NationStates Jolt Archive

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/7/7a/Yuliya.jpg/200px-Yuliya.jpg

Any counter-arguments? :P

Well, if everyone has a go at her, there will be a hideous mess...

I have three. Her face is ugly. She's a communist. I'm gay.

She is not a communist. She is a National Bolshevik...which is like the Russian version of nationalism socialism.

Lousy reason. You could at least have found a cute girl for that.

Well, if everyone has a go at her, there will be a hideous mess...

I think I just threw up in my mouth.

Lousy reason. You could at least have found a cute girl for that.

I second this.

Lousy reason. You could at least have found a cute girl for that.

I'm not saying she's hot or anything, but if you don't think she's at least cute...well, wow.

I second this.

I third it.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/7/7a/Yuliya.jpg/200px-Yuliya.jpg

Any counter-arguments? :P

Somewhat disturbningly not the first time she has appeared on here: don't they talk about 'combat girlfriends' on that site?

I'm not saying she's hot or anything, but if you don't think she's at least cute...well, wow.

She's certainly cute. She just looks so serious, though. "No, I could not possibly do that, it is not the way of the proletariat!"

I'm not saying she's hot or anything, but if you don't think she's at least cute...well, wow.

No... she's not ugly, but definitely not cute, either.

No thanks. I've met much more attractive non-communist Russian women.

I think I just threw up in my mouth.

you do that a lot

No thanks. I've met much more attractive non-communist Russian women.

theres a hell of lot of those about

I third it.

Czardas agrees with me, I win!

Czardas agrees with me, I win!

has your medal
*holds out medal*

Is this worth starting a topic at all ? :rolleyes:

She's certainly cute. She just looks so serious, though. "No, I could not possibly do that, it is not the way of the proletariat!"

Got a point there.

you do that a lot

Yes, I do.

Czardas agrees with me, I win!

Czardas agreeing with you is teh lose. :p

Is this worth starting a topic at all ? :rolleyes:

Like many many other topics. No, not really.

I'm not saying she's hot or anything, but if you don't think she's at least cute...well, wow.

In which case, well wow....

Czardas agrees with me, I win!

Congratulations, you get Cluichstan's soul.

Czardas agreeing with you is teh lose. :p
EY! YOU! GET BACK IN YOUR CAGE THIS INSTANT, OR I'LL TAKE AWAY YOUR INTERNET ACCESS! I MEAN IT YOUNG MAN, IT IS SO PAST YOUR BEDTIME!

In which case, well wow....

Typical intarwebs attitude. "If she doesn't look like Kate Beckinsale [or insert any other celebrity here], I wouldn't do her." :rolleyes:

Congratulations, you get Cluichstan's soul.

But it's sooooooo dirty.

Congratulations, you get Cluichstan's soul.

Didn't even know I had one. ;)

EY! YOU! GET BACK IN YOUR CAGE THIS INSTANT, OR I'LL TAKE AWAY YOUR INTERNET ACCESS! I MEAN IT YOUNG MAN, IT IS SO PAST YOUR BEDTIME!

I only just woke up a little while ago. Hell, I'm only on my seventh beer. :p

i cannot see the point in why bothering with communism at all.

history has proved it does not work in many separate cases.

it shouldn't be an issue to consider any more.

Typical intarwebs attitude. "If she doesn't look like Kate Beckinsale [or insert any other celebrty here], I wouldn't do her." :rolleyes:

I note that most internet people are also virginal teenagers, and simply say such things to justify why they don't have a girlfriend/boyfriend, when the real reason is that they're unattractive losers (case in point: me).

And, um, wait... why in hell am I posting on the General forum? We've been over this before, haven't we? :rolleyes:

Didn't even know I had one. ;)
You don't. Ifreann has it now.


I only just woke up a little while ago. Hell, I'm only on my seventh beer. :p

DON'T CLOUD THE ISSUE WITH FACTS!!! YOU ARE ONLY A TOOL OF THE WORLDWIDE JEWISH COMMUNIST FEMINAZI REVOLUTION SPREADING ITS HATEFUL LIES TO THE TRILATERAL COMMISSION IN ORDER TO INFLUENCE THE FREEMASON DOMINATED ILLUMINATI AND ABSORB THE KNIGHTS OF COLUMBUS INTO THE SECRET WORLD GOVERNMENT!!!!!!!

http://www.renouveaubruxellois.be/images/candidats/ries.jpg

Social democrats FTW! :D

I third it.

I fourth it.

Shes Ok by normal standards (is it me or are her eyes really far apart?) but in internet land shes not so hot.

Typical intarwebs attitude. "If she doesn't look like Kate Beckinsale [or insert any other celebrity here], I wouldn't do her." :rolleyes:

you do realise she’s probably about 14 right?

Nahh.

I note that most internet people are also virginal teenagers, and simply say such things to justify why they don't have a girlfriend/boyfriend, when the real reason is that they're unattractive losers (case in point: me).

And, um, wait... why in hell am I posting on the General forum? We've been over this before, haven't we? :rolleyes:

Don't be so hard on yourself, mate. But there is much truth in what you said, aside from your self-deprecating bit. ;)

You don't. Ifreann has it now.

Bah, I wasn't really using it anyway.

DON'T CLOUD THE ISSUE WITH FACTS!!! YOU ARE ONLY A TOOL OF THE WORLDWIDE JEWISH COMMUNIST FEMINAZI REVOLUTION SPREADING ITS HATEFUL LIES TO THE TRILATERAL COMMISSION IN ORDER TO INFLUENCE THE FREEMASON DOMINATED ILLUMINATI AND ABSORB THE KNIGHTS OF COLUMBUS INTO THE SECRET WORLD GOVERNMENT!!!!!!!

