Guide to Anti-Communism - Especially for NSG
The Parkus Empire
06-02-2008, 03:01
*clears table of papers*
The lifestyle generated by Communism is nowhere near as enjoyable as the one generated by Capitalism.
There, now is that not easier?
I think that their are alot of failed anti-communists on NSG who need help, well here it is, the complete 40-step guide to opposing the evil red menace!
40 Helpful tips for Becoming a Successful Anti-Communist
1. Constantly insist that Marxism is discredited, outdated, and totally dead and buried. Then proceed to build a lucrative career on beating that supposedly ‘dead’ horse for the rest of your working life.
2. Remember, any unnatural death that occurs under a ‘Communist’ regime is not only attributable to the leaders of the state, but also Marxism as an ideology. Ignore deaths that occur for the same reason in non-Communist states.
3. Communism or Marxism is whatever you want it to be. Feel free to label countries, movements, and regimes as ‘Communist’ regardless of things like actual goals, stated ideology, diplomatic relations, economic policy, or property relations.
4. If there was a conflict involving Communists, the conflict and all ensuing deaths can be laid at the feet of Communism. Be careful when applying this to WWII. Fascist movements who fought against the Soviets or Communist partisans are fine, but try not to openly praise Nazi Germany. Save that for private conversations if you must do so.
5. You decide what Marxism “really means”, and who the rightful representatives of Communism were. Feign interest that Trotsky was somehow robbed of power by Stalin, despite the fact that you hate him as well.
6. Constantly talk about George Orwell. Quote from Animal Farm or 1984. Do not worry about the fact that he never set foot in the Soviet Union and both of those books are novels.
7. Quote massive death tolls without regards to demographics or consistency. 3 million famine deaths? 7 million? 10 million? 100 million deaths total? You need not worry about anyone checking your work, which is good for you seeing that you probably haven’t done any.
8. Everyone ever arrested under a Communist regime was most likely innocent of any crime. Communists only arrested harmless poets and political prophets who had a beautiful message to share with the world.
9. Everything Stalin did or didn’t do had some sinister ulterior motive. Everything.
10. Keeping with the spirit of #9, remember that Stalin was an omnipotent being, perhaps an incarnation of the Hindu deity Vishnu, who had full awareness of everything going on in the Soviet Union and total control over every occurrence which took place between 1924 and 1953. Everything that occurred during that time was the will of Stalin. Stalin knew the exact details of every criminal case that took place during that era and out of his boundless cruelty, had tons of innocent people shot for no reason regardless of where they were or their position in life. Being omnipotent, he was not dependent on information passed up from tens of thousands of subordinates.
11. Constantly attack ‘Communist’ regimes for actions that occur in capitalist regimes up to this very day.
12. Claim that Marxism is utopian because of its description of a possible future society. Alternately claim that Marxism failed because it never gave a detailed description of how a Communist society would look. Do not pay attention to the massive contradiction here.
13. Start referring to Marxism as being some kind of religious faith, Messianic, or whatever other spiritualist bullshit you can come up with. When people point out that you can draw similarities between virtually any political ideology and other religions, ignore them.
14. Remember the one-two anti-Communist attack: Attack the post-Stalin system on economic grounds, and claim it just doesn’t work. Since an informed opponent will most likely point out that actual socialist economics did indeed work during the Stalin era, and in fact worked very well, attack that era on human rights grounds.
15. Two words- Human nature. What is human nature? For your purposes, human nature is a quick explanation why political ideas or systems you don’t like are wrong.
16. Bolshevik revolutions were carried out with violence and bloodshed. Bourgeois revolutions were all carried out by democratic referendums, and there was no violence whatsoever.
17. Use words like ‘freedom’ and ‘democracy’ constantly. Do not accept any challenge to define these terms.
18. Communists can be for or against whatever is popular in your particular area. If you are preaching to a right-wing crowd, Communists are for degeneration and homosexuality. If you are preaching to a more mainstream audience, Communists were homophobic. Essentially, Communists are for moral degeneration and puritanical prudery at the same time. Again, do not notice the contradiction.
19. Constantly flog Stalin over the Molotov-Ribbentrop agreement, while totally ignoring massive support and collaboration with Nazi Germany, Fascist Italy, and Imperial Japan on the part of America, Britain, and France, long before the war and even after in some ways. As usual, do not allow your opponent to examine the context of the non-aggression pact.
20. Praise the newfound “freedom” of Eastern Europe. Ignore the massive depopulation via migration, plunging birthrates, huge alcohol and drug problems, political instability, civil wars, ethnic cleansing, sex trafficking and child prostitution, organized crime, high suicide rates, unemployment, disease, etc. Who cares about all that when you have freedom of speech?!
21. Constantly talk about the culture of fear in Communist nations, about that ‘knock on the door’ in the middle of the night. Ignore the ‘kick in your door in the middle of the night, stick a shotgun in your back, and haul your ass out of bed etc. because you are suspected of dealing,’ a normal occurrence in the American War on Drugs.
22. Attack Communists for suppression of religion. Attack Islamic fundamentalists for not being secular. What contradiction?!
23. Do not notice the irony that the US is currently fighting an incredibly expensive, losing war against an opponent which it funded, supported, and even handed its first victory in Afghanistan.
24. What should you say when confronted with all the continuing and often worsening problems in the world today, and asked for a solution? FREEDOM!! (Repeat as necessary until your opponent goes away)
25. Nothing from “Communists” can be trusted. Unless it somehow works in your favor, ala Khrushchev’s ‘Secret Speech’ from 1956, or anything Trotsky wrote.
