PDA

View Full Version : History calls communists to account



Jagermeister
01-25-2006, 08:00 PM
FIFTEEN years after the fall of the Berlin Wall, the Council of Europe last night became the first international body to condemn crimes against humanity committed by the communist regimes of the Soviet Union and other states.

However, in a vote that was bitterly contested by Russia and Western Europe’s left-wing parties , the 46-nation council failed to raise the two-thirds majority needed to approve a tougher resolution by a Swedish MP that called on former communist states to teach the truth about their former regimes and create days of remembrance.

Conservative estimate of deaths attributed to Soviet and other Communist regimes in the European Council document presented yesterday (1917-present day): 94.5 million
History calls communists to account (http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,13509-2010125,00.html)

94.5 million people - any of you lefty America bashers want to get upset about that?

“A single death is a tragedy, a million deaths is a statistic.” - Joseph Stalin

- Kevin

Keith Wilson
01-25-2006, 08:37 PM
lefty America bashers Oh, give it a rest. :rolleyes: Noam Chomsky and Ramsey Clark don't post here. Have you EVER read anything on the WBF that tried to justify Mao, Stalin, or Pol Pot? I don't think those are the standards against which we should judge ourselves, do you?

Donn
01-25-2006, 08:43 PM
Who needs Chomsky and Clark, when we've got Wilson, Bernstein, Jardine, Wassa and Dot?

Ya'll make Chomsky and Clark look like boy scouts.

Ed Harrow
01-25-2006, 09:16 PM
http://www.hopnews.com/duck_bentover.jpg

Peter Malcolm Jardine
01-25-2006, 09:17 PM
I feel fine, just a little sore today. The weather is getting me down.

imported_GregW
01-25-2006, 09:50 PM
The numbers can't be denied, so why in the world do we continue to support China? The Chinese Communist Party is just as ruthless and its history just as dark as its European counterparts. Is it because we don't care, or do $.59 flip-flops at Walmart trump all?

Jagermeister
01-25-2006, 10:09 PM
Keith:

Some of George.'s and Wassa's statements certainly leave me wondering, and although PMJ has never given reason to think he is an apologist for the commies, he isn't above linking from the World Socialist Web Site ("published by the International Committee of the Fourth International").

GregW:

The Republican affinity with the Communist Chinese has been a constant source of distress for me, and one of the reasons that I will never become a registered Republican, so long it remains. Before Nancy Pelosi's botox injections transformed her into the Bride of Frankenstein, I used to admire her principled stance against U.S. pandering to the PRC. Alas, those days are no more, and the Democrats are as in thrall to PRC money as the Republicans, if not more so (especially in light of the campaign scandals of the Clinton era). But, the events of this century have shown that the PRC is not tied to either U.S. political party by bonds of friendship, but only by their willingness to purchase a blind eye to their depredations by dumping cheap goods made by slave labor on our markets. A sorry state for the principled.

- Kevin

P.S. I HAVE read considerable on the WBF that tries to justify the doctrinaire policies of Mao, Stalin, and Pol Pot. Just as one cannot argue in favor of fascist policies without confronting the realities that arose from the implementation of those policies, one should not be able to argue in favor of communist policies without confronting the realities that have arisen at every implementation of those policies. People tacitly argue in favor of Mao, Stalin, and Pol Pot every time they argue for the abrogation of freedoms that communism entails.

[ 01-25-2006, 11:51 PM: Message edited by: Jagermeister ]

Chris Coose
01-25-2006, 10:30 PM
The present calls dubbya to account and the white house is shut up tighter than a hen's ass.

Ian Marchuk
01-25-2006, 10:58 PM
Thanks for this post Jager. Most of the responses are revealing. The report calls attention to the grotesque and appalling reord of communist regimes , and conservatively numbers the dead at almost 3 times the entire present population of Canada.The report is opposed by the Russians and their fellow obstructionists. Interestingly THE FACTS as presented here are not disputed or questioned by the responses.....the response is to engage in ad hominum attempts to discredit the poster.Good job of flushing the bats out of the belfry...

ljb5
01-25-2006, 11:25 PM
Originally posted by Ian Marchuk:
Interestingly THE FACTS as presented here are not disputed or questioned by the responses.No, they certainly have not. Who here would dispute them? More to the point, who do you imagine is on the side of Stalin?

Not me. Not anyone else here.


....the response is to engage in ad hominum attempts to discredit the poster...I just looked back over this thread and I can't find a single ad hominum attack against the poster.

Can you?

