the point of actually destabilizing the country?

 

You're very mistaken there, bud.

 

This is off topic, anyway.

 

LoF, people seem to be conflating communism and socialism. Give a clear and well-defined explanation of both.

 

Since you don't seem to be a slavering maniac I'll explain. Our entire system is predicated on high energy exchanges occurring at massive speed. Destabilising such a system doesn't just result in it losing energy and slowing down, it causes catastrophe. A plastic lightsaber isn't a threat in itself under normal circumstances, but jam it into the wheels of a tour de France rider and you've got bits of skinny bloke all up a tree.

[Oblarg]

You eedjits have completely zero concept of how complicated and fragile the modern world is, do you?

 

Frankly, I have to say I'm pleased, because that's less ideologically deranged halfwits trying to wreck it using terror.

 

You actually believe a (relatively small) pack of radical muslim terrorists pose a serious threat to our national security, even to the point of actually destabilizing the country?

 

You're very mistaken there, bud.

 

This is off topic, anyway.

 

LoF, people seem to be conflating communism and socialism. Give a clear and well-defined explanation of both.

 

Since you don't seem to be a slavering maniac I'll explain. Our entire system is predicated on high energy exchanges occurring at massive speed. Destabilising such a system doesn't just result in it losing energy and slowing down, it causes catastrophe. A plastic lightsaber isn't a threat in itself under normal circumstances, but jam it into the wheels of a tour de France rider and you've got bits of skinny bloke all up a tree.

 

Irellevant and meaningless analogy is irrelevant and meaningless. I could just as easily say the exact opposite and have it be just as valid, seeing as you have done nothing to support your comparison.

 

The amount of damage muslim terrorists can inflict to this country is not a major security threat. More people have been killed by lightning than by terrorists on American soil in the past 10 years. Yes, they can kill people. No, they can't topple the government.

 

Now let's end this particular tangent before the thread derails and is locked. I was enjoying the discussion.

[Meshugger]

[Godwins law]

 

Hitler came to power without killing anyone.

 

[/Godwins law]

[lord of flies]

Since you don't seem to be a slavering maniac I'll explain. Our entire system is predicated on high energy exchanges occurring at massive speed. Destabilising such a system doesn't just result in it losing energy and slowing down, it causes catastrophe. A plastic lightsaber isn't a threat in itself under normal circumstances, but jam it into the wheels of a tour de France rider and you've got bits of skinny bloke all up a tree.

The destabilization of the capitalist system on any lasting scale is only realistically possible via structural damage. Terrorists, however, are only capable of superficial damage.

LoF, people seem to be conflating communism and socialism. Give a clear and well-defined explanation of both.

Communism and socialism are closely intertwined, so I'll try to explain a bit. Socialism is a political theory created by Marx, and which developed into what's known as the "social democratic" parties, especially the SPD. The basic idea of socialism is the rebuilding of the class society and the economy to favor the urban worker - that is, the proletariat - against the capitalist class, similar to the restructuring the capitalists succeeded at doing against the aristocracy of Europe.

 

Communism was originally a term used to describe what's basically pie-in-the-sky transhumanist crap for socialists. When the Left-Social Democrats in Russia (the Bolsheviks) successfully seized power against warmongering SRs, they founded the Communist International, and demanded everybody take a hard left position and change their party's name to a Communist Party and accept various tenants of Leninism. Communism, then, is differentiated as an ideology by its adherence to certain political theories, such as democratic centralism. You can read about the Twenty-one Conditions, the requirements for joining the Comintern, here.