26. Communist leaders were ‘paranoid’ for devoting so much time to security against counter-revolution. Ignore the mountains of evidence, including the restoration of capitalism in the East Bloc, that this threat was indeed real.
27. Communist regimes were never popular. If proof is presented in various cases to show otherwise, claim that the people were brainwashed. Make no effort to consider the budgetary and logistic constraints on such an undertaking.
28. Communist propaganda is crude and primitive. If someone mentions Red Dawn or worse, mentions the J. Edgar Hoover-endorsed comic book series known as The Godless Communists, run away.
29. Praise secularism in the name of ‘freedom’ and ‘pluralism’ until faced with a Communist. Then play the religion card.
30. Atrocities and other bad things that happen under non-Communist regimes are the fault of individual ‘bad people’. Anything bad that happens under a ‘Communist’ regime is the fault of the ideology and system. And Stalin.
31. Being an anti-Communist means not having to have any sort of ideological consistency whatsoever. Preach populist left-wing pseudo-socialism 90% of the time, and then compare the capitalist system to “Stalin’s Russia”(if you never really studied the subject, just read 1984 and Animal Farm). Bitch about capitalism 99% of the time, but balk when someone suggests Communism as an alternative. Far right wing Fascist? Constantly bitch about cultural degeneracy under capitalism, while remaining fanatically opposed to Marxism for no discernible reason save for your affinity for historic nationalism.
32. If you’re an anarchist, keep pointing out the ‘failure’ of Marxism while ignoring the fact that your ideology has a 100% failure rate throughout its entire history. Blame those failures on Communists, or stronger military powers. Ignore the fact that the most wonderful society is worthless if it can’t defend itself from reaction, and the fact that any system that has no basis in reality is automatically defunct.
33. Neo-Nazi? Communism is Jewish!! Debate over.
34. Neo-Hippy? Tibet!
35. Constantly condemn the genocide that allegedly occurred under Mao, while ignoring the US’ relations with China established by Nixon, and the massive role capitalist China has played in the modern US economy. When you want to talk positively about China, it’s a capitalist country. If you need to criticize it, it’s still ‘Communist’.
36. Claim Marxism is not empirical. Neither are neo-liberalism, ‘democracy’, or ‘freedom’, but don’t worry about that.
37. Always insist that despite the location, country, historical era, past experience, and all other factors, Communists must want to recreate a modern-day copy of Stalin’s Russia, and all that entails according to you. Do not notice the inherent idiocy in this concept, such as your particular country being already industrialized, and not having a historical problem of severe backwardness.
38. Learn to use the magic word ‘totalitarian’. This word allows you to link two ideological opposites, Communism and Fascism.
39. Ignore the fact that socialist states experienced more economic problems parallel to the number of market reforms they made.
40. When challenged about numbers or historical context, resort to labels like “ruthless tyrant”, “cruel murderer”, and such. Remember, people like Stalin were mass-murderers because of all the people they killed, and we know they killed all those people because they were mass-murderers. It totally tracks!
Andaluciae
06-02-2008, 03:06
Boring copy-pasta, got anything better?
About as accurate an analysis as...Dieses Ding (http://www.albinoblacksheep.com/text/victories.html).
Name one successful communist regime
Edit: also if Marxism is so great, and Karl Marx had such a good understanding... name one communist regime that came about in a way remotely similar to what Marx predicted
Your coming along well son, you've got the denial of the industrialization and explosion of industrial output during the time of Stalin, all you need now is more Nazi-ist McCarthy propaganda for your sources, remember to quote 'reputable' sources like 'The Black Book of Communism' and their 'reliable' information often.
<SNIP>
Name one successful Communist regime
Edit: also if Marxism is so great, and Karl Marx had such a good understanding... name one communist regime that came about in a way remotely similar to what Marx predicted
er...wasn't Orwell fairly communist shouts the Spanish civil war
Don't forget also a state informer...
Orwell the State Informer
As if more proof were needed of Orwell's anti-communist credentials, it was revealed in 1996 that in 1949, Orwell offered to provide a secret Foreign Office Propaganda Unit linked to the intelligence services with the names of writers who could be trusted to write anti-communist propaganda, and also with the names of writers and journalists whom he regarded as being `crypto-communist' and `fellow-travellers'. This unit had been set up by the Attlee government in response to the “developing communist threat to the whole fabric of Western civilisation”. Well-known writers, such as Bertrand Russell, Stephen Spender and Arthur Koestler were employed to disseminate misinformation about the USSR, the East European Peoples' Democracies and the communist Parties of Western Europe. Papers release also show that the IRD (Information Research Department) actively promoted the foreign language publication of Animal Farm in places such as Saudi Arabia, where anti-imperialist activity was threatening the oil revenues of imperialism. Thus we can see that
“What attracted the bourgeoisie to this third-rate writer was not his pretended support for the ideals of the October Revolution, but his real driving hatred for the ideals of communism. Had Orwell's characterisation of Stalin, and the CPSU that he led, corresponded to the truth, that would have made Stalin the darling of the imperialist bourgeoisie; had there been a steady erosion of revolutionary principles and had the dictatorship really collapsed into the dictatorship of a cynical few, Stalin's Russia would have been warmly embraced to the point of suffocation by imperialism”. (Lalkar, September/October 1996)
It was precisely because Stalin's USSR did not conform to the picture painted by Orwell that it posed such a threat to imperialism, and this in turn explains the bourgeoisie's joyful embrace of Orwell's tawdry novels and their continued place as compulsory reading for students the world over. It is the duty of all Marxist-Leninists to refute the slanders contained in Orwell's work and to arm our young people with the knowledge they need to defend the Soviet Union both in and out of the classroom. Continuing in the vein pioneered by Trotsky of attacking the Revolution from the Left, showing the same all-pervading contempt for ordinary people and demonstrating the same lack of faith in the ability of the working class to free itself, Orwell has served imperialism just as well as many more openly reactionary writers, and has more than earned the honours that have been heaped upon him.