Whatever you're smoking, can I please have some, too?

http://www.renouveaubruxellois.be/images/candidats/ries.jpg

Social democrats FTW! :D

Who the hell is that?!? And why do I want to move to Belgium now?

I fourth it.

Shes Ok by normal standards (is it me or are her eyes really far apart?) but in internet land shes not so hot.

I've actually observed the opposite... on the internet a lot of people seem to claim that those who really aren't that attractive are worth comparison to $celebrity. Standards seem to lower online. Of course, in real life when meeting someone you have to factor the sound of their voice, the way they smell, what they say etc., whereas online it's just a (usually posed) picture which may not be a particularly accurate depiction of the person in general.

This post insults Communism, by calming a national Bolshevik is a communist when she's not NATIONAL BOLSHEVIKS GO TO THE DUSTBIN OF HISTORY (can't say hell because i am a Marxist) FOR ILEGAL USE OF HAMMERS AND SICKLES IN THEIR SYMBOLISM!
LONG LIVE THE FORTH INTERNATIONALE! DEATH TO STRALINISM!

Don't be so hard on yourself, mate. But there is much truth in what you said, aside from your self-deprecating bit. ;)
I'm not being hard on myself. In fact, I can only say such things because I'm so egotistical, and have learned (I guess something changed with my 17th birthday, as things apparently do) to accept and become comfortable with myself. Well, sometimes.

Therefore, it's unlikely anyone will see me getting particularly upset about things that happen on the internet, the way I used to in the era of the Cult of TInk. Sorry to disappoint.:p

Whatever you're smoking, can I please have some, too?

No. It's a stimulant whereas alcohol is a depressant, so with what you're taking anyway they'll end up canceling each other out and leaving you sober.

If Euclid can be trusted. Bloody commies.

Typical intarwebs attitude. "If she doesn't look like Kate Beckinsale [or insert any other celebrity here], I wouldn't do her." :rolleyes:

Excuse me? What the hell are you on about?

The girl in the OP looks like a sunken faced near-zombie.

I had no idea who Kate Beckinsale was until you mentioned her. No she's not cute either. (Nor do I find many celebs to be.)

And who's said anything about doing her?

Next time, try actually reading what you're actually responding to instead of what you think someone posted.

She's not a communist, she's a "National Bolshevik". Note the armband similarity to the Nazis.

You don't. Ifreann has it now.



DON'T CLOUD THE ISSUE WITH FACTS!!! YOU ARE ONLY A TOOL OF THE WORLDWIDE JEWISH COMMUNIST FEMINAZI REVOLUTION SPREADING ITS HATEFUL LIES TO THE TRILATERAL COMMISSION IN ORDER TO INFLUENCE THE FREEMASON DOMINATED ILLUMINATI AND ABSORB THE KNIGHTS OF COLUMBUS INTO THE SECRET WORLD GOVERNMENT!!!!!!!

A National socialist!

She's not a communist, she's a "National Bolshevik". Note the armband similarity to the Nazis.

I second.

Bloody commies.

Without our efforts to free humanity, their would be noting but evil european empires ruleing the world.

She's not a communist, she's a "National Bolshevik". Note the armband similarity to the Nazis.

Dictionary.com Unabridged (v 1.0.1) - Cite This Source
com·mu·nism /ˈkɒmyəˌnɪzəm/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[kom-yuh-niz-uhm] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation
–noun 1. a theory or system of social organization based on the holding of all property in common, actual ownership being ascribed to the community as a whole or to the state.
2. (often initial capital letter) a system of social organization in which all economic and social activity is controlled by a totalitarian state dominated by a single and self-perpetuating political party.
3. (initial capital letter) the principles and practices of the Communist party.

American Heritage Dictionary - Cite This Source
com·mu·nism (kmy-nzm) Pronunciation Key
n.
A theoretical economic system characterized by the collective ownership of property and by the organization of labor for the common advantage of all members.
Communism
A system of government in which the state plans and controls the economy and a single, often authoritarian party holds power, claiming to make progress toward a higher social order in which all goods are equally shared by the people.
The Marxist-Leninist version of Communist doctrine that advocates the overthrow of capitalism by the revolution of the proletariat.

WordNet - Cite This Source

communism



n 1: a form of socialism that abolishes private ownership

2: a political theory favoring collectivism in a classless society


Kernerman English Multilingual Dictionary (Beta Version) - Cite This Source
communism [ˈkomjunizəm] noun

(often with capital) a system of government under which there is no private industry and (in some forms) no private property, most things being state-owned

^ National Bolshevism meets all of these definitions.

Therefore, she is a communist.

can't say hell because i am a Marxist

um...yeah you can

^ National Bolshevism meets all of these definitions.

Therefore, she is a communist.

NO, Marx was a internationalist, so was Lenin. National Bolshevism is nationalistic, imperialistic, and insanely Russian. And they call themselves nazibols (iv been on their site).
Lenin said "where their is a state their cannot be freedom, where is freedom their cannot be a state."
Therefore the one party owning everything is communism argument falls flat on it's face.

^ National Bolshevism meets all of these definitions.

Therefore, she is a communist.

Oh, I see. I've also been convinced that North Korea are democratic because they call themselves such and have elections.

I've actually observed the opposite... on the internet a lot of people seem to claim that those who really aren't that attractive are worth comparison to $celebrity.

That's called leg-humping.