As Keith said, "give it a rest."

A modern American (or Canadian or Brazilian) liberal is not a Soviet communist. We have nothing to apologize for.

Stop flogging the Democrats to get back at the Soviets --- that's just plain silly.

[ 01-25-2006, 11:27 PM: Message edited by: ljb5 ]

Meerkat
01-26-2006, 12:11 AM
Originally posted by Jagermeister:
People tacitly argue in favor of Mao, Stalin, and Pol Pot every time they argue for the abrogation of freedoms that communism entails.You mean like freedom of reproduction (or not - abortion) and association (gay marriage)? How about the centraliztion of the National Park Service because the Bush administration didn't like the environment protecting decisions of regional managers? How about the relaxation of clean air laws/regulations that meant an additional 19,000 children in respiratory distress per year? Or, the change in mining regulations that are said to be the direct cause of the deaths of 2 miners in a conveyer belt fire just a few days ago? How about the failure to enforce laws thus allowing increaces in monopolistic practices?

Just wondering...

Keith Wilson
01-26-2006, 12:16 AM
I HAVE read considerable on the WBF that tries to justify the doctrinaire policies of Mao, Stalin, and Pol Pot. . . . one should not be able to argue in favor of communist policies without confronting the realities that have arisen at every implementation of those policies. People tacitly argue in favor of Mao, Stalin, and Pol Pot every time they argue for the abrogation of freedoms that communism entails.
Huh??? Jagermeister, excuse me, but who in the world are you talking about? Have we been reading the same WBF? Show us, please, where ANYONE here has "argued in favor of communist policies." Show us a single instance where anyone has tried to "justify the doctrinaire policies of Mao, Stalin, and Pol Pot." Pol Pot, for God's sake?!?

You are not making sense.


Interestingly THE FACTS as presented here are not disputed or questioned by the responses.Ian, OF COURSE the facts are not being disputed; they've been known for decades (at least) by anyone who pays even a little attention to these things. OF COURSE communist regimes were awful! (And the few remaining ones still are.) Is this news?

[ 01-26-2006, 12:27 AM: Message edited by: Keith Wilson ]

shamus
01-26-2006, 04:11 AM
I'm a proud socialist, and quite a well off one too. It doesn't mean I think there was anything good about the corrupt government of the Soviet Union, or any other corrupt government. It means that I believe certain essential services should be delivered irrespective of a person's capability to pay for them, that's all. ****ing scary isn't it?

shamus
01-26-2006, 04:13 AM
P.S. Don't touch my stuff.!

Wild Wassa
01-26-2006, 04:21 AM
How brave is this appologists for the torturing Fascists and paranoid Neo-Cons?

I've eaten Cadbury's aerated chocolate that was less of a 'Flake' than you Jagermeister.

Stalin and Moa and Fidel (amongst many others) are/were sociopaths and just criminals and not people to admire nor were they the end all of a political doctrine. At least I can descriminate, and I am not a brain washed fool, unlike you, you appologist.

Flake off. Most Republicans are so shallow they are are not even worth considering or answering ... but since you are being a little bit brave, go have one for me.

Warren.

[ 01-26-2006, 04:41 AM: Message edited by: Wild Wassa ]

George.
01-26-2006, 07:03 AM
Originally posted by Jagermeister:
Some of George.'s and Wassa's statements certainly leave me wondering...Give me a break, Jager. Some of my statments make you wonder if I support Stalin and Pol Pot? And here I was, thinking that you are one of the more reasonable conservatives in the bilge...

We do not start threads to condemn the crimes of Stalin, Mao, and Pol Pot, for the same reason that we do not start threads to condemn the crimes of Hitler, Idi Amin, and Nero. Because their deeds are done, they are all dead, their regimes have fallen, and no one tries to argue that they didn't do it, or that they had good reasons for doing it.

On the other hand, we do discuss crimes that, although on a much much smaller scale, are currently happening, and have voices in support of them right here in the bilge. See the difference?

Talk about hyperbole... :rolleyes:

uncas
01-26-2006, 07:05 AM
And tomorrow we are going to talk about restitution for all those who were killed or died during 250 yrs. of slavery....
We can discuss the Amistad...etc...slave ships...etc... :rolleyes:

LeeG
01-26-2006, 07:09 AM
gee,,I stopped beating my wife a long time ago

George.
01-26-2006, 07:13 AM
Originally posted by uncas:

We can discuss the Amistad...etc...slave ships...etc... Now that we could do - they were wooden boats! :D

uncas
01-26-2006, 07:17 AM
http://www.law.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/amistad/AMI_PSHP.JPG

ishmael
01-26-2006, 07:21 AM
And tomorrow we are going to talk about restitution for all those who were killed or died during 250 yrs.