Call to power
06-02-2008, 03:14
6. Constantly talk about George Orwell. Quote from Animal Farm or 1984. Do not worry about the fact that he never set foot in the Soviet Union and both of those books are novels.
er...wasn't Orwell fairly communist shouts the Spanish civil war
also your forgetting Yevgeny Zamyatin
[NS]Click Stand
06-02-2008, 03:15
This reeks of pro-Stalinism, may I remind you of his bad human rights record (14)
Seriously, how can you favor that guy. He killed upwards of 100 trillion people.
Pick any one of a plethora of worker owned and operated businesses.
Hey, now, you said "communist." Not "Communist." What gulags and huge portraits of Marx and Lenin have to do with communism, I have no idea. Ask Andaras.
Is it me or does NSG prefer mindless popular misconception and conspiracy theory rather than objective fact, it seems it does...
The Loyal Opposition
06-02-2008, 03:16
Name one successful communist regime
Pick any one of a plethora of worker owned and operated businesses.
Hey, now, you said "communist." Not "Communist." What gulags and huge portraits of Marx and Lenin have to do with communism, I have no idea. Ask Andaras.
Pick any one of a plethora of worker owned and operated businesses.
Hey, now, you said "communist." Not "Communist." What gulags and huge portraits of Marx and Lenin have to do with communism, I have no idea. Ask Andaras.
Fixed
Andaluciae
06-02-2008, 03:19
36. Claim Marxism is not empirical. Neither are neo-liberalism, ‘democracy’, or ‘freedom’, but don’t worry about that.
Actually, we do worry about that, and we are able to come to terms with the fact that human behavior is an incredibly complex system, that it is malleable (to an extent) and that the social sciences are not really sciences, and are actually quite soft and imprecise. Exact measurements are impossible, and, as a result, predictions are impossible.
SHOCKER! (http://imagecache2.allposters.com/images/pic/PS/7655~Shocker-Posters.jpg)
Knights of Liberty
06-02-2008, 03:19
This was glorious
The Loyal Opposition
06-02-2008, 03:20
also your forgetting Yevgeny Zamyatin
:eek:
So that's who the drunk Russian sailor at the Lucky Money was yelling about (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deus_Ex)...
"Yevgeny! Yevgeny! Where is Yevgeny?!?!"
I really need to play through that game again. For the 20th time. :D
**puts We on reading list**
Your coming along well son, you've got the denial of the industrialization and explosion of industrial output during the time of Stalin, all you need now is more Nazi-ist McCarthy propaganda for your sources, remember to quote 'reputable' sources like 'The Black Book of Communism' and their 'reliable' information often.
Name one successful Communist regime...
You can't, can you?
The Loyal Opposition
06-02-2008, 03:28
Actually, we do worry about that, and we are able to come to terms with the fact that human behavior is an incredibly complex system, that it is malleable (to an extent) and that the social sciences are not really sciences, and are actually quite soft and imprecise. Exact measurements are impossible, and, as a result, predictions are impossible.
So much for economics. And Game Theory/Social Choice Theory in general.
Name one successful Communist regime...
You can't, can you?
Firstly, define 'successful', I assume in your logic this means capitalist, as in a massive concentration of capital, so no matter how badly the majority is treated, as long as nice skyscrapers (most which you will never even visit) exist it's all fine. My point is that under Stalin industrialization was completely finished in about 10 years, and given the backwardness of Russia, the civil war and WWI which has left the country is a virtual rubble, the Kulaks selling grain on capitalist markets while their countrymen starved. Fascist Tsarist elements taking over the officer corp, WWII etc etc. To ignore situations is not apologizing, it's simply putting into correct perspective the gains made by Stalin.
My point is simply that whenever industrial social labor has been implemented without the bourgeois controlling it, the results have been astonishing, when Stalin become General Secretary Russia had a tiny proletariat, afterwards it comprises the vast majority of the population. The USSR was turned from a backwards feudalistic dump into a modern industrial state with an advanced chemicals industry, electrification of the entire country, thousands of industrial communes etc etc. Look at the numbers yourself if you like. Also I suggest a read of this well-sourced work:
http://www.plp.org/books/Stalin/book.html
Andaluciae
06-02-2008, 03:46
So much for economics. And Game Theory/Social Choice Theory in general.
Game theory and social choice theory are O.K. at predicting individual actions, but far from perfect. Further, they usually deal with situations that are so entirely simple as to be unrealistic (the classic example being the prisoner's dilemma).
It's just rough statistical estimates dressed up in the guise of scientific facts. In fact, most other social scientists are willing to admit the existence of a phenomenon known as "Physics envy", which is nearly exactly what it sounds like.