Excuse me? What the hell are you on about?

The girl in the OP looks like a sunken faced near-zombie.

Apparently, we're not looking at the same girl.

Without our efforts to free humanity, their would be noting but evil european empires ruleing the world.

Communist Britaina, this is Sarcasm. Sarcasm, Communist Britaina.

Don't just stand there -- mingle, talk, get to know each other.


Also, what exactly are you commies "freeing humanity" from? Our rights and freedoms? Personally, I prefer having freedom to than freedom from, and I'm sure a lot of other people do too. Jews in Nazi Germany had freedom from being attacked or killed by the hired armies of the petty-bourgeois in their attempt to suppress the global social revolution, because they were all living in concentration camps; I'm sure they appreciated that freedom a great deal.

Oh, I see. I've also been convinced that North Korea are democratic because they call themselves such and have elections.

Dictionary.com Unabridged (v 1.0.1) - Cite This Source
de·moc·ra·cy /dɪˈmɒkrəsi/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[di-mok-ruh-see] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation
–noun, plural -cies. 1. government by the people; a form of government in which the supreme power is vested in the people and exercised directly by them or by their elected agents under a free electoral system.
2. a state having such a form of government: The United States and Canada are democracies.
3. a state of society characterized by formal equality of rights and privileges.
4. political or social equality; democratic spirit.
5. the common people of a community as distinguished from any privileged class; the common people with respect to their political power.


[Origin: 1525–35; < MF démocratie < LL démocratia < Gk démokratía popular government, equiv. to démo- demo- + -kratia -cracy]
Dictionary.com Unabridged (v 1.0.1)
Based on the Random House Unabridged Dictionary, © Random House, Inc. 2006.
American Heritage Dictionary - Cite This Source
de·moc·ra·cy (d-mkr-s) Pronunciation Key
n. pl. de·moc·ra·cies
Government by the people, exercised either directly or through elected representatives.
A political or social unit that has such a government.
The common people, considered as the primary source of political power.
Majority rule.
The principles of social equality and respect for the individual within a community.


Merriam-Webster's Dictionary of Law - Cite This Source
Main Entry: de·moc·ra·cy
Pronunciation: di-'mä-kr&-sE
Function: noun
Inflected Form: plural -cies
1 a : government by the people; especially : rule of the majority b : a government in which the supreme power is vested in the people and exercised by them directly or indirectly through a system of representation usually involving periodically held free elections
2 : a political unit that has a democratic government —dem·o·crat·ic /"de-m&-'kra-tik/ adjective —dem·o·crat·i·cal·ly adverb

Merriam-Webster's Dictionary of Law, © 1996 Merriam-Webster, Inc.
WordNet - Cite This Source

democracy


n 1: the political orientation of those who favor government by the people or by their elected representatives

2: a political system in which the supreme power lies in a body of citizens who can elect people to represent them [syn: republic, commonwealth] [ant: autocracy]

3: the doctrine that the numerical majority of an organized group can make decisions binding on the whole group [syn: majority rule]

WordNet® 2.0, © 2003 Princeton University


False analogy. North Korea is neither a democracy nor a republic, nor any other form of representative government. Just because it has elections doesn't mean it's a democracy.

Try again.

NO, Marx was a internationalist, so was Lenin. National Bolshevism is nationalistic, imperialistic, and insanely Russian. And they call themselves nazibols (iv been on their site).
Lenin said "where their is a state their cannot be freedom, where is freedom their cannot be a state."
Therefore the one party owning everything is communism argument falls flat on it's face.

"Communism" is a word. That word is defined as I described, taken straight from Dictionary.com. You can look it up if you like.

Lenin may have said such and such thing, but since that is not defined as communist today, but rather Leninist or democratic socialist, you have fallen into the No true Scotsman (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No_true_scotsman) fallacy, thus:

"She is not a real Communist."
"But she is because Communists do blah blah blah and so does she."
"But that's not real Communism."
(etc.)

... What? So I have a logical fallacy fetish. Shut up.

^ National Bolshevism meets all of these definitions.

Therefore, she is a communist.

Communist Britaina, this is Sarcasm. Sarcasm, Communist Britaina.

Don't just stand there -- mingle, talk, get to know each other.


Also, what exactly are you commies "freeing humanity" from? Our rights and freedoms? Personally, I prefer having freedom to than freedom from, and I'm sure a lot of other people do too. Jews in Nazi Germany had freedom from being attacked or killed by the hired armies of the petty-bourgeois in their attempt to suppress the global social revolution, because they were all living in concentration camps; I'm sure they appreciated that freedom a great deal.

Sorry, you've got me confused with the nasty soviet union and Chinese. I am a Trotskyist, i oppose socialism in all it's national forms, and imperialism in it's international forms. When there is revolution their are two choses, Freedom, hardship, and chaos, or order, tyranny and hardship.
FREEDOMS YOU ENJOY THANKS TO MARXISM ARE:
1: The right to unionise
2: The right to join a left-wing party and not be
backlisted and killed.
3: Freedom from European imperialism
4: Freedom from being killed by you boss
for not working hard enough.

don't they talk about 'combat girlfriends' on that site?

Indeed they do.

The Google search results lead to:
Software error:

DBD::mysql::db selectrow_array failed: Can't open file: 'sessions.MYI' (errno: 145) at /home/virtual/site79/fst/var/www/cgi-bin/perllib/CGI/Session/MySQL.pm line 61.

For help, please send mail to the webmaster (bunker@nbp-info.com), giving this error message and the time and date of the error.

