scary quotes

[PHUNX]

Scary Quotes
BE AFRAID BE VERY AFRAID



"General Franco was a loyal friend and ally of the United States."- Richard Nixon toasted after Franco's death


"No, I don't know that atheists should be considered as citizens, nor should they be considered as patriots. This is one nation under God."- George Herbert Walker Bush 41st President of the United States

"Can it be that we, too, are ready to embrace the foul concepts of atheism? Somebody is tampering with America's soul, I leave it to you who that somebody is."- Robert Byrd US Senator, Democrat from West Virginia

If we have to give up either religion or education, we should give up education."- William Jennings Bryan American political leader


"We must expel Arabs and take their places."

"We must do everything to insure they [the Palestinians] never do return.... The old will die and the young will forget."

'The present map of Palestine was drawn by the British mandate. The Jewish people have another map which our youth and adults should strive to fulfill: from the Nile to the Euphrates."

"If I were an Arab leader, I would never sign an agreement with Israel. It is normal; we have taken their country. It is true God promised it to us, but how could that interest them? Our God is not theirs. There has been anti-Semitism, the Nazis, Hitler, Auschwitz, but was that their fault? They see but one thing: we have come and we have stolen their country. Why would they accept that?"

"A Christian state should be established [in Lebanon], with its southern border on the Litani river. We will make an alliance with it. When we smash the Arab Legion's strength and bomb Amman, we will eliminate Transjordan too, and then Syria will fall. If Egypt still dares to fight on, we shall bomb Port Said, Alexandria and Cairo.... And in this fashion, we will end the war and settle our forefathers' account with Egypt, Assyria, and Aram."

- David Ben Gurion One of the founders of modern Israel



"We're going to bring back God and the Bible and drive the gods of secular humanism out of the public schools of America."

"Gay rights activists seek to substitute, for laws rooted in JudeoChristian morality, laws rooted in the secular humanist belief that all consensual sexual acts are morally equal. That belief is anti-biblical and amoral; to codify it into law is to codify a lie."

"The courts and the media elite are abolishing America, they are deconstructing our country ... they have dethroned our God."

"Our culture is superior. Our culture is superior because our religion is Christianity and that is the truth that makes men free."

"There were no politics to polarize us then, to magnify every slight. The "negroes" of Washington had their public schools, restaurants, bars, movie houses, playgrounds and churches; and we had ours."

"There is nothing wrong with us sitting down and arguing that issue that we are a European country."

"Hitler's success was not based on his extraordinary gifts alone. His genius was an intuitive sense of the mushiness, the character flaws, the weakness masquerading as morality that was in the hearts of the statesmen who stood in his path."

"The real liberators of American women were not the feminist noise-makers, they were the automobile, the supermarket, the shopping center, the dishwasher, the washer-dryer, the freezer."

- Pat Buchanan US Presidential Candidate 2000, 1996, etc


"The recognition of God as the ruling and leading power in the universe and the grateful acknowledgment of His favors and blessings are necessary to the best type of citizenship."- Boy Scouts of America

"Only out of respect, because he was our teacher, did we not beat him to death on the spot."- Syed Bilal Former 17-year-old student of Dr. Younus Shaikh; the latter was convicted of blasphemy in Pakistan in August, 2001, for teaching that Mohammed did not practice Islam until after he had received his revelation


"If we took away women's right to vote, we'd never have to worry about another Democrat president. It's kind of a pipe dream, it's a personal fantasy of mine, but I don't think it's going to happen. And it is a good way of making the point that women are voting so stupidly, at least single women.
It also makes the point, it is kind of embarrassing, the Democratic Party ought to be hanging its head in shame, that it has so much difficulty getting men to vote for it. I mean, you do see it's the party of women and 'We'll pay for health care and tuition and day care — and here, what else can we give you, soccer moms?"

"We should invade their countries, kill their leaders and convert them to Christianity. We weren't punctilious about locating and punishing only Hitler and his top officers. We carpet-bombed German cities; we killed civilians. That's war. And this is war."

- Ann Hart Coulter political commentator

[¿Que?]

My blood pressure just went up from reading those. I think I need a xanax.

[Comrade B]

Creepy, sick, nationalist cappie fucks...

[red cat]

SICK is the word.

[Sam Da Communist]

We got racists, suidcidal sexists, zionists, religious fundies, anti-left fascists.

