PDA

View Full Version : Wheelchairman's private message



ReaganRevolution
01-11-2005, 02:54 AM
I recieved the following private message from Wheelchairman:

You don't scare me, you moronic trickle-down economist with a tendency to give money to death squads of South America. Twas a time when you democracy loving folk were put to death by the Sandinistas. You can choke on this trendy pencil I just bought from Hot Topic, you self-centered republican asshole. Now excuse me while I go listen to the Smashing Pumpkins' Porcelina

wheelchairman
01-11-2005, 08:04 AM
I like that you used the angry smiley, way to look like a retard.

RXP
01-11-2005, 11:57 AM
Regan was close to blowing the whole world up. he's a fucking cunt. He stayed president too long, that fucker was old.

ReaganRevolution
01-11-2005, 12:02 PM
Hmm, I bet that if I were to meet Wheelchairman, he'd probably shoot a poisoned dart out of that cigar that is stuck in his mouth. Communists just want to kill as many people as possible!

RXP - too bad you weren't around when Maggie Thatcher was running the United Kingdom, you liberal swine. :mad:

wheelchairman
01-11-2005, 01:40 PM
Poison dart? phh you're a retard, I would torture you and your family first, that's what we commies would do.

ReaganRevolution
01-11-2005, 02:11 PM
Good thing that the great Reagan destroyed the USSR then.

Vera
01-11-2005, 02:19 PM
Reagan didn't have to, USSR pretty much managed that by themselves.

wheelchairman
01-11-2005, 02:33 PM
You know very well that Reagan's foreign policy (at least when he was aware of it) was not significantly different than his predecessors.

ReaganRevolution
01-11-2005, 02:37 PM
Well, Vera, just look at your location! FINLAND, THE UNOFFICIAL SOVIET STATE! The Finns just sucked up the the evil Russkies, no wonder you're going to deny everything that the mighty Reagan did to rid the world of the evil and ungodly communist menace.

Noodles is gay
01-11-2005, 02:39 PM
I'm sorry to interrupt - but is it only obvious to me that this 'ReaganRevolution' seems to be here just to piss other existing members off?

ReaganRevolution
01-11-2005, 02:41 PM
No, I'm here to fight the intellectual solar plexus of the Left.

RXP
01-11-2005, 03:22 PM
RXP - too bad you weren't around when Maggie Thatcher was running the United Kingdom, you liberal swine. :mad:

omg first time anyone's ever said I'm a liberal.

RXP
01-11-2005, 03:23 PM
You know very well that Reagan's foreign policy (at least when he was aware of it) was not significantly different than his predecessors.

WTF? His arms race caused the Ruskies to put more and more money into their armed forces. WTF?

wheelchairman
01-11-2005, 03:48 PM
WTF? His arms race caused the Ruskies to put more and more money into their armed forces. WTF?
What arms race? His talk of arms race perhaps, and that was no different than past presidents.

killboypwrheadjx
01-11-2005, 04:13 PM
i agree with wheelchairman. reaganrevolution needs to die or somethin. its kinda weird...seems that whenever i read wheelchairman's posts, i disagree and become angered. grrrrrr.

wtf_mate?
01-11-2005, 07:49 PM
I'm sorry to interrupt - but is it only obvious to me that this 'ReaganRevolution' seems to be here just to piss other existing members off?

Not all members, of course. I, actually am a Republican. But, it's sad that everyone here would rather insult each other then have a peaceful conversation.

Skate Rat 19
01-11-2005, 08:20 PM
The whole point of sending a private message is to make it "private" not to put out on the open web. It doesn't matter who it is , oh yeah and Reagan wasn't that much of a better president than Bush(the second one and/or current one)

SkunkIt
01-11-2005, 08:27 PM
No, I'm here to fight the intellectual solar plexus of the Left.
My first post, do you even like The Offspring?

wtf_mate?
01-11-2005, 08:53 PM
The whole point of sending a private message is to make it "private" not to put out on the open web. It doesn't matter who it is , oh yeah and Reagan wasn't that much of a better president than Bush(the second one and/or current one)

Yeah, that's why he won his second term with a near electoral sweep.

SkunkIt
01-11-2005, 09:11 PM
Yeah, that's why he won his second term with a near electoral sweep.
So did bush, but bush is a cunt.

wtf_mate?
01-11-2005, 11:01 PM
So did bush, but bush is a cunt.

Um...last time I checked, 286 to 251 was NOT an electoral sweep. Please, read the whole post.

Dio
01-11-2005, 11:32 PM
What arms race? His talk of arms race perhaps, and that was no different than past presidents.


Agreed... Reagan is very much overrated... I've read quite a few Russian books/articles on the topic, especially the ones that came out recently and contain information about negotiations with USA that was classified in the past... What really happened is that Gorbachyov himself wanted to go ahead with "Perestroika", which is basically what killed USSR in the end... New ideas, new influences, less control over the people essentially brought down the regime.

However, what people seem to think is that Reagan was the one that somehow destroyed USSR with his arms race... And that's especially silly to think, because the so called "arms race" was actually rather profitable for both USA and USSR... Each side tried to develop new technologies first, and then sent the newly made weapon to allies throughout the world... Billions and billions of dollars were made on this, so I simply cannot see this as USSR's downfall.

Instead, I've got a qestion for y'all - do you think that USSR would fall down when it did if someone else apart of Gorbachyov was in power at the time? And obviously in this hypothetic scenario Reagan is in power in USA, while geopolitical and financial situation in the world is the same as it was then.