But the cache leads to:
Beautiful photos of girls of our party

Beautiful photos of girls of our party from a series - "Our fighting girlfriends"

That leads to a whole site of pics. I surfed it up and was about to post a couple of links until I realized one or two pics would violate the TOS - so I'll leave you with the seach terms and that warning: National bolsheviks Beautiful photos of girls of our party....)
(And there actually are a few cuties there, Cluich...)

Daistallia 2104 View Post
Excuse me? What the hell are you on about?

The girl in the OP looks like a sunken faced near-zombie.
Apparently, we're not looking at the same girl.[/QUOTE]

Having surfed the site, I'd say it's just a bad pic. There's a better pic, to which I'd say yeah, she's alright. But her friend is just heroin chic...

"Communism" is a word. That word is defined as I described, taken straight from Dictionary.com. You can look it up if you like.

Lenin may have said such and such thing, but since that is not defined as communist today, but rather Leninist or democratic socialist, you have fallen into the No true Scotsman (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No_true_scotsman) fallacy, thus:

"She is not a real Communist."
"But she is because Communists do blah blah blah and so does she."
"But that's not real Communism."
(etc.)

... What? So I have a logical fallacy fetish. Shut up.

No seriously, the national Bolsheviks are just nazis who like Stalin and Ivan the terrible. They glorify the tazrist empire in their pamphlets, even a state communist wouldn't do that...

No seriously, the national Bolsheviks are just nazis who like Stalin and Ivan the terrible. They glorify the tazrist empire in their pamphlets, even a state communist wouldn't do that...

Indeed they do.

The Google search results lead to:


But the cache leads to:


That leads to a whole site of pics. I surfed it up and was about to post a couple of links until I realized one or two pics would violate the TOS - so I'll leave you with the seach terms and that warning: National bolsheviks Beautiful photos of girls of our party....)
(And there actually are a few cuties there, Cluich...)



Having surfed the site, I'd say it's just a bad pic. There's a better pic, to which I'd say yeah, she's alright. But her friend is just heroin chic...

I see, as this post revolves around pictures, i shall provided a picture to prove the "national Bolsheviks" are nazis. Note that the person in this is a GERMAN SOLIDER with hammers and sickles superimposed on him.

Sorry, you've got me confused with the nasty Chinese.

what’s wrong with a free market?:p

I am a Trotskyist, i oppose socialism in all it's national forms

you oppose nationalized healthcare?

1: The right to unionise

that has nothing to do with Marxism it was caused by a combination of guilds and worker trouble during the industrial revolution

3: Freedom from European imperialism

complete dribble national determination is not Marxism

4: Freedom from being killed by you boss
for not working hard enough.

that was the Magna carter I do believe

Note that the person in this is a GERMAN SOLIDER with hammers and sickles superimposed on him.

how is it the helmet is all wrong?

how is it the helmet is all wrong?

http://aboutww2militaria.com/February2006/tn_soviet_helmetM36%20(1).jpg

An WWII Soviet helmet, today.

what’s wrong with a free market?:p

What's free about a free market? China's not free at all, it just sells stuff.

you oppose nationalised healthcare?

I meant as in closed borders and secret police.

that has nothing to do with Marxism it was caused by a combination of guilds and worker trouble during the industrial revolution

That has everything to do with Marxism, before Marx their were no trade
unions, no workers rights or socialist parties. They turned up thanks to him
and engels organising the second internationale so well.

complete dribble national determination is not Marxism

Marxism is about bringing about the end of history, if that means nation determination so be it.

that was the Magna carter I do believe

The Magna carter means articles of the barons, it had nothing to do with that. It was mainly about land and limiting the powers of the monarch.
The word "freeman" in medevil english ment a blueblooded nobel, not just anybody.

before Marx their were no trade
unions, no workers rights or socialist parties.

Have you read Marx?

He refers to the existence of all three of those things repeatedly, both in his earlier and his later works.

Sorry, you've got me confused with the nasty soviet union and Chinese. I am a Trotskyist, i oppose socialism in all it's national forms, and imperialism in it's international forms. When there is revolution their are two choses, Freedom, hardship, and chaos, or order, tyranny and hardship.
FREEDOMS YOU ENJOY THANKS TO MARXISM ARE:
1: The right to unionise
2: The right to join a left-wing party and not be
backlisted and killed.
3: Freedom from European imperialism
4: Freedom from being killed by you boss
for not working hard enough.

1: The right to unionize is something that more than just Marxists advocate.
2: The right to join any political party that you might desire to join is a viewpoint advocated by liberals and democrats worldwide.
3: European Imperialism was destroyed by the World Wars, not by Marxism. After the European powers exhausted themselves, they found that they did not have the national political will to maintain their empires, especially in the face of American opposition to Imperialism, and support for decolonialization.
4: I don't even know what deep hole you pulled this one out of.

Have you read Marx?

He refers to the existence of all three of those things repeatedly, both in his earlier and his later works.

I sould have said before the internationale damn it.......

Have you read Marx?

He refers to the existence of all three of those things repeatedly, both in his earlier and his later works.

I tried reading Marx. Good God, what a bore. Then again, Adam Smith is even more boring.

I tried reading Marx. Good God, what a bore. Then again, Adam Smith is even more boring.

At least Smith had academic credibility. Marx just pulled shit out of his ass and proclaimed it the "laws of history."

I tried reading Marx. Good God, what a bore. Then again, Adam Smith is even more boring.

What does that have to do with a piece of tea in china?

At least Smith had academic credibility. Marx just pulled shit out of his ass and proclaimed it the "laws of history."