That franco thing was the most creepiest. :blink: this truly shows capitalism's allegiance with fascism. nice attack on the right wingers phunx.

[Chambered Word]

My blood pressure just went up from reading those. I think I need a xanax.

I know how you feel...

[Bud Struggle]

Well, let's see:


"General Franco was a loyal friend and ally of the United States."- Richard Nixon toasted after Franco's death That is pretty much true--he was on our side during the Cold War.


"Can it be that we, too, are ready to embrace the foul concepts of atheism? Somebody is tampering with America's soul, I leave it to you who that somebody is."- Robert Byrd US Senator, Democrat from West Virginia A good deal less nasty than some of the anti-religion stuff that is posted around here.


"There is nothing wrong with us sitting down and arguing that issue that we are a European country." That's pretty true--our culture is derived from European culture--though we do have a mixture of other things in there also.


"Hitler's success was not based on his extraordinary gifts alone. His genius was an intuitive sense of the mushiness, the character flaws, the weakness masquerading as morality that was in the hearts of the statesmen who stood in his path." This quote is pretty insightful. The point is that Hitler came to power in part because people who had the ability and the opportunity didn't stand in his way.


"The real liberators of American women were not the feminist noise-makers, they were the automobile, the supermarket, the shopping center, the dishwasher, the washer-dryer, the freezer." How is this different than what the technocrats are saying about the role of technology in society?


"The recognition of God as the ruling and leading power in the universe and the grateful acknowledgment of His favors and blessings are necessary to the best type of citizenship."- Boy Scouts of America If people want to have faith in God--that's their business.


If we took away women's right to vote, we'd never have to worry about another Democrat president. That's probably true. Women vote more Democratic than men.

Though I grant you some of the quotes are pretty bad.

[AK]

Ew. Religion.

[Havet]

"The right of holding slaves is clearly established in the Holy Scriptures, both by precept and example."


Just like what Nazi Germany did to the Jews, so liberal America is now doing to the evangelical Christians. It's no different. It is the same thing. It is happening all over again. It is the Democratic Congress, the liberal-based media and the homosexuals who want to destroy the Christians. Wholesale abuse and discrimination and the worst bigotry directed toward any group in America today. More terrible than anything suffered by any minority in history.

:blink:

[Bud Struggle]

Here's a couple of beauties by old Joe Stalin:



Education is a weapon whose effects depend on who holds it in his hands and at whom it is aimed.

Gratitude is a sickness suffered by dogs.

Ideas are more powerful than guns. We would not let our enemies have guns, why should we let them have ideas.


One death is a tragedy; one million is a statistic.

[AK]

:blink:
And that's because the Bourgeois media is just soooooo leftist :lol:

[red cat]

Here's a couple of beauties by old Joe
Stalin:

Education is a weapon whose effects depend on who holds it in his hands and at whom it is aimed.

Gratitude is a sickness suffered by dogs.

Ideas are more powerful than guns. We would not let our enemies have guns, why should we let them have ideas.


One death is a tragedy; one million is a statistic.


While all the quotations by Marx or Lenin can be referred in their works, I didn't find a single work by Stalin mentioning any of the above. May be Stalin went on random sprees of spewing disconnected sentences out of context so that true revolutionaries could find something to criticize half a century later. :lol:

[rednordman]

Creepy, sick, nationalist cappie fucks...What the hell do you mean??? They are all heroes of the 'free' world.:rolleyes:lol

[Bud Struggle]

While all the quotations by Marx or Lenin can be referred in their works, I didn't find a single work by Stalin mentioning any of the above. May be Stalin went on random sprees of spewing disconnected sentences out of context so that true revolutionaries could find something to criticize half a century later. :lol:

I rather think that goes for all of the quotes on this thread--almost all are verbal hearsay and all are taken out of context. ;)

[PHUNX]

Well, let's see:

That is pretty much true--he was on our side during the Cold War.
"our side" and who side exactly are you on, so the enemy of our enemy is our friend is that what your saying

That's pretty true--our culture is derived from European culture--though we do have a mixture of other things in there also.
you obviously dont understand what he is saying he is not talking about culture let me translate it for you

"There is nothing wrong with us sitting down and arguing that issue that we are a White country"