Andaluciae
06-02-2008, 03:50
Firstly, define 'successful', I assume in your logic this means capitalist, as in a massive concentration of capital, so no matter how badly the majority is treated, as long as nice skyscrapers (most which you will never even visit) exist it's all fine. My point is that under Stalin industrialization was completely finished in about 10 years, and given the backwardness of Russia, the civil war and WWI which has left the country is a virtual rubble, the Kulaks selling grain on capitalist markets while their countrymen starved. Fascist Tsarist elements taking over the officer corp, WWII etc etc. To ignore situations is not apologizing, it's simply putting into correct perspective the gains made by Stalin.
My point is simply that whenever industrial social labor has been implemented without the bourgeois controlling it, the results have been astonishing, when Stalin become General Secretary Russia had a tiny proletariat, afterwards it comprises the vast majority of the population. The USSR was turned from a backwards feudalistic dump into a modern industrial state with an advanced chemicals industry, electrification of the entire country, thousands of industrial communes etc etc. Look at the numbers yourself if you like. Also I suggest a read of this well-sourced work:
http://www.plp.org/books/Stalin/book.html
And I suggest this book (http://www.amazon.com/Ghost-Executed-Engineer-Technology-Research/dp/0674354370) to give you a greater understanding of the failings of Soviet industrialization. It shows how science, industrial and engineering policies were set, not for any particularly good reason, other than increasing the perception of the prestige of the Soviet Union. The failures of the Dnieper Dam, Magnitogorsk and (probably worst of all) the White Sea Canal are detailed in this book, how they were all human disasters, and never met the economic and scientific expectations that were made when they were planned, and the costs that they incurred.
Or, can we forget the Stalinization of Soviet biological sciences, as highlighted by the Kliuva-Roskin Affair, or Lysenkoism. (Oh, God, was Lysenkoism a total disaster.)
Vojvodina-Nihon
06-02-2008, 04:14
the results have been astonishing, when Stalin become General Secretary Russia had a tiny proletariat, afterwards it comprises the vast majority of the population.
You sure this is what you meant here? ;)
Myrmidonisia
06-02-2008, 04:15
I think that their are alot of failed anti-communists on NSG who need help, well here it is, the complete 40-step guide to opposing the evil red menace!
40 Helpful tips for Becoming a Successful Anti-Communist
1. Constantly insist that Marxism is discredited, outdated, and totally dead and buried.
[yawn]
and we know they killed all those people because they were mass-murderers. It totally tracks!
Are all communists so long-winded and dull? And what about all those people that Marx killed? I missed something during my nap.
It's just rough statistical estimates dressed up in the guise of scientific facts.
Still, that's a far cry from "predictions are impossible."
Uncertain, certainly--but that is not the same thing.
Myrmidonisia
06-02-2008, 04:22
Marx didn't kill anybody, Myrmi. He wrote books, and philosophized about how to make a better world.
There's another trait y'all seem to share -- humorlessness.
Trotskylvania
06-02-2008, 04:26
Are all communists so long-winded and dull? And what about all those people that Marx killed? I missed something during my nap.
Marx didn't kill anybody, Myrmi. He wrote books, and philosophized about how to make a better world.
Chumblywumbly
06-02-2008, 04:28
also your forgetting Yevgeny Zamyatin
And Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn, Václav Havel, Mikhail Bulgakov, Milan Kundera, et al.
As for blaming Orwell for helping a government attack totalitarian regimes he had attacked all his life, it seems rather bizarre.
Andaluciae
06-02-2008, 04:29
Still, that's a far cry from "predictions are impossible."
Uncertain, certainly--but that is not the same thing.
Truly accurate predictions are impossible, especially when discussing something as titanic and complex as human society and experience. The more complex a system, the less certain we can be about predictions. When discussing the whole of society, we cannot make the claims that Marx made, without being exposed to immense academic and political scrutiny. We cannot forget the implications of chaos theory in human society.
Hey, if the Soviet Union were so great, it would still be around.
It is.
Just in smaller bite-size pieces.
Like those reaaally small 'fun-size' Snickers bars and such.
I mean.. 'fun-size'? You give me a candy product the size of my thumbnail and I think I would call it 'down-sized'. Seriously, who wants a one-bite-wonder of a Snickers bar? Actually, I could swallow those things without chewing. That's how 'fun' they are. Fun. Fun. Fun.
Chumblywumbly
06-02-2008, 04:37
We cannot forget the implications of chaos theory in human society.
Very true.
Even John Nash, the father of Game Theory, (eventually) realised this to be true.
Hey, if the Soviet Union were so great, it would still be around.
Trotskylvania
06-02-2008, 04:47
There's another trait y'all seem to share -- humorlessness.
You're not usually the sarcastic type, Myrmi. Put a :rolleyes: or a ;) to give us a fighting chance.
Marrakech II
06-02-2008, 04:49
Hey, if the Soviet Union were so great, it would still be around.
Remember the ebil Capitalist killed it? At least Russia is still around.
Oakondra
06-02-2008, 05:06
International Socialism is the destruction of sovereignty for all nations, the abolition of all that is true to men - individual and ancestral history, culture, religion, race, etc. - and the undermining of all liberty for the sake of the "Greater Good". It is the dark breed of multiculturalism and globalism. It is the hypocrisy of political correctness and the bread and butter of powermongers and non-thinkers alike. It is responsible for hundreds of millions of deaths, the abuse of a billion others, and threatens to rise again in this increasingly thoughtless human-machine-infested rock we call Terra. It is war and, at this rate, the end of the world.