Marxism is just common sense, better ideas kick the ass out of old ones.

At least Smith had academic credibility. Marx just pulled shit out of his ass and proclaimed it the "laws of history."

Have you ever read Marx?

Marxism is just common sense, better ideas kick the ass out of old ones.

But Marxism is a terrible idea.

At least Smith had academic credibility. Marx just pulled shit out of his ass and proclaimed it the "laws of history."

lol

Have you ever read Marx?

Never finished anything. Boring as hell.

But, his evolution of society thing is totally wrong. He treated it like there was a "natural" way in which human society would evolve. There isn't. Society goes where it wants, it breaks barriers, it damages things. It doesn't follow some moronic formula or plan.

But Marxism is a terrible idea.

Are you one of those anti-communists who support the killing of 50,00,00
people in order to stop communism because its "the worst idea in history"?

i cannot see the point in why bothering with communism at all.

history has proved it does not work

Cuba?

Are you one of those anti-communists who support the killing of 50,00,00
people in order to stop communism because its "the worst idea in history"?

Christ. You are so fucking thick.

Christ. You are so fucking thick.

There's a lot of that going around.

Cuba?

What, economic stagnation, even though the Soviet Union dumped millions of Rubles every day into Cuba, with absolutely no return on their investment? Cuba is a country that continues to exist in the 1950's, and that has virtually nothing to do with the US embargo.

More Communist chicks...
http://i74.photobucket.com/albums/i261/exforcesuk/20060316114250381190684800.jpg

More Communist chicks...
http://i74.photobucket.com/albums/i261/exforcesuk/20060316114250381190684800.jpg

DPRK?

But, his evolution of society thing is totally wrong. He treated it like there was a "natural" way in which human society would evolve. There isn't.

Well, technological development follows a fairly linear path, doesn't it? And technological development affects social development in certain specific ways.

I don't have a problem so much with historical determinism; there are good reasons for it to make sense, at least if you control for factors like geography. I do think Marx overestimated our capability to know the laws of history, however, and make meaningful predictions from them. Whatever his declared materialist orientation, in some ways Marx remained an idealist at heart, and this is one of them.

Society goes where it wants, it breaks barriers, it damages things.

Marx would agree.

It doesn't follow some moronic formula or plan.

Free action does not imply arbitrary action, nor does it mean that no patterns appear when things are viewed in totality. Human beings have natures, technology proceeds upon specific paths, economic circumstances dictate to a great extent the conditions, and thus at least in part, the attitudes of individuals (read Smith, and you'll find him saying the same thing), and history follows certain patterns for all these reasons and more.

This doesn't mean that we can look at global society today and use it to predict everything that will happen in the next century. But it does mean that we can look at economic and social development from the past to discover the kinds of changes that will occur in the future.

Ahh my argument of capitalism is not going well, I have yet to find some capitalist chicks..... *sigh*

Does the porn industry count, as it benefits the free market greatly.

What, economic stagnation, even though the Soviet Union dumped millions of Rubles every day into Cuba, with absolutely no return on their investment? Cuba is a country that continues to exist in the 1950's, and that has virtually nothing to do with the US embargo.

Actually, Cuba is more well off than some South American Capitalist countries. And its poverty has everything to do with the US trade embargo, an embargo created back in the Cold War which has still to be lifted.

I tried reading Marx. Good God, what a bore.

What did you read, Capital?

The rest isn't that bad.

More Communist chicks...
http://i74.photobucket.com/albums/i261/exforcesuk/20060316114250381190684800.jpg

Ooh-la-la! :D

I sould have said before the internationale damn it.......

And you'd still be wrong.

What did you read, Capital?

The rest isn't that bad.

Yes, I only read that one. I'll give the others a look.

Ahh my argument of capitalism is not going well, I have yet to find some capitalist chicks..... *sigh*

Does the porn industry count, as it benefits the free market greatly.

Capitalist chick

http://i66.photobucket.com/albums/h247/hellboy_09/cauldron11.jpg

Never finished anything. Boring as hell.

But, his evolution of society thing is totally wrong. He treated it like there was a "natural" way in which human society would evolve. There isn't. Society goes where it wants, it breaks barriers, it damages things. It doesn't follow some moronic formula or plan.

Here i agree, human history does not follow a fixed path, this is the main failure of Marx. Marx is boring today because its from a century ago and its greatly out of date. The "Proleatrate" no longer exists in the peasant day, it has being replaced by a "unemployed class" of jobless oppressed minorities, and workers are better off due to the privileges work beings. All the goods are produces by "working counties" such as china and india. Thus the workers are divided on global rather than national basis, making a revolution almost impossible.

Actually, Cuba is more well off than some South American Capitalist countries. And its poverty has everything to do with the US trade embargo, an embargo created back in the Cold War which has still to be lifted.

You'll have to remember the starting point for the Cuban economy in 1958 was better than the economies of several Western European nations in 1958, Only by dumping millions of rubles into Cuba on a daily basis was the USSR able to maintain a comparable quality of life to what the Cuban people had before the Revolution. Since the collapse of the USSR, Cuba has been able to maintain quality in some areas by making drastic cuts in others.

You'll have to remember the starting point for the Cuban economy in 1958 was better than the economies of several Western European nations in 1958, Only by dumping millions of rubles into Cuba on a daily basis was the USSR able to maintain a comparable quality of life to what the Cuban people had before the Revolution. Since the collapse of the USSR, Cuba has been able to maintain quality in some areas by making drastic cuts in others.