How is this different than what the technocrats are saying about the role of technology in society?
well being a technocrat myself i'd say the automobile, the supermarket, the shopping center, the dishwasher, the washer-dryer, the freezer has made life easier for everyone but last time i checked washer-dryers and freezers didn't give women the right to vote, serve in the military, have a divorce, acquire a bank loan extra i believe that was those "feminist noise-makers"

If people want to have faith in God--that's their business.
i agree but that not what there saying. there saying "[gods] favors and blessings are necessary to the best type of citizenship" in other words atheists are not "the best type of citizenship"

[Morgenstern]

If the quotes are true is this any shocking revelation? Rich, white, Christians rule this country. The older ones (like Pat Buchanan) would of course have a bit of reaction against other races or a secularism. The Nixon quote about General Franco is no surprise, if we [the United States Government] can put Pinochet in Chile we can surely support any other dictator. Capitalist rulers are largely a combination of racist, clinging to Christianity, untrue to their rhetoric, or simply scared of losing the traditional power structure in this country since its founding. I have a feeling as the older rulers and puppets die off we will see a slight creeping in of other races and other religions (or just plain secularism) so most of those quotes won't be said under a different man in 50 or 100 years. But what will remain is that as long as capitalist rulers exist we cannot hope for a straight up and honest action. Capital is a beast that once tamed, will force its master to side with anybody necessary.

[Bud Struggle]

"our side" and who side exactly are you on, so the enemy of our enemy is our friend is that what your saying I'm saying that it was the Cold War--everybody has strange bedfellows in those days. Besides by the time he died Franco wasn't all that much of a Fascist, he was just another meglomaniac European dictator very similar to the kind that Communist Eastern Europe produced in great abundance.


you obviously dont understand what he is saying he is not talking about culture let me translate it for you

"There is nothing wrong with us sitting down and arguing that issue that we are a White country" Oh, I understood that it COULD mean that--but that's the problem with taking quotes out of context. It could mean the way I interpreted it also.


well being a technocrat myself i'd say the automobile, the supermarket, the shopping center, the dishwasher, the washer-dryer, the freezer has made life easier for everyone but last time i checked washer-dryers and freezers didn't give women the right to vote, serve in the military, have a divorce, acquire a bank loan extra i believe that was those "feminist noise-makers" Again--it's how you want to take it. Economic progress was/is the facilitator of political independence, that's all.


i agree but that not what there saying. there saying "[gods] favors and blessings are necessary to the best type of citizenship" in other words atheists are not "the best type of citizenship" But look, you have to admit that Communists do exactly the same thing but in the opposite. To REALLY be a good Communist you have to be materialistic and that by its nature excludes any belief in God.

Now, look at Ben Gurion's quotes--there is no doubt how those quotes should be taken.

Interesting quotes anyway.

[rednordman]

Well, let's see:

That is pretty much true--he was on our side during the Cold WarIts a very hypercritical thing of the USA to say. That is that during the cold war, it was always the West harking on about being morally superior ('we do not supress our people with guns' etc). Yet when someone who did that in a measure to rival some of the communist governments at the time, he is all of a sudden a hero and ally, just because he is against communism. OK, if you take away morals, but to then critizise the USSR for repressing 'free speach'.....Franco was no better (especially before ww2).

[Bud Struggle]

Franco was no better (especially before ww2).

I can't disagree with you there. Franco was a pretty creepy guy.

[red cat]

I rather think that goes for all of the quotes on this thread--almost all are verbal hearsay and all are taken out of context. ;)

Except that most of the quotes and ideas attributed to Stalin are not reflected in the actions of Marxist-Leninists.

[PHUNX]