It's 1983 in the world, right now. I hate to see where we'll be next year.
How fortunate for leaders that men do not think.
Fleckenstein
06-02-2008, 05:15
International Socialism is the destruction of sovereignty for all nations, the abolition of all that is true to men - individual and ancestral history, culture, religion, race, etc. - and the undermining of all liberty for the sake of the "Greater Good". It is the dark breed of multiculturalism and globalism. It is the hypocrisy of political correctness and the bread and butter of powermongers and non-thinkers alike. It is responsible for hundreds of millions of deaths, the abuse of a billion others, and threatens to rise again in this increasingly thoughtless human-machine-infested rock we call Terra. It is war and, at this rate, the end of the world.
It's 1983 in the world, right now. I hate to see where we'll be next year.
How fortunate for leaders that men do not think.
What's the weather like up your own ass?
Remember the ebil Capitalist killed it? At least Russia is still around.
They didn't even last a century...
Marrakech II
06-02-2008, 05:24
What's the weather like up your own ass?
I assume it is fairly crappy.
It is the dark breed of multiculturalism and globalism.
Dun dun dun dunnnnnn!
Oakondra
06-02-2008, 05:37
What's the weather like up your own ass?
Shitty.
Trotskylvania
06-02-2008, 05:55
God forbid that we're not nationalists or statists...
Easy Steps to being a Communist:
1.Ignore Historical Fact.
2.Discredit people who said those facts.
3.Claim anything that proves you wrong , or presents communists as evil is evil.
4. Compare capitalistism to nazism. (by the way, if it weren't for communism, the nazis would have been able to find a common enemy in the german people, so Communism caused rise ofnazi Germany, resulting in the Holocaust. So add 12 million more to the Soviet death toll.)
5. Claim death tolls were mere happen-stance. "It's not Stalins fault that the Ruissians used politcal prisoners as cannon fodder in WW2."(basicly they sent in a wave of politcal prisoners armed with grenades in to soften up the germans. The ones that fled were shot by the main attack force, the rest took massive casulties.)
Trotskylvania
06-02-2008, 06:18
Easy Steps to being a Marxist-Leninist:
1.Ignore Historical Fact.
2.Discredit people who said those facts.
3.Claim anything that proves you wrong , or presents communists as evil is evil.
4. Compare capitalistism to nazism. (by the way, if it weren't for Marxism-Leninism, the nazis would have been able to find a common enemy in the german people, so Marxism-Leninism caused rise ofnazi Germany, resulting in the Holocaust. So add 12 million more to the Soviet death toll.)
5. Claim death tolls were mere happen-stance. "It's not Stalins fault that the Ruissians used politcal prisoners as cannon fodder in WW2."(basicly they sent in a wave of politcal prisoners armed with grenades in to soften up the germans. The ones that fled were shot by the main attack force, the rest took massive casulties.)
fixed
Talopoli
06-02-2008, 06:36
LOL Tho I fear your list (Andaras) was a bit too pro-Stalin, or at least not anti-Stalin enough, I loved it and shall use it in the future. Also as to 1010102's crappy list, that only applies to Stalinists not Communists.
Thank everyone's god(s) that some Communists came to save this disaster of a thread.
The Loyal Opposition
06-02-2008, 06:37
Game theory and social choice theory are O.K. at predicting individual actions, but far from perfect
True enough. However, the claim that accurate predictions are entirely impossible is going too far.
The Loyal Opposition
06-02-2008, 06:45
Truly accurate predictions are impossible, especially when discussing something as titanic and complex as human society and experience.
A little while ago, this was also the case with every single one of the "hard" sciences.
The more complex a system, the less certain we can be about predictions.
Of course. But "It's hard" doesn't mean "Don't try." Neither does "with reservations" mean "entirely useless or unreliable."
When discussing the whole of society, we cannot make the claims that Marx made, without being exposed to immense academic and political scrutiny.
Marx is neither the beginning nor the end of social science, so I'm not really sure what special meaning his particular example has. I'm confident I can walk up and down the halls of the social science faculty building at school and literally drown in the empirical and normative evidence and arguments that my profs will ofter up to me concerning why Marx was an idiot.
But then I'm in political science. If one wants Marxists, head over to sociology. :D </academic stereotype>
Aggicificicerous
06-02-2008, 06:59
Easy Steps to being a Communist:
4. Compare capitalistism to nazism. (by the way, if it weren't for communism, the nazis would have been able to find a common enemy in the german people, so Communism caused rise ofnazi Germany, resulting in the Holocaust. So add 12 million more to the Soviet death toll.)
That's ridiculous. By the same token, I could say that without capitalism, Germany wouldn't have been hit by the Great Depression, and Hitler wouldn't have come to power. Therefore, capitalism caused the Holocaust. Correlation does not equal causation.
Barringtonia
06-02-2008, 07:14
They didn't even last a century...
Nor did democracy on its first outing, not even 50 years.
To dismiss the entire concept purely on current 'communist' states is absurd - look what democracy has done and look how long it took to get here.
Communism's just got going, as a first time experiment in terms of Russia, China, Cuba et al, it did okay.
Firstly, define 'successful', I assume in your logic this means capitalist, as in a massive concentration of capital, so no matter how badly the majority is treated, as long as nice skyscrapers (most which you will never even visit) exist it's all fine. My point is that under Stalin industrialization was completely finished in about 10 years, and given the backwardness of Russia, the civil war and WWI which has left the country is a virtual rubble, the Kulaks selling grain on capitalist markets while their countrymen starved. Fascist Tsarist elements taking over the officer corp, WWII etc etc. To ignore situations is not apologizing, it's simply putting into correct perspective the gains made by Stalin.