And it would be able to boost its economy if the Cold War-fearing Government would take off its embargos. Granted, Cuba isn't the grandest nation. But economy and lifestyles can be damned, as its the fact that is one of the few true Communist nations that matters. Not like China, which despite that still suffers from poverty itself.

We've being arguing for a whole hour now. I for one am bored of talking to people who hate my beliefs.

We've being arguing for a whole hour now. I for one am bored of talking to people who hate my beliefs.

Let's think about that for a minute, shall we?

Why do you think people got tired of Trotsky - so tired of him that they hit him in the head with an ice pick?

I think that people got tired of the overphilosophization of the world's problems.

Either that, or someone realized Trotsky was a bullshit artist.

Well, technological development follows a fairly linear path, doesn't it? And technological development affects social development in certain specific ways.
Absolutely not, technological development and wanders and zig-zags, much as a wave. It sputters and it recedes, sometimes it totally collapses.

Don't forget that the Greeks in Alexandria were just a half-step away from developing a steam engine, and, somehow they didn't make the vital connection. Instead we didn't see the steam engine until fairly recently in history.

I don't have a problem so much with historical determinism; there are good reasons for it to make sense, at least if you control for factors like geography. I do think Marx overestimated our capability to know the laws of history, however, and make meaningful predictions from them. Whatever his declared materialist orientation, in some ways Marx remained an idealist at heart, and this is one of them.
I still continue to believe that analyzing and predicting the future cannot be done for much more than two-three years ahead.

And it would be able to boost its economy if the Cold War-fearing Government would take off its embargos. Granted, Cuba isn't the grandest nation. But economy and lifestyles can be damned, as its the fact that is one of the few true Communist nations that matters. Not like China, which despite that still suffers from poverty itself.

Cuba really doesn't matter though.

And I feel that the US is justified in continuing to punish Castro for putting nuclear missiles, not to mention the fact that he advocated their launch, on the island.

Let's think about that for a minute, shall we?

Why do you think people got tired of Trotsky - so tired of him that they hit him in the head with an ice pick?

I think that people got tired of the overphilosophization of the world's problems.

Either that, or someone realized Trotsky was a bullshit artist.

"people" didn't get tired of Trotsky, the K.G.B mundered him. And it was Diago Rivera who did all the paintings.

"people" didn't get tired of Trotsky, the K.G.B mundered him. And it was Diago Rivera who did all the paintings.

The "sword and the shield" of the party, who, according to what they said, was the "sole voice of the people".

"people" didn't get tired of Trotsky, the K.G.B mundered him. And it was Diago Rivera who did all the paintings.

Yes, they murdered him because he was tiresome.

We've being arguing for a whole hour now. I for one am bored of talking to people who hate my beliefs.

I loathe your beliefs because I would fight those who would implement them in society, and if I failed to hold them back, I would probably be killed.

Thus the workers are divided on global rather than national basis, making a revolution almost impossible.

That was exactly what Marx predicted would happen, and indeed, was a precondition for his notion of the communist revolution.

I loathe your beliefs because I would fight those who would implement them in society, and if I failed to hold them back, I would probably be killed.

I wouldn't kill you.

Sorry, you've got me confused with the nasty soviet union and Chinese.
They were communist. So you're not?

I am a Trotskyist, i oppose socialism in all it's national forms,
So therefore you oppose socialism in general? Because socialism won't just happen. Something has to make it happen. That something is almost always a state; show me one example otherwise.

and imperialism in it's international forms. When there is revolution their are two choses, Freedom, hardship, and chaos, or order, tyranny and hardship.
Uh..... what?


1: The right to unionise
Unions were around long before Marx.

2: The right to join a left-wing party and not be
backlisted and killed.
Instead we're blacklisted and killed if we join a right-wing party. Freedom of assembly works both ways.

3: Freedom from European imperialism
Would have happened anyway (ever heard of the First World War?)

4: Freedom from being killed by you boss
for not working hard enough.
Um... in how many instances has this actually happened?

I wouldn't kill you.

Best of luck trying to democratize my stuff then.

What's free about a free market? China's not free at all, it just sells stuff.
People have the ability to buy and sell things. They can own what they make. China doesn't have a free market however; it adheres more to a form of corporate communism (what has also been termed absolute capitalism (http://ns.goobergunch.net/wiki/index.php/Absolute_capitalism)).


I meant as in closed borders and secret police.

So that's "nationalised socialism", whereas nationalised healthcare, welfare, education etc. are not?

Basically the bad things about communism are actually forms of capitalist oppression attributed to Communism as foul lies by the Fascist beast and spread by the bourgeoisie, whereas the good things are the only type of freedom and revolution possible?


That has everything to do with Marxism, before Marx their were no trade
unions, no workers rights or socialist parties. They turned up thanks to him
and engels organising the second internationale so well.

Already taken care of.


Marxism is about bringing about the end of history, if that means nation determination so be it.

... History will go on forever until there are no people left to record it, use a better description than leeching off some old dead Russian dude's phrases.


The Magna carter means articles of the barons, it had nothing to do with that. It was mainly about land and limiting the powers of the monarch.
The word "freeman" in medevil english ment a blueblooded nobel, not just anybody.
Well, technically at the time "free men" meant anyone who was not a serf. That would include nobles as well as merchants, artisans, courtiers, clergy etc. As the definition of "free man" expanded throughout the 16th and 17th centuries, the Magna Carta came to cover all of the newly free people as well, and then was reworked into the Bill of Rights which the UK still has today. Feudalism was already going out by 1215, anyway.

