PDA

View Full Version : To WCM....



4eh
07-17-2006, 07:36 PM
just wonder, are you real communist?

Little_Miss_1565
07-17-2006, 07:37 PM
No, he just eats babies.

BREAK
07-17-2006, 07:52 PM
He IS a real fag, if that helps you any.

Llamas
07-17-2006, 08:20 PM
commi? he's hitler's grandson.

All About Eve
07-17-2006, 08:48 PM
No, he just eats babies.
Although he does eat an equal amount and makes sure everyone has their fair share of babies too.

Sin Studly
07-17-2006, 10:27 PM
Of course he's a communist, he has an ugly girlfriend.

Tizzalicious
07-18-2006, 12:18 AM
No, he's a fake, with a hot girlfriend.

Tizzalicious
07-18-2006, 04:03 AM
I'm a tru punx with a girlfriend with dreadlocks.

- WCM

4eh
07-18-2006, 06:09 AM
ok, i think everyone answered, except WCM

Rocky-girl
07-18-2006, 08:25 AM
ok, i think everyone answered, except WCM
His answer is above yours!

4eh
07-18-2006, 12:05 PM
oh, now i see )))

this is not answer i'd expected really

Tizzalicious
07-18-2006, 12:50 PM
And asking whether I am a true communist is a loaded question. What do you define as a true communist? Cause eventually it can become easy to find un-Marxist things about Marx, if you start talking about true communists, true communism, etc.

- WCM

Rocky-girl
07-18-2006, 01:33 PM
Maybe going to Cuba? Or trying to become as great as Stalin? Or make a revolution like Lenin?

Tizzalicious
07-18-2006, 02:45 PM
Maybe going to Cuba? Or trying to become as great as Stalin? Or make a revolution like Lenin?
I've been to Cuba. And I am as great as Stalin.

Rocky-girl
07-18-2006, 02:55 PM
YOu know there is such illness..its name is megalomania...

Tizzalicious
07-18-2006, 03:38 PM
YOu know there is such illness..its name is megalomania...
I thought I was being modest.

Jebus
07-18-2006, 03:42 PM
I enjoyed AAE's post.

That is all...

Rocky-girl
07-18-2006, 03:59 PM
I thought I was being modest.
You're always modest) That illness is only for the modest)

Tizzalicious
07-18-2006, 04:09 PM
Tanichka, you are always Tovarish Smile!

Rocky-girl
07-18-2006, 04:23 PM
Thank you, my smiling Tovarisch)

Tovarisch, smile!

4eh
07-19-2006, 06:35 AM
aha, then tovarish handshake, tovarish kissing, Hrushev's style ))))



dude, i ask really simple question, are you (true) communist or not?

Tizzalicious
07-19-2006, 09:36 AM
dude, i ask really simple question, are you (true) communist or not?
And I'm telling you it's a loaded question. What the hell would your definition be of a "true communist"? That's like asking are you tru punx? I'll tell you my answer when you tell me what you mean.

- WCM

0r4ng3
07-19-2006, 09:36 AM
tru commie 4 lyfe!

...

...

I bet you were all expecting that.

Mota Boy
07-19-2006, 09:55 AM
Per, do you still think that Stalin's image as a megalomaniac mass-murderer is only the result of Western propaganda based on the barest shred of evidence?


Because I still find that viewpoint amusing.

Tizzalicious
07-19-2006, 10:00 AM
My view on Stalin is that his "kill count" is wildly exaggerated among some circles. 1-5 million people dead, is bad enough. 20 million killed from a total population of 100 million, seems preposterous. The logistics of such an operation would seem to require everyone who lived to help kill the rest, including paperwork and such.

That, and the Russia government locked the archives, so who knows.

- WCM

Mota Boy
07-19-2006, 10:08 AM
It's my understanding that, like Mao and Pol Pot's kill counts, the implication isn't that Stalin went out and murdered 20 million people with his bare hands, nor ordered 20 million people murdered, but that the deaths were caused as a result of his flawed social policies of collectivist farming, which seems a completely reasonable number to me if we're talking about large-scale reordering of the agricultural sector. And why not 20 million Russians? More than that died in WWII, and I think the relative numbers to Pol Pot's mass murders are comparable, even if it's too late to bother Googling them (wikipedia isn't accessible here).

Sin Studly
07-19-2006, 10:31 AM
Stalin didn't kill anybody.

He just gave speeches and stuff.