My point is simply that whenever industrial social labor has been implemented without the bourgeois controlling it, the results have been astonishing, when Stalin become General Secretary Russia had a tiny proletariat, afterwards it comprises the vast majority of the population. The USSR was turned from a backwards feudalistic dump into a modern industrial state with an advanced chemicals industry, electrification of the entire country, thousands of industrial communes etc etc. Look at the numbers yourself if you like. Also I suggest a read of this well-sourced work:
http://www.plp.org/books/Stalin/book.html
So, the Союз Советских Социалистических Республик, a 'Communist' country which collapsed under the weight of its own bureaucracy, is your example of a successful Communist regime? That's really rather sad AP.
You could have at least said Cuba, I would have had to have given you that one (although they'll probably fall once Fidel is gone)
Barringtonia
06-02-2008, 07:39
Interesting note on democracy in terms of its conduct during war:
It would be interesting to follow, in Thucydides, the conduct of the Assembly throughout the war: to see how a certain irresponsibility grew — Cleon's remarks about the theatre being already an indication of this; how it became more impatient of control, whether of prudence or of its own laws; how Cleon's doctrine of Force more and more prevailed, notably in the barbarous treatment of Melos, an innocent neutral; how the Assembly turned its fury on unsuccessful commanders, and even on successful ones, until one begins to wonder why any general ever risked serving his country. In spite of a few outstanding instances of moderation and true nobility, it is on the whole a melancholy record of degeneration under the stress of war and opportunist leadership.
Sound familiar?
It's not that democracy hasn't done well in wars - it clearly has - but the point is that no political system is ultimately stable nor impervious to abuse.
Those who simply state democracy is best, without considering all the possible permutations of both democracy or communism are being rather rash in their judgment.
Dontgonearthere
06-02-2008, 07:45
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/b/b3/Communist_States.png
That really says it all, doesnt it?
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/b/b3/Communist_States.png
That really says it all, doesnt it?
Except at this point China should probably be at least fuschia since they have adopted some capitalist policies to avoid having their economy collapse
Sorry, but I got to like 14 or 15 and then quit, because you were just progressivley coming out of character with profanity, slips of not being sarcastic, and just plain poor grasp of rhetorical skills. Try again next time. Here's my tip: try humor, it keeps people's interest:) You started out well, though.
And, please tell me you inserted the 40 number AFTER you made your arguments, rather than stretching 3 or 4 into forty.
Ah, but if you were enlightened like AP, you would have found that riveting :p
Dontgonearthere
06-02-2008, 07:56
Except at this point China should probably be at least fuschia since they have adopted some capitalist policies to avoid having their economy collapse
My point exactly.
The only successful nation on that map isnt even really Communist. In fact, one might say they arent even Communist at all, except in the sense that they CALL themselves Communist. And that hardly counts for anything these days.
Legumbria
06-02-2008, 07:56
I think that their are alot of failed anti-communists on NSG who need help, well here it is, the complete 40-step guide to opposing the evil red menace!
40 Helpful tips for Becoming a Successful Anti-Communist
1. Constantly insist that Marxism is discredited, outdated, and totally dead and buried. Then proceed to build a lucrative career on beating that supposedly ‘dead’ horse for the rest of your working life.
... ... ...
40. When challenged about numbers or historical context, resort to labels like “ruthless tyrant”, “cruel murderer”, and such. Remember, people like Stalin were mass-murderers because of all the people they killed, and we know they killed all those people because they were mass-murderers. It totally tracks!
Sorry, but I got to like 14 or 15 and then quit, because you were just progressivley coming out of character with profanity, slips of not being sarcastic, and just plain poor grasp of rhetorical skills. Try again next time. Here's my tip: try humor, it keeps people's interest:) You started out well, though.
And, please tell me you inserted the 40 number AFTER you made your arguments, rather than stretching 3 or 4 into forty.
And Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn, Václav Havel, Mikhail Bulgakov, Milan Kundera, et al.
As for blaming Orwell for helping a government attack totalitarian regimes he had attacked all his life, it seems rather bizarre.
As Ludo Martens rightly points out, Solzhenitsyn 'became the official voice for the fiver per cent of Tsarists, bourgeois, speculators, kulaks, pimps, maffiosi and Vlasovites, all justifiably repressed by the socialist state.'
http://www.plp.org/books/Stalin/node118.html#SECTION001034400000000000000
Greater Trostia
06-02-2008, 08:34
Communism is it's own anti-communism.
Wowie. So yeah, maybe he *deserved* to be sent to the camps, is that what you're saying?
Of course he did, he was sent there by Stalin* wasn't he? :rolleyes:
*translate that to Jesus Christ equivalent for AP
Greater Trostia
06-02-2008, 08:38
As Ludo Martens rightly points out, Solzhenitsyn 'became the official voice for the fiver per cent of Tsarists, bourgeois, speculators, kulaks, pimps, maffiosi and Vlasovites, all justifiably repressed by the socialist state.'
http://www.plp.org/books/Stalin/node118.html#SECTION001034400000000000000
Wowie. So yeah, maybe he *deserved* to be sent to the camps, is that what you're saying?
To dismiss the entire concept purely on current 'communist' states is absurd - look what democracy has done and look how long it took to get here.