... History will go on forever until there are no people left to record it, use a better description than leeching off some old dead Russian dude's phrases.

The end of history is not the same as as end to things happening and being recorded.

Best of luck trying to democratize my stuff then.

How many factories do you own?

The end of history is not the same as as end to things happening and being recorded.

And it won't happen, because conflict is inherent.

How many factories do you own?

I own portions of several through stock, as well as investments in several service firms.

The end of history is not the same as as end to things happening and being recorded.

I thought so. What does it mean then?

And it won't happen, because conflict is inherent.

Indeed.

I own portions of several through stock, as well as investments in several service firms.

And you'd sacrifice your life for the sake of that stock?

How many factories do you own?

Yes, I suppose stock ownership really mucks with "workers controlling the means of production".

And you'd sacrifice your life for the sake of that stock?

Absolutely. Of course, I'll sacrifice plenty of revolutionaries lives before mine.

My property is a part of me, it is a part of my life and my liberty. If my property is no longer held sacrosanct, then my life and liberty are equally violable. I might as well draw the line at my property.

I thought so. What does it mean then?

An end to the conflicts of history, to the kinds of developments and changes that characterize history as opposed to a mere series of events.

Things happen - but nothing major changes, because everything is perfect. All the contradictions are resolved.

In a parallel meaning, the "end of history" is the end towards which history is directed - almost an objective, yet in a weaker sense of the word, without the element of conscious orientation.

If my property is no longer held sacrosanct, then my life and liberty are equally violable.

Just because you do not distinguish between them does not mean that nobody else does.

Just because you do not distinguish between them does not mean that nobody else does.

The justification for a right to property is derived from the rights to life and liberty, much as a right to life is derived from a combination of rights to property and liberty, and liberty is derived from life and property.

They are indistinguishable.

A table with three legs can stand stably, but a table with two will topple over.

The justification for a right to property is derived from the rights to life and liberty, much as a right to life is derived from a combination of rights to property and liberty, and liberty is derived from life and property.

So it's one big circular argument?

At least you're honest.

So it's one big circular argument?

At least you're honest.

In a world where there is no intrinsic morality, we must build our own.

And the morality we create must be self sustaining.

In a world where there is no intrinsic morality, we must build our own.

Indeed. But we do not do it with circular arguments.

And the morality we create must be self sustaining.

Not if it rests on something else.

Indeed. But we do not do it with circular arguments.

A circular argument is the only that that won't collapse.


Not if it rests on something else.

There is nothing for it to rest one, besides our own normative judgments.

A circular argument is the only that that won't collapse.

Perhaps it doesn't, but it also tells us nothing.

There is nothing for it to rest one, besides our own normative judgments.

And is that not a good place upon which to rest it?

Perhaps it doesn't, but it also tells us nothing.

It tells us all we need to know.

And is that not a good place upon which to rest it?

It would be if normative judgment were uniform, but it is not.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Bolshevik_Party

if you think they are the same then read up on these guys...
Incidentally, her pic can be found here and it can be clcked on to enlarge so that you can actually get a good look at it.

The justification for a right to property is derived from the rights to life and liberty, much as a right to life is derived from a combination of rights to property and liberty, and liberty is derived from life and property.

Sez you.

Sez you.

Like I said, everyone draws different normative conclusions.

Like I said, everyone draws different normative conclusions.

Can you even legitimately call it a conclusion when you've constructed the reasoning around it?

Can you even legitimately call it a conclusion when you've constructed the reasoning around it?

Yes, because it's a conditional argument.

Yes, because it's a conditional argument.

Well, it's actually a completely baseless circular argument, as already established, but you can call it what you like.

She is not a communist. She is a National Bolshevik...which is like the Russian version of nationalism socialism.

Which is why she should be stoned right now.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/7/7a/Yuliya.jpg/200px-Yuliya.jpg

Any counter-arguments? :P

http://passtheammo.com/images/temp/fat-bastard-michael-moore-s.jpg

Don't forget that the Greeks in Alexandria were just a half-step away from developing a steam engine, and, somehow they didn't make the vital connection. Instead we didn't see the steam engine until fairly recently in history.

Yeah, they could have developed the toys of Hero, but the real question is whether they had the metallurgy and precision engineering skills to actually make the next step in anything other than a purely theoretical arena - for that you had to wait for the English during the Industrial Revolution.

I thought so. What does it mean then?

The End of History? It was something that happened when the Berlin Wall came down.

You know, It's kind of sad that when I start a serious thread, it ends up as a joke, and when I start a not-so-serious thread, it becomes a serious debate.

Andaluciae: If you were robbed of everything you own, would you not still live? Property does not equal life, the fact that you even suggest this marks you as some sort of superior materialist. You are the fruit of capitalism, a "last man" in full glory.

I guess that is some kind of achievement, from some perspective.

meh, I'd put in her ass once or twice....:fluffle:

Fat Bastard/Michael Moore photoshop[/IMG]

You win the thread!

You know, It's kind of sad that when I start a serious thread, it ends up as a joke, and when I start a not-so-serious thread, it becomes a serious debate.

Andaluciae: If you were robbed of everything you own, would you not still live? Property does not equal life, the fact that you even suggest this marks you as some sort of superior materialist. You are the fruit of capitalism, a "last man" in full glory.

I guess that is some kind of achievement, from some perspective.

Cute. Trying to make an insult with a Nietzsche reference.

But your understanding of philosophy is clearly limited, because you were unable to read my philosophical argument. My property is the result of my life and my liberty, it would not exist without these two things present. To deprive me of my property is, in essence, to admit that you believe that you have the right to deprive me of my life or my liberty.