Do you know any? Find one, or one who was enslaved, or one who was indentured, and I'll be at the top of the petition to pay them restitution.

uncas
01-26-2006, 07:23 AM
Ish...just going with the flow...with a slight hijack...
No...no one I know but their decendants maybe still around... :rolleyes:
And interestingly enough...this topic does come up once in a while....

P.I. Stazzer-Newt
01-26-2006, 07:45 AM
Originally posted by A. Ranter:
...estimate of deaths attributed to Soviet and other Communist regimes ...(1917-present day): 94.5 million... Envy - is such an ugly emotion - it will cloud your judgement something terrible. Look on the bright side those regimes are all dead and gone.

But their scores are now frozen - You still have the ability to catch up :
You can gas people in their beds on an industrial scale (Bhopal).
You can add in the starved third world farmers unable to compete in rigged markets.
You could ask SamF (nicely) for a Roe V Wade total and add that in.

Chin up, just keep counting for long enough and you'll get there.

<object classid="clsid:D27CDB6E-AE6D-11cf-96B8-444553540000" codebase="http://download.macromedia.com/pub/shockwave/cabs/flash/swflash.cab#version=6,0,29,0" width="400" height="325" hspace="0" vspace="15">
<param name="movie" value="wombat.swf" >
<param name="quality" value="high" >
<param name="BGCOLOR" value="#000000" >
edited to remove the echo
<I embed /* commented out cos of donn's echo */ src="http://www.globalcommunity.org/flash/wombat.swf" width="400" height="325" hspace="0" vspace="15" quality="high" pluginspage="http://www.macromedia.com/go/getflashplayer" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" bgcolor="#000000"--></embed>
</object>

Courtesy of The Foundation for Global Community (http://www.globalcommunity.org/index.shtml)

[ 01-26-2006, 08:50 AM: Message edited by: P.I. Stazzer-Newt ]

Donn
01-26-2006, 08:21 AM
Originally posted by P.I. Stazzer-Newt:

<object classid="clsid:D27CDB6E-AE6D-11cf-96B8-444553540000" codebase="http://download.macromedia.com/pub/shockwave/cabs/flash/swflash.cab#version=6,0,29,0" width="400" height="325" hspace="0" vspace="15">
<param name="movie" value="wombat.swf" >
<param name="quality" value="high" >
<param name="BGCOLOR" value="#000000" >
<embed src="http://www.globalcommunity.org/flash/wombat.swf" width="400" height="325" hspace="0" vspace="15" quality="high" pluginspage="http://www.macromedia.com/go/getflashplayer" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" bgcolor="#000000"></embed>
</object>

Courtesy of The Foundation for Global Community (http://www.globalcommunity.org/index.shtml)

LeeG
01-26-2006, 08:30 AM
I see black boxes...oh right..a mind

Donn
01-26-2006, 08:34 AM
Cool! AdBlock works on this, too. :D

Billy Bones
01-26-2006, 09:12 AM
After six years on this forum I've learned that people, more-or-less irrespective of party, prefer to criticize what they understand. Absent real understanding, most folks transfer their own values to the opposition and open fire. Silence takes over where understanding fears to tread--see China, Somalia, etc., etc. Even the Clinton administration, now thankfully over, is so far gone in history that, here on WBF, to invoke that legacy or to damn it is to be chided as almost comical.

Most people cannot comprehend let alone understand communism and its role in history. To expect clammoring of moral indignation over the heinous legacy of communism might be expecting a bit much. We tend as a society not to value history and historians perhaps as much as we ought to.

Keith Wilson
01-26-2006, 09:37 AM
Most people cannot comprehend let alone understand communism and its role in history. You have it exactly backwards IMHO. For those who talk politics on the WBF, at least, the atrocities of the Soviets, Mao, or Pol Pot are so well-known as to need no further reiteration. One does not hear any fresh moral indignation against Nazis either, or against slavery, because everyone agrees they were very bad. Again, NO ONE here is defending totalitarian states of any sort.

[ 01-26-2006, 09:40 AM: Message edited by: Keith Wilson ]

George.
01-26-2006, 09:45 AM
Originally posted by Keith Wilson:
Again, NO ONE here is defending totalitarian states of any sort.Sometimes Donn appears to be...

ljb5
01-26-2006, 11:28 AM
Stalin's crimes, like Pol Pot's and Hitler's had nothing to do with his political theories.