I'm saying that it was the Cold War--everybody has strange bedfellows in those days. Besides by the time he died Franco wasn't all that much of a Fascist, he was just another meglomaniac European dictator very similar to the kind that Communist Eastern Europe produced in great abundance.
what your saying is its alright to support fascist dictators but not Communist dictators personally i'd rather support dictators that believe in equality than support dictators that believe in inequality and privilege. franco is only one of the fascists that the american government supported over democratically elected leftist parties. there's also Fulgencio Batista, FERDINAND MARCOS, HASSANAL BOLKIAH, SITIVENI RABUKA, MAXIMILIANO HERNANDEZ MARTINEZ, ANASTASIO SOMOZA, SR. AND JR, ROBERTO SUAZO CORDOVA, GENERAL MANUEL NORIEGA, VINICIO CEREZO, ALFREDO CRISTIANI, HALIE SELASSIE, IAN SMITH, P. W. BOTHA, GENERAL SAMUEL DOE, MOBUTU SESE SEKO, HUSSAN II, CHIANG KAI-SHEK, NGO DINH DIEM, PARK CHUNG HEE, MOHAMMED ZIA UL-HAQ, FULGENCIO BATISTA, RAFAEL LEONIDAS TRUJILLO, FRANÇOIS & JEAN CLAUDE DUVALIER, GENERAL HUMBERTO BRANCO, COLONEL HUGO BANZER, GENERAL JORGE RAFAEL VIDELA, ALFREDO STROESSNER, GENERAL AUGUSTO PINOCHET, MOHAMMAD REZA PAHLEVI, ANTONIO DE OLIVEIRA SALAZAR, GEORGE PAPADOPOULOS, TURGUT OZAL and worst of all SUHARTO almost all rose to power through bloody CIA-backed coups :(

Besides by the time he died Franco wasn't all that much of a Fascist
tell that to the Basque, being a little bit fascist is like being a little bit pregnent

[Bud Struggle]

what your saying is its alright to support fascist dictators but not Communist dictators personally i'd rather support dictators that believe in equality than support dictators that believe in inequality and privilege. franco is only one of the fascists that the american government supported over democratically elected leftist parties. there's also Fulgencio Batista, FERDINAND MARCOS, HASSANAL BOLKIAH, SITIVENI RABUKA, MAXIMILIANO HERNANDEZ MARTINEZ, ANASTASIO SOMOZA, SR. AND JR, ROBERTO SUAZO CORDOVA, GENERAL MANUEL NORIEGA, VINICIO CEREZO, ALFREDO CRISTIANI, HALIE SELASSIE, IAN SMITH, P. W. BOTHA, GENERAL SAMUEL DOE, MOBUTU SESE SEKO, HUSSAN II, CHIANG KAI-SHEK, NGO DINH DIEM, PARK CHUNG HEE, MOHAMMED ZIA UL-HAQ, FULGENCIO BATISTA, RAFAEL LEONIDAS TRUJILLO, FRANÇOIS & JEAN CLAUDE DUVALIER, GENERAL HUMBERTO BRANCO, COLONEL HUGO BANZER, GENERAL JORGE RAFAEL VIDELA, ALFREDO STROESSNER, GENERAL AUGUSTO PINOCHET, MOHAMMAD REZA PAHLEVI, ANTONIO DE OLIVEIRA SALAZAR, GEORGE PAPADOPOULOS, TURGUT OZAL and worst of all SUHARTO almost all rose to power through bloody CIA-backed coups :( I agree that the US supported some bad people but I don't think that most of these guys were put in office by the CIA. Pinochet was and Pahlevi, most of the other got to the top of their respective food chains on their own. The US supported them because they supported us in the Cold War. The Soviets and the Chinese had their share of bad guys, too.


tell that to the Basque, being a little bit fascist is like being a little bit pregnent Well now Spain is a free nation and the Basques still have their troubles.

[PHUNX]

Economic progress was/is the facilitator of political independence
for that statement to be correct you would have to ignore history some ancient tribes had gender equality and female leaders like Boudicca for example. i think youll find gender equality went out the window when that god you love defending so much first came on the scene.
women in iran today have less rights than women in the persian empire

[PHUNX]

The US supported them because they supported us in the Cold War.

Well now Spain is a free nation and the Basques still have their troubles.

you keep saying "us" they supported us who pray tell is "us"

[Bud Struggle]

for that statement to be correct you would have to ignore history some ancient tribes had gender equality and female leaders like Boudicca for example. i think youll find gender equality went out the window when that god you love defending so much first came on the scene.
women in iran today have less rights than women in the persian empire

That kind of thing is all over the place but in GENERAL improved technology leads to more universal freedoms for women. There's lots of places without the Christian God that treated women pretty badly. The wise and thoughtful Greeks we'rent very good. So Native Maericans were good and some downright nasty. But overall the plight of women has been generally on the uptick and in that the Christian world been doing better and better. (And of course, things still aren't perfect.)

[Bud Struggle]

you keep saying "us" they supported us who pray tell is "us"


Sorry about that--us is the US. I see you are from places otherwise.