Unfortunately, I do believe in something, I believe in me, the most important thing in the world, from my current point of view.

Well, it's actually a completely baseless circular argument, as already established, but you can call it what you like.
There's nothing to rest it on, because there's nothing to rest anything moral on. There's no intrinsic morality, instead there is only that which we create, that which the strong create.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/7/7a/Yuliya.jpg/200px-Yuliya.jpg

EEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW!

Perhaps, but it is not the same thing for a communist government to take your property than your life, the same way it is not the same thing for a fascist government to take your freedom as opposed to your life. Yes, your material property is the fruit of your freedom and life, that's actually more of a communist argument than you may know. But it could be argued that your life is part of your property, and that therefore by taking your stock they are just taking that which is not essential.

To put it in a few words; Life>liberty>lamborghinis

Which is why she should be stoned right now.

Why, is this the time she's usually smoking her pot? :p

Perhaps, but it is not the same thing for a communist government to take your property than your life, the same way it is not the same thing for a fascist government to take your freedom as opposed to your life. Yes, your material property is the fruit of your freedom and life, that's actually more of a communist argument than you may know. But it could be argued that your life is part of your property, and that therefore by taking your stock they are just taking that which is not essential.

To put it in a few words; Life>liberty>lamborghinis
Ah, but I would resist, tooth and nail, anyone who would seek to take my property or my liberty. And I would fully expect them to finally respond by going after the last thing I'd have left.

Your virginity?

Sorry, debate mode failed for a moment there.

I doubt that. Your replies thus far indicate that you're a person who values posessions over most things - even life.
It's easy to state such with bravado, but selfishness is a mindset, and when confronted with the loss of your life, I'm fairly sure your survival would trump your ideals.

Given my judgment of your character, that is. I'm not saying there aren't people who die for ideals.

But let's take a less extreme example (what we have right now is state comes in to redistribute your wealth). You're walking down the street and you get mugged by a man with a gun. You'd rather die than give him your wallet? You're either very dumb or very avarous.

She'd be better if her eyes weren't so far apart.

She'd be better if her eyes weren't so far apart.


Or if she wasn't so freaking ugly

EEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW!

And it won't happen, because conflict is inherent.

That's what the nazis said.

That's what the nazis said.

that’s not an argument that’s throwing a powerful word in to sound like a cunning argument

The Nazis also said the treaty of Versailles was unfair, going to argue that?

That's what the nazis said.

So too did Heraclitus, Hegel, Marx, Kierkegaard and Nietzsche. Are we to assume that they were also Nazis?

National Bolshevism isn't communism! Fascism is capitalism in decay! Death to Stalinism and all of its cronies!

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/7/7a/Yuliya.jpg/200px-Yuliya.jpg

Any counter-arguments? :P

You do realize she's carrying a pro-liberal book, advertising "Another Russia", a mostly liberal body?

So too did Heraclitus, Hegel, Marx, Kierkegaard and Nietzsche. Are we to assume that they were also Nazis?

And the Old Testament.

NEWSFLaSH:

GOD IS A NAZI.

Lousy reason. You could at least have found a cute girl for that.
She's fine, you have no taste!

She's certainly cute. She just looks so serious, though.
That's part of what makes her hot.

Absolutely. Of course, I'll sacrifice plenty of revolutionaries lives before mine.
That's so materialist, it's just sad. I'm not a part of the NS Communist cabal, but to say that a few dollars are the worth of your diginity and life is pathetic.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/7/7a/Yuliya.jpg/200px-Yuliya.jpg

Any counter-arguments? :P


You've convinced med:p

Any counter-arguments? :P
1. That's a National Bolshevik (fascist), not a Commie.
2. http://racicot.csdhr.qc.ca/info/site/Lord/american-bikini-playmate-unknown1.jpeg

1. That's a National Bolshevik (fascist), not a Commie.
2. http://racicot.csdhr.qc.ca/info/site/Lord/american-bikini-playmate-unknown1.jpeg
You know, I think I like the second point a lot. I mean, I think I am converted to capitalism now!!:D

You know, I think I like the second point a lot. I mean, I think I am converted to capitalism now!!:D
Awesomeness!
http://news.bbc.co.uk/media/images/38358000/jpg/_38358057_churchill_victory.jpg

In the OP's view, could the same woman have a swastika on her arm and be a convincing argument to become a Nazi?

Edit: Also, her head is a weird shape, her eyes are weird, and her skin is too pale. She looks like something out of Roswell. Jesus.

Who the hell is that?!? And why do I want to move to Belgium now?It's Frédérique Ries, a Belgian Liberal and member of the European Parliament...

Here's a bigger pic (http://content.answers.com/main/content/wp/en/7/7a/Yuliya.jpg) of the OP's lady (name's Yuliya). She seems ok to me!

I have three. Her face is ugly. She's a communist. I'm gay.

if she were an attractive gay male communist? *batts his eyes at you*

Here's a bigger pic (http://content.answers.com/main/content/wp/en/7/7a/Yuliya.jpg) of the OP's lady (name's Yuliya). She seems ok to me!

She's still getting purged when I take over.

So too did Heraclitus, Hegel, Marx, Kierkegaard and Nietzsche. Are we to assume that they were also Nazis?

heraclitus is so blatently nazi it's not even funny, n00b.:rolleyes:

She's still getting purged when I take over.Well, I personally believe in the idea of "the more the merrier." No one ever died of an overdose of too many ladies (except if they are exceptionally ugly, which she isn't). :D