They were the result of his irrational lust for power and the absence of effective checks and balances.

Modern liberals are in favor of limited government, respect for citizen's rights and effective checks and balances.

Modern conservatives argue for more executive powers and fewer restrictions.

Neither party need apologize for Stalin's crimes --- but the neocons would do well to learn from them.

Billy Bones
01-26-2006, 11:35 AM
ROTFLMAO!

ljb5
01-26-2006, 11:39 AM
Originally posted by Billy Bones:
ROTFLMAO!Billy, which part do you find amusing?

The 95 million dead?

Donn's insistence that the president can break any law he wants and order the military to do anything to anyone?

Leon m
01-26-2006, 11:42 AM
Originally posted by ljb5:
which part do you find amusing?

[/QB]I find this amusing. smile.gif

I don't go for fancy cars
For diamond rings
Or movie stars
I go for penguins
Oh lord i go for penguins

Throw your money out the door
We'll just sit around
And watch it snow
I go for penguins
Oh lord i go for penguins

Penguins are so sensitive
Penguins are so sensitive
Penguins are so sensitive
To my needs

Penguins are so sensitive

Penguins are so sensitive
Penguins are so sensitive
To my needs
To my needs
To my needs
To my needs

Penguins are so sensitive
Penguins are so sensitive
Penguins are so sensitive
To my needs
To my needs
To my needs

To my needs
To my needs
To my needs
To my needs
To my needs

To my needs

Keith Wilson
01-26-2006, 11:44 AM
Stalin's crimes, like Pol Pot's and Hitler's had nothing to do with his political theories.Huh?? Of course they did. When you have a political theory completely subordinating the individual to the Glorious Fatherland or the People's State, what do you expect?

Alan D. Hyde
01-26-2006, 11:46 AM
Thank you, Keith.

Alan

Billy Bones
01-26-2006, 11:46 AM
I particularly enjoyed the part where you proved my point. Absent an understanding of history, people tend to insert their own notion of it, or worse some concoction based on their own values, then fire away.

Liberals for small government, indeed. When that becomes a reality I'll happily sign up.

ljb5
01-26-2006, 11:56 AM
Originally posted by Keith Wilson:
When you have a political theory completely subordinating the individual to the Glorious Fatherland or the People's State, what do you expect?Throughout history, there have been both right-wing fascists and left-wing fascists.

All leaders, both left-wing and right-wing subordinate the individual for the sake of the community. That's the difference between anarchy and order.

Tyranny has nothing to do with political ideology -- it's about unchecked power.

But since you bring it up, which current U.S. president tells us that we should abandon our individual rights for the sake of the homeland?

Billy, which party has created the largest, most invasive government in this nation's history? Which party routinely argues for more government power and less citizens' rights?

Welcome to reality. It's a little different than Karl Rove said it would be.

[ 01-26-2006, 12:02 PM: Message edited by: ljb5 ]

George.
01-26-2006, 12:05 PM
Originally posted by ljb5:
Tyranny has nothing to do with political ideology.No. But political ideology can be very useful when setting up a tyranny.

Billy Bones
01-26-2006, 12:10 PM
Liberals for small government. That's like....let's see...CCCP: the Coalition of Catholic Condom Producers. Or how 'bout UEEP: Union of Europeans for Ethnic Purity (ouch, maybe that cuts too close to the bone) how 'bout Mercenaries for Nonviolence?

lbj you're clever at subtle association but it's the only rabbit in your hat and it isn't enough to overcome your weakness at critical analysis.

ljb5
01-26-2006, 12:11 PM
Originally posted by George.:
No. But political ideology can be very useful when setting up a tyranny.That's just window dressing. Tyrants have to get power before they can abuse it. They'd dress themselves in any ideology to help them get power.

There are many different ways to come into power and it doesn't much matter which one they use, because once there, they abandon that ideology in favor of lust for power.

Lenin and Castro rode a wave of popular support to overthrow existing governments....Hitler rose up through the political system that was already in place.

Very different origins, but once in power, they cast off the fake cloak of ideology and went after pure power.

Read the Federalist Papers: the founding fathers believed that threats to freedom could come from any direction, not just from the left and not just from the right.

The believed the best defense was a system of checks and balances -- and educated, aware voters.

[ 01-26-2006, 12:16 PM: Message edited by: ljb5 ]

ljb5
01-26-2006, 12:16 PM
Originally posted by Billy Bones:
Liberals for small government.Have you seen any Conservatives for smaller government lately?