Tizzalicious
07-19-2006, 10:54 AM
It's my understanding that, like Mao and Pol Pot's kill counts, the implication isn't that Stalin went out and murdered 20 million people with his bare hands, nor ordered 20 million people murdered, but that the deaths were caused as a result of his flawed social policies of collectivist farming, which seems a completely reasonable number to me if we're talking about large-scale reordering of the agricultural sector. And why not 20 million Russians? More than that died in WWII, and I think the relative numbers to Pol Pot's mass murders are comparable, even if it's too late to bother Googling them (wikipedia isn't accessible here).
Pol Pot's killings were due to a wholly different ideological thought-process. He hated everyone who was not a peasant, he even viewed the working class as stealing the bread from the peasants. Not to mention the Cambodian nation is on a much smaller area of land, with a significantly higher number of people per square mile.

I do not know how many people Stalin killed due to flawed social policies and collectivist farming. There is no truly reliable number available. And it'd be difficult to give him the blame personally. I think it's far worse that there were those executions under his reign that happened due to various dubious political and judicial processes.

You could go as far as blaming him for every death in WW2 on the Russian side, due to bad military policy. But that would be a weird way to do that, no?

Judging a man based on the loss of life due to policy, would technically make Khruschev the monster of the Soviet Union. The virgins land projects, the massive reconstruction of damns, lakes, and most of Siberia, has had far more disastrous affects, still killing today.

But that leads to a different debate, for how many deaths is a leader responsible for? Is a man responsible for the starving people of his own country? I come from Eugene, Oregon. We have the highest municipal unemployment in the country. Oregon has the highest number of starving children (I don't have a source for this), and we have one of the highest numbers of homeless people in the United States. All this despite being rich in resources, and home to various large national corporations. Is Bush directly responsible? Clinton?

And I know there are places poorer than Oregon in the US.

The executions under Stalin, those belong on his hands.

Besides the number 20 million, comes not from failed social policy, but from executions.

4eh
07-19-2006, 03:51 PM
And I'm telling you it's a loaded question. What the hell would your definition be of a "true communist"? That's like asking are you tru punx? I'll tell you my answer when you tell me what you mean.

- WCM


what do you mean? being true punk has different rules for everybody. communism has more stability rules )) if you want...

4eh
07-19-2006, 03:58 PM
damn... guys, where do you get those numbers? 20 million... 1-5 million.... you know that is much more than died in WW2.... guess it's no more than numbers from your head and some newspapers, we still don't know how many people died in WW2 or in Stalin's repressions. well yeah numbers are huge and scary, now when we open secret documents we can hardly imagine what stuff was there in 40-55. but othersidewhat we done that time, the first man in space, technologies, everyone was afraid of USSR, now what?

Tizzalicious
07-19-2006, 04:01 PM
what do you mean? being true punk has different rules for everybody. communism has more stability rules )) if you want...
There are factions inside of factions inside of factions, in the communist movement. If I say one thing, you may label me a trotskyite, if I say another, I'm a stalinist, or a Hoxhaite, or a eurocommunist, whatever. So really it depends, what do you think is true communist? Because all those people believe they are true communist yet none of the other groups are.

As I said, time and again, it's a loaded question. Seriously. Not a complicated thing. When you add "true" to the beginning of something, you make it elitist. You separate yourself from the "false" communists. If I am a true communist, that must mean they are some who are false communists. Do these false communists believe themselves to be false? No they believe themselves to be true communists.

It's a really stupid question, if you don't tell me what you mean by true communist.

- WCM

(Edit by Tizz: Sign, or sign out, stupid commiefuck)

4eh
07-20-2006, 10:18 AM
i guess for every man who lived in USSR there's only one "true" communism (or communist :))) ))))

Mota Boy
07-20-2006, 10:30 AM
Is Bush directly responsible? Clinton?
No, because America doesn't have an autocratic government. However, if you single-handedly dictate policy for an entire country, and those policies end up being directly responsible for widespread starvation, you've got some questions to answer.

Tizzalicious
07-20-2006, 10:45 AM
Then who would you blame Mota, Congress? The House? The Supreme Court? All 3 branches? Would you place the blame on a local level? I'm sure Stalin sub-delegated duties to other people. Many choices probably weren't directly his. Would you then place blame on local soviets in the USSR? It was an autocracy. But there was a complicated procedure, a legislative entity that wrote the laws. Local soviets which implemented them. Would you place blame on the individual Commissars, perhaps the Agricultural Commissar should've made the transition easier to collectivism.

4eh, yeah whatever.

- WCM

Mota Boy
07-20-2006, 10:51 AM
Let's compare how many people died in one year in America due to starvation and murder by the state as a percentage of population with, say, Soviet Russia. Then let's compare it with the rest of the modern first world.