RXP
01-12-2005, 03:11 AM
Regan was so fucking old that he believed things in films were for real, that's where his concept of star wars program came for. He was so crazy.

wheelchairman
01-12-2005, 05:16 AM
Wtf_mate- What are you talking about? I tried to argue with you, you failed to back up your point of view and refused to offer foundation to the facts you found. Then you gave up.

Dio- We essentially agree on Reagan's influence inm the fall of the USSR. The USSR fell due to a contradiction in the society of the USSR at the time. For the same reason that feudalism fell in old ages. The relatively new and growing bourgeois needed to lose the constraints of the semi-capitalist (or state-capitalist) economy that was run at the time, what better way than through abolition of the socialist economy?

I think Andropov was a promising leader, but I really haven't done much research on the late USSR so it's hard for me to have an opinion.

Dio
01-12-2005, 05:33 AM
The USSR fell due to a contradiction in the society of the USSR at the time. For the same reason that feudalism fell in old ages. The relatively new and growing bourgeois needed to lose the constraints of the semi-capitalist (or state-capitalist) economy that was run at the time, what better way than through abolition of the socialist economy?


You're bringing up a valid point, but I have a slightly different view on the matter.... The thing is USSR was supposed to be socialist, but unfortunately in its core it wasn't. As it happens in every political regime, a small circle of people has usurped the power and used it according to its own wishes...

I'm not even talking about them deciding on foreign politics and such -- it was rather easy and almost invisible to do, as no one in USSR knew a thing about the real events that were happening in the world due to censorship and official propaganda....

But rather there were other reasons that made people hate the regime...Even though everyone was getting a rather similar amount of money (120-240 rubel a month), there was no real equality in the country... For example, the "elite" - political communist figures and senior government employees had:
- huge apartments (while regular Russians shared apartments - one room for each family, shared kitchen and utilities)
- special stores where they bought food (ensured it was there, was fresh, and was of good quality - while regular people stood in hours-long lines to get food)
- huge dachas (countryhouses) with hectars of land and armed security people (it was realllly hard for a regular peron to build one, let alone have land to grow vegetables on).
- cars with personal drivers (while regular people had to wait literally YEARS to be able to BUY a car - there was a huge waiting list due to low supply/production).

This situation eventually made people see things in their true light, and that's how most dissidents in USSR started.....

wheelchairman
01-12-2005, 06:16 AM
Well I would say their ignorance of foreign countries played a large part in the dissent that happened.

I would say that dissent became quite common among people who would've been able to make more money, had it not been the state that ruled, people who wanted to expand their small businesses (it's my understanding that under Perestroika people were able to open small stores under their own ownership.) However that doesn't explain it fully, because Cuba has the same kind of business ownership deal going on, and there is no sign of a revolution, but I do think it explains it in a large part. Also the oppression of the USSR state on religion made people even more religious and resenting the system for divine reasons.

You can't blame it on the things you mentioned, because those same problems exist in the west with the economic elite (who do have more state power than the average citizen as well.)

I think another main reason, had to do with honey-tongued western propaganda. The west has a history of trying to convince communist citizens about how much better their system will be with capitalism. And the average soviet citizen, being completely ignorant on conditions in the west, wouldn't be able to criticize his/her source as well.

An example of this would be recently when Bush said he'd vaccinate every Cuban child against diseases if the Cuban people overthrew communism. (Now obviously this is an ignorant statement, cause we all know that Cuba has better standards healthcare-wise than the US, especially when it comes to the vaccination of children.)

These kinds of things were what built up to the initial large support behind Yeltsin.

Dio
01-12-2005, 07:54 AM
You can't blame it on the things you mentioned, because those same problems exist in the west with the economic elite (who do have more state power than the average citizen as well.)

I think another main reason, had to do with honey-tongued western propaganda. The west has a history of trying to convince communist citizens about how much better their system will be with capitalism. And the average soviet citizen, being completely ignorant on conditions in the west, wouldn't be able to criticize his/her source as well.




Mmmmm... You've made some good points. The Western propaganda (including radio stations broadcasted from Western Germany, and which Russians listened to illegally) would certainly be in part to blame.

However when you talk about "economic elite" in the West - it's really different from USSR's "political elite". In USSR, a commie society, everyone was supposed to be the *same*, with same privilleges and rights... For example even if you had money you couldn't buy "rare" stuff in stores.... unless you had a friend working there ;) That's how my mom was getting Italian leather shoes, rare books, French perfume, etc - all came through some friend who could get it... It was supposed to be in stores, but it just wasn't. And those commie party dudes had it all at their fingertips.... It certainly created quite a lot of animosity towards the regime on the part of regular workers :)

wheelchairman
01-12-2005, 10:28 AM
As far as I understand it, that kind of corruption still exists in the East, 15 years after the fall of communism.

And there is no real difference, it's just no one sees it in the west. In the west, everyone is supposed to be equal before the law. Obviously we aren't, do I really need to give examples of this do I? In the West it's one man one vote, yet multi-national corporations have a far more significant hand in power than the average man.

It's really quite odd at times, to think about how similar the USA today is to the USSR yesterday, or how far they deviated from their founding values.

wtf_mate?
01-12-2005, 11:19 AM
Wtf_mate- What are you talking about? I tried to argue with you, you failed to back up your point of view and refused to offer foundation to the facts you found. Then you gave up.



We were arguing? Sorry, had no idea...

Vera
01-12-2005, 11:26 AM
Well, Vera, just look at your location! FINLAND, THE UNOFFICIAL SOVIET STATE! The Finns just sucked up the the evil Russkies, no wonder you're going to deny everything that the mighty Reagan did to rid the world of the evil and ungodly communist menace.
Stop posting. :)