Paul G
01-26-2006, 12:21 PM
"The greatest weapon in the hands of the oppressor is the mind of the oppressed"

Lets go to wal-mart and buy some of them damm cheap chineeese goods, by the way didja hear ol GW stopped them terrists, hell he done PASTED eye-raaak

Keith Wilson
01-26-2006, 12:24 PM
Liberals for small government, indeed. Ignoring the communists or fascists on either extreme, who resemble each other a great deal, let's look at this. The mantra "liberals = more government" gets repeated endlessly until some start to think it's actually true. In reality, there are those who favor both more and less government all across the political spectrum, but those on the left and right usually favor government intervention in different areas. In general, the left ends to favor more regulation of economic activity, while the right tends to favor regulation of morals and expansion of police power. There's a reason that the ACLU is accused of being left wing, and it's NOT because they're in favor of more government power.

And ljb5, give me a break; "left-wing fascists"? It would be best not to torture the language quite so much - totalitarians might be a better term. And remember that Nazi is short for "National Socialist".

Billy Bones
01-26-2006, 12:26 PM
Ummmm, haven't you been following the ongoing debates about privatization of all government services? Don't you know any civil servants who not only work for inferior wages but then must compete for their own jobs against private contractors?

ljb5
01-26-2006, 12:31 PM
Originally posted by Keith Wilson:
And ljb5, give me a break; "left-wing fascists"? It would be best not to torture the language quite so much - totalitarians might be a better term.Just underlining the point that, at the extremes, the left and right tend to resemble each other.

"Nazi" may be short for "national socialist," but that had no bearing on the their true ideology. Like I said, 'just window dressing.'

Don't foget: former Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder was a member of the SPD, (Social Democratic Party) and he was hardly a Nazi.

<hr>

In the 80's, conservatives could claim to legitimately want smaller government. At the time, corporations wanted the government to stand aside so they could screw the public.

Now, the corporations have discovered they can do a better job of screwing us if the government helps, so they have drastically expanded the government -- and our tax dollars flow into their coffers.

Billy, the debate about privatizing government is cute --- in the meantime, while you were distracted by the debate, have you noticed what's actually happened?

[ 01-26-2006, 12:39 PM: Message edited by: ljb5 ]

Memphis Mike
01-26-2006, 12:41 PM
The Dubya's administration is more commie than any in history.

So I guess if you're a follower, then you're a commie too.

It's comforting to know that there aren't too many commies on this board.

[ 01-26-2006, 12:43 PM: Message edited by: Memphis Mike ]

Billy Bones
01-26-2006, 12:43 PM
I'll take that as an unqualified no.

ljb5
01-26-2006, 12:52 PM
Originally posted by Billy Bones:
I'll take that as an unqualified no.Outsourcing of government power is not the same as reduction of government power.

The government will pay Halliburton to violate our privacy, but we'll be no more free for it.

Have you noticed what has actually happened to the size of government while under the control of Republicans?

ljb5
01-26-2006, 03:33 PM
Originally posted by ljb5:
Have you noticed what has actually happened to the size of government while under the control of Republicans?Two and a half hours without an answer?

I'll take that as an unqualified no.

Sea Frog
01-26-2006, 03:39 PM
News (http://www.state.gov/p/wha/rls/fs/22972.htm)
of an emprisoned island.
More (http://havanajournal.com/politics_comments/A812_0_5_0_M)
And more. (http://www.directorio.org/political/political.php)

[ 01-26-2006, 03:55 PM: Message edited by: Sea Frog ]

PeterSibley
01-26-2006, 04:01 PM
Silence takes over where understanding fears to tread--see China, Somalia, etc., etc. Even

Ahhh Billy ,you really want people to talk even more about things they know nothing about ? :D

Osborne Russel
01-26-2006, 04:13 PM
Originally posted by Jagermeister:
94.5 million people - any of you lefty America bashers want to get upset about that?

“A single death is a tragedy, a million deaths is a statistic.” - Joseph StalinUnfair. We ran out of Indians to kill before we even had a chance to get into those kinds of numbers.

"To retrench the traditional concept of Western history at this point would mean to invalidate the justifications for conquering the Western Hemisphere. Americans will cling to the traditional idea that they suddenly came upon a vacant land on which they created the world's most affluent society. Not only is such an idea false, it is absurd. Yet without it, both Western man and his religion stand naked before the world."

-- Vine DeLoria Jr., *God is Red* (1973) Dell Publishing Co., New York.