I'm perfectly comfortable with you digging up those facts and figures. While you're at it, why don't you also argue that I'm equally as culpable as John Wayne Gacy for mass murder.

Tizzalicious
07-20-2006, 10:54 AM
Of course more happened. But is there a difference? Is it a crime when it only happens in the tens, the hundreds, the thousands, the millions? Where would you draw the line to be self-righteous?

- WCM

4eh
07-21-2006, 05:21 PM
It's a really stupid question, if you don't tell me what you mean by true communist.

- WCM

(Edit by Tizz: Sign, or sign out, stupid commiefuck)



ok, stupid question, yes, agree....


then correct question: ARE you communist?

Tizzalicious
07-21-2006, 05:28 PM
ok, stupid question, yes, agree....


then correct question: ARE you communist?
Yes, I consider myself a communist.

-WCM

Outerbands
07-23-2006, 03:56 AM
Would you then place blame on local soviets in the USSR? It was an autocracy. But there was a complicated procedure, a legislative entity that wrote the laws. Local soviets which implemented them. Would you place blame on the individual Commissars, perhaps the Agricultural Commissar should've made the transition easier to collectivism.



Wasn't Stalin a workaholic and micromanaged a great deal of affairs working long into the night? I distinctly recall reading Ian Kershaw's biography on Hitler and him comparing Stalin and Hitler and saying they weren't that similar. Hitler was a lazy bum who deligated everything, Stalin was a workaholic. Obviously he would have deligated much but he micromanaged greatly?

Mota Boy's argument is appealing, dictators hold a greater share of blame than leaders of democratic governments.

Little_Miss_1565
07-23-2006, 05:06 AM
Of course more happened. But is there a difference? Is it a crime when it only happens in the tens, the hundreds, the thousands, the millions? Where would you draw the line to be self-righteous?

- WCM

I've always followed the litmus test that if millions (if not tens of millions) of people die while you are in power, you were probably a bad leader with deeply flawed public policy. Certainly it's also bad if thousands, hundreds, or even the barest dozens die. But in the interest of painting the broadest strokes, let's stick with millions for now.

Tizzalicious
07-23-2006, 05:33 AM
How do you know Stalin was a work-a-holic? Because Khruschev said so? Because some biographer said so? That is meaningless. I've read biographies on Hitler which said he micromanaged military affairs to a ridiculous level. But yes I also read Stalin worked long hours. Doing what I don't know. Some biographies claim that he spent the first 8 hours of his working day, signing death sentences.

- WCM

Outerbands
07-23-2006, 06:59 AM
Multiple sources Kershaw referenced and cross referenced confirm that Hitler was lazy.

Tizzalicious
07-23-2006, 07:16 AM
Great. Multiple sources that Bullock referenced and cross-referenced, contradict you.

- WCM

Sin Studly
07-23-2006, 08:19 AM
I've always followed the litmus test that if millions (if not tens of millions) of people die while you are in power you were probably a bad leader with deeply flawed public policy.

Sometimes democracy must be bathed with blood.

4eh
07-23-2006, 08:45 AM
Yes, I consider myself a communist.

-WCM


yes, that is what i was wondering )))))

sorry for wrong way of question )))

have you ever been to Russia?

Little_Miss_1565
07-23-2006, 08:47 AM
Sometimes democracy must be bathed with blood.

The only government that needed to be bathed in blood went by the name of Erzebet.

Outerbands
07-23-2006, 10:18 AM
Great. Multiple sources that Bullock referenced and cross-referenced, contradict you.


Bullock's work is the first work, by a renowned historian, that argued Hitler was lazy. The constant thread through the book is that he disliked administrative and run of the mill government business a great deal. This went as far as organising persecution of the Jews etc. Bullock's work is also dated, Kershaw's is widely accepted as being the most authoritative biography of Hitler ever compiled.

I've never known a respected historian to argue Hitler was a micro-manager in anything but battle tactics. So, in this debate, Hitler can be held to be responsible for deaths due to tactical failures in theatre, but not directly in his country where the whole Nazi government could shoulder the blame also.

Tizzalicious
07-23-2006, 05:09 PM
That would be exactly what I said. He micro-managed military affairs...? But thank you for confirming this.

- WCM

4eh, Yes I have. I've also been on the trans-siberian.

HornyPope
07-26-2006, 04:47 AM
Stalin does have image of a workaholic, which was a quality very revered and popular at the time. But it could be also it was somewhat exagerated to sell his persona.