Yeah, but democracy also didn't inflict anywhere near the same colossal human, environmental, and economic cost as communism. If this is only communism's first failure, I'd hate to see how much worse additional iterations could be. Perhaps some other model will come along, but it's safe to say Marxism-Leninism is a failure and does not work.
Communism's just got going, as a first time experiment in terms of Russia, China, Cuba et al, it did okay.
But of those, only China is doing really well and it's solely because they've dismantled a lot of the communist-era stuff in favor of a market economy. The thing is, communism simply could not compete with the capitalist countries; this doesn't necessarily
Wowie. So yeah, maybe he *deserved* to be sent to the camps, is that what you're saying?
Class struggle friend, if you think the struggle should be dropped as 'unjust' and the exploiter left alone just because people get hurt, then you're weak and naive, as well as holding ultra-idealistic and unrealistic thought processes.
Marx observed that the ruling class struggle has never given up power willingly or without bloodshed, and indeed the bourgeois know this too. Revolutionary terror is the legitimate expression of the aggravation of class struggle under socialism.
It saddens me greatly that even the 'left' these days believe the bourgeois and Nazi lies about comrade Stalin. Prison under Marxist law simply represents the socialist purpose of the judiciary, and the struggle over bourgeois jurisprudence. Law to the Marxist is a tool in the socialist period (just as the state is) for carrying on the class struggle.
It saddens me greatly that even the 'left' these days believe the bourgeois and Nazi lies about comrade Stalin. Prison under Marxist law simply represents the socialist purpose of the judiciary, and the struggle over bourgeois jurisprudence. Law to the Marxist is a tool in the socialist period (just as the state is) for carrying on the class struggle.
Your problem AP, is that you're at the other extreme. The western propaganda about Stalin was not 100% accurate, but then it also wasn't completely baseless. He was not a nice guy by any stretch of the imagination (think the purges and quotas thereof), he was however, through force of personality a very effective leader.
Questers
06-02-2008, 08:47
guise stfu pls andaras is talking
http://www.channel4.com/more4/media/images/documentaries/R/russia/gallery2/stalin_384x350.jpg
Oh, he didn't have anything important or slightly amusing to say, as usual. Carry on.
Greater Trostia
06-02-2008, 08:58
Class struggle friend, if you think the struggle should be dropped as 'unjust' and the exploiter left alone just because people get hurt, then you're weak and naive, as well as holding ultra-idealistic and unrealistic thought processes.
Uh, adhering to International Law, basic principles of Human Rights, and in general not imprisoning people and using them for slave labor in Siberia is not "weak."
Seriously, what do you think, my choice NOT to commit rape and murder is "pansy?" Is that all you've got? I must be weak, because I'm not into fucking Stalinism?
'Oh, it's OK to commit crimes against humanity. It's a class struggle! Some people have more MONEY than ME, therefore crimes against humanity are OK and people who disagree with me are just pussies!'
Wow. So how many people have you persuaded to communism with your arguments? Anyone?
Marx observed that the ruling class struggle has never given up power willingly or without bloodshed, and indeed the bourgeois know this too. Revolutionary terror is the legitimate expression of the aggravation of class struggle under socialism.
Hmm. What a compelling pair of statements. You know, you've convinced me - crimes against humanity are in fact, good things.
It saddens me greatly that even the 'left' these days believe the bourgeois and Nazi lies about comrade Stalin.
...
You can't be serious.
Law to the Marxist is a tool in the socialist period (just as the state is) for carrying on the class struggle.
We've always been at war with Eastasia.
So, you're into Stalinism, crimes against humanity, oppression by the state, and a perpetual "class war" under which you can march march march and wear shiny red armbands and feel good about yourself.
Yeah. See - you are exactly what I meant. You are the best voice of anti-communism ever, because you shamelessly endorse, try to rationalize, and all but wet your pants about things that no reasonable and non-sociopathic people could. I'm just going to let you keep on talking...
You beat your own horse, and convince the rest of us that it's best left dead.
'International Law', 'Human Rights', are you joking, is this the best you have? To quote concepts created by bourgeois states to justify their dictatorship, the same as 'freedom' and your 'democracy' are just veils for the classocracy of capitalism, such niceties should not last a second when bourgeois power becomes threatened. Your 'rights' and 'democracy' are nothing but illusions and you buy into them. To explain I will quote something from Lenin's analysis of the dictatorship of the proletariat...:
The working people have been emancipated from their age-old oppressors and exploiters, the landowners and capitalists. This step in the direction of real freedom and real equality, a step which for its extent, dimensions and rapidity is without parallel in the world, is ignored by the supporters of the bourgeoisie (including the petty-bourgeois democrats), who, when they talk of freedom and equality, mean parliamentary bourgeois democracy, which they falsely declare to be “democracy” in general, or “pure democracy” (Kautsky).
But the working people are concerned only with real equality and real freedom (freedom from the landowners and capitalists), and that is why they give the Soviet government such solid support.
You can't be serious
Yes, he is... kind of freaky, huh?
*sigh* there is no hope for some people is there. And every word Andaras speaks makes the sane, rational socialists who do kneel down and fellate Stalin at every chance.
'Socialist', you have some nerve to call yourself that, coming from the revisionist and deviationist 'left' who more than any group, though their apologism to the bourgeois and obsession with bourgeois parliamentarianism, do harm to the cause of the workers. In the end you represent nothing but another tool in the bourgeois apparatus...