[RGacky3]

Sorry about that--us is the US. I see you are from places otherwise.

Us is the US???

By the US do you mean the United States people? Common now.


I agree that the US supported some bad people but I don't think that most of these guys were put in office by the CIA. Pinochet was and Pahlevi, most of the other got to the top of their respective food chains on their own. The US supported them because they supported us in the Cold War. The Soviets and the Chinese had their share of bad guys, too.


Many of the atrocities that those bad guys commited was because of the implicit support by the United States and the fact that the US would still support them. Many of them were not directly put in by the CIA, but would have never gotten into power without US support.

BTW, most people here don't believe the USSR or China were real socialist states, and "they did it too" is not a justification.


I'm saying that it was the Cold War--everybody has strange bedfellows in those days. Besides by the time he died Franco wasn't all that much of a Fascist, he was just another meglomaniac European dictator very similar to the kind that Communist Eastern Europe produced in great abundance.

So that was just a wierd time, and things are different now? The US state has'nt changed.

BTW again, talking about what the USSR did is'nt an argument.

[PHUNX]

Many of the atrocities that those bad guys commited was because of the implicit support by the United States and the fact that the US would still support them. Many of them were not directly put in by the CIA, but would have never gotten into power without US support.


Just three of the american backed dictators to illustrate that point exactly



GENERAL SUHARTO
President of Indonesia
Indonesia is a totalitarian state and its uncontested ruler for over 20 years, General Suharto, is one of the most brutal dictators in history. After a CIA organized coup brought him to power in 1965, Suharto, who had already collaborated with Dutch colonialists and Japanese occupiers, decided to purge every last "Communist subversive from Indonesian soil". General Nasution, a former close associate of Suharto, called for the extermination of three million Indonesian communist party members.
CIA point man Colonel Sarwo Eddie personally supervised the murderous purge. Paratroopers would arrive in a region with a list of "subversives" and provide it to local vigilante groups. Using machetes and other crude weapons, the vigilantes would hack the alleged subversives to death. Entire populations of towns and villages were herded to central locations and massacred. Children would be asked to identify "communists" who would then be executed on the spot. In addition to the half million people who were killed outright after the coup, another 750,000 were arrested and tortured. Ultimately, one million people died in one of the most savage mass slaughters of modem political history.
Ironically, the New York Times reported in December 1965, two months after the purge began, that "from an American viewpoint" Suharto's new government in Indonesia "represents a positive achievement." Apparently so, for the U.S. continues to this day to train and arm the Indonesian military with the latest high-tech equipment.

MOBUTU SESE SEKO
President of Zaire
When Zaire's first elected President, Patrice Lumumba, appeared to be getting too close to socialism, U.S. companies feared they might lose control of Zaire's precious cobalt, copper, and diamonds. So the CIA stepped in, assassinated Lumumba, and replaced him with Mobutu Sese Seko (his name means "Himself Forever"). Although one CIA official commented that "Mobutu is screwing up Zaire pretty good. He simply has no idea how to run a country," this mercurial leader has been our main ally in Central Africa since 1965.
Mobutu has amassed an estimated $5 billion personal fortune at his nation's expense. He is perhaps the only world leader who could pay his national debt from his own bank account. In fact, there seems to be no division between his pocket and the national treasury. In 1974, when the U.S sent $1.4 million to assist troops fighting a civil war, Mobutu pocketed the entire sum. And no foreign company sets itself up in Zaire without a tribute to his honor, "Himself."
Although Zaire has more resources than most other countries in the region, it is the fifth poorest. Malnutrition takes the lives of 1/3rdof Zaire's children, and one child out of two dies before age five. But Mobutu has vowed to keep the world safe for democracy and according to Amnesty Intemational, in the name of anti-communism, he imprisons and tortures anyone who threatens his power base, often without trial. While some members of Congress grumble about giving assistance to Mobutu, they continue to reward his work against communism and his warm reception of American corporations.