But we shall never recognise equality with the peasant profiteer, just as we do not recognise “equality” between the exploiter and the exploited, between the sated and the hungry, nor the “freedom” for the former to rob the latter. And those educated people who refuse to recognise this difference we shall treat as whiteguards, even though they may call themselves democrats, socialists, internationalists, Kautskys, Chernovs, or Martovs.
Trotskylvania
06-02-2008, 09:08
*sigh* there is no hope for some people is there. And every word Andaras speaks makes the sane, rational socialists who do kneel down and fellate Stalin at every chance.
*sigh* there is no hope for some people is there.
I agree, there is no hope for AP.
I'm just amused that income inequality in Stalin's USSR was far higher than that in any capitalist country of the time. It took Khrushchev years of hard work to reduce it to a far more equitable level fitting a socialist economy.
I'm just amused that income inequality in Stalin's USSR was far higher than that in any capitalist country of the time. It took Khrushchev years of hard work to reduce it to a far more equitable level fitting a socialist economy.
No, it was Stalin who was trying through vicious class struggle to build socialism, while the kulaks and other hidden bourgeois elements horded grain to speculate on higher prices on capitalist markets abroad, while their countrymen starved and they tried to stop the industrialization so the feudal peasant caste could stay in power and not be outdone by the proletarians. These bourgeois-inspiring peasants horded 40,000,000 poods of grain at ten times the state price and caused famine by selling it abroad.
Trotskylvania
06-02-2008, 09:26
'Socialist', you have some nerve to call yourself that, coming from the revisionist and deviationist 'left' who more than any group, though their apologism to the bourgeois and obsession with bourgeois parliamentarianism, do harm to the cause of the workers. In the end you represent nothing but another tool in the bourgeois apparatus...
Strong words coming from a war crimes apologist. I have said it before, and I will say it again: I am an anarcho-syndicalist. Because I oppose the excesses of men like Stalin does not mean that I defend the bourgeoisie. As a matter of fact, the reason why I despise Stalin so much is that he and so many other Marxist-Leninists fail to see that they are often the most bourgeois of anyone.
Clinging to little Red Books or singing the sacred litanies of Lenin will not save them from the simple fact that they intensified the class domination of capitalism with their vanguard party. The vanguard is an inherently bourgeois apparatus. It's structure makes it antithetical to the very popular power it professes to support. Any ruthlessly centralizing force like the vanguard party or the "proletarian dictatorship" cannot hope to be wielded in a revolutionary fashion.
The new boss is the same as the old boss. What you fail to recognize is that socialism only has meaning if it questions the existence of the boss-slave social relationship, and levels it. If it merely cloaks the same social relationship behind words like "worker's state" or "vanguard party", then it is even more vile then the bourgeoisie it professes to oppose. It does not oppose them, it supplants them, and makes itself king.
Who then is the tool, huh? All organs of hierarchical domination are inherantly anti-socialist, and must be smashed. The bourgeois state, as well as the capitalist social relationship must be undone. No Gods, No Masters. All those who argue otherwise while clinging "socialist" beliefs are their own worst enemy.
Risottia
06-02-2008, 10:02
I think that their are alot of failed anti-communists on NSG who need help, well here it is, the complete 40-step guide to opposing the evil red menace!
Nice! (there were some repetitions, though)
Bandiera rossa la trionferà!
Skinny87
06-02-2008, 10:09
I fail to see the point with arguing with AP. He's so ideologically-driven that he denies any evidence thrown at him, and won't even respond to criticism thrown at him using allegedly 'biased' sources - see his thread on Stalin where I called him on the Katyn Massacre. I showed original doucments showing Stalin ordered the masscare, but he still believes it was a German plot.
So really, there's no point in arguing with him. At least the Neo-Nazis can have a good debate before they sulk.
I fail to see the point with arguing with AP. He's so ideologically-driven that he denies any evidence thrown at him, and won't even respond to criticism thrown at him using allegedly 'biased' sources - see his thread on Stalin where I called him on the Katyn Massacre. I showed original doucments showing Stalin ordered the masscare, but he still believes it was a German plot.
So really, there's no point in arguing with him. At least the Neo-Nazis can have a good debate before they sulk.
It's fun seeing how extreme his arguments get
I fail to see the point with arguing with AP. He's so ideologically-driven that he denies any evidence thrown at him, and won't even respond to criticism thrown at him using allegedly 'biased' sources - see his thread on Stalin where I called him on the Katyn Massacre. I showed original doucments showing Stalin ordered the masscare, but he still believes it was a German plot.
So really, there's no point in arguing with him. At least the Neo-Nazis can have a good debate before they sulk.
Like I said, this is the only guys I know who would fail to even get that there was a joke in the peasant commune scene in Monty Python and the Holy Grail.
Of course since Australia is not bloody likely to become communist anytime soon and other states are either collapsing or attempting to sneakily become more market based...
Well, I see AP becoming one of them old crazy dudes who just shouts on street corners and everyone else ignores.
Mad hatters in jeans
06-02-2008, 12:55
I liked this OP, well done. Most useful.
HotRodia
06-02-2008, 16:12
I think that their are alot of failed anti-communists on NSG who need help, well here it is, the complete 40-step guide to opposing the evil red menace!
40 Helpful tips for Becoming a Successful Anti-Communist
<snipped for brevity>
Next time, cite your source. It's not that hard to copy and paste the link after doing it for all that text.
NationStates Capitalist Oppressor
HotRodia