GENERAL SAMUEL DOE
President of Liberia
Perhaps Samuel Doe's rule is best summed up by his changing physique. When he came to power in a bloody 1980 coup, he was a lean Master Sergeant in military gear; today, he is a fat self-made General in a suit, living off U.S. aid and corporate kickbacks. But while Doe and his cronies live in luxury the rest of Liberia dwells in squalor. Under his regime, the gross domestic product has decreased by 13%, the country's health statistics are among the world's worst, 80% of the population is illiterate, all opposition parties but one were forbidden to participate in the 1985 national elections, and those who protest these inequities are jailed or killed.
Doe, a pro-American anti-communist, received $500 million in U.S. aid between 1980 and 1985. When Congress threatened to cut off funds because of Liberia's human rights abuses. Doe requested American "financial advice, as a show of good will. The U.S. sent 17 accountants, bank examiners, and economists to help Doe balance his budget, but they realized a difficult task lay ahead when they leamed that Doe had purchased over sixty $60,000 Mercedes Benz cars for his government ministers and had given the Liberian swear team $1 million for winning a match against rival Ghana. Ultimately Doe refused to allow access to records conceming 40% of Liberia's funds, for this "second budget," revenues from gasoline and lodging taxes, goes directly into the President's bank account. The American advisors returned home in 1989, mission not accomplished, and Samuel Doe remains in office, despite early 1990 rumblings of rebel plots against him.

[Muzk]

1 Corinthians 11:7-9

7 A man ought not to cover his head, since he is the image and glory of God; but the woman is the glory of man.
8 For man did not come from woman, but woman from man;
9 neither was man created for woman, but woman for man.

and:




Matthew 6:5-6

5 And when thou prayest, thou shalt not be as the hypocrites are: for they love to pray standing in the synagogues and in the corners of the streets, that they may be seen of men. Verily I say unto you, They have their reward.
6 But thou, when thou prayest, enter into thy closet, and when thou hast shut thy door, pray to thy Father which is in secret; and thy Father which seeth shall reward thee openly.
Praying while taking a shit. Oh yes.

[Bud Struggle]

Us is the US???

By the US do you mean the United States people? Common now. For the most part. Or for convenience sake maybe it's better to say "the Free World" countries as opposed to the "Iron Curtain" countries.




Many of the atrocities that those bad guys commited was because of the implicit support by the United States and the fact that the US would still support them. Many of them were not directly put in by the CIA, but would have never gotten into power without US support.

BTW, most people here don't believe the USSR or China were real socialist states, and "they did it too" is not a justification. No matter what you believe about the quality of their Communism the USSR and Communist China were at that time real ideological and military foes of the United States. As far as them being "real" Communists--they were what Communism look like in the real world. The same as the United States is what Capitalism looks like in the real world. It's interesting to have all these theories about what Communism really is or Anarchism or Capitalism--but I only go by what I see and I saw the USSR and the United States.


So that was just a wierd time, and things are different now? The US state has'nt changed.

BTW again, talking about what the USSR did is'nt an argument.

It's just how the world is. It's not like Communism hasn't been tried--it has been tried in a LOT of places and empirically we have a pretty good idea what it looks like when Marx and his ilk are translated into real world situations.

I mean it's all right to talk about fairy tale scenarios of no government and everybody being happy and equal and having robots doing your work, and there is a place for that. Just like there's a place for talk of Rand and Mises and those guys. But that's just dreaming. The real world looks like the world we have today.

[gorillafuck]

being a little bit fascist is like being a little bit pregnent
That's a catchy quote you just came up with:p

[Comrade B]

I was just debating with a republican, he was claiming that the US was not a religious state... I just started reading quotes from this, worked pretty well

[PHUNX]

It's not like Communism hasn't been tried--it has been tried in a LOT of places and empirically we have a pretty good idea what it looks like when Marx and his ilk are translated into real world situations.



it's a bit hard try communism when every country in "the Free World" is hell bent on your destruction

why do the US have to this day embargos on communists and not facsist countrys? the cold war's over

Why in the case of cuba do only america and israel back the embargo?

if communism is such a economic failure then why dose america feel so threatened by it?

[Bud Struggle]

it's a bit hard try communism when every country in "the Free World" is hell bent on your destruction Agreed. As a matter of fact history is showing us that it is impossible.


why do the US have to this day embargos on communists and not facsist countrys? the cold war's over I have no idea--it's just plane stooopid. I used to boat over to Cuba every now and then before Bush (who owed his Presidential victory to the Florida Cuban ex-Pats) put the harsh restrictions on Americans going there. I like their cigars.


Why in the case of cuba do only america and israel back the embargo? I explained above about Bush.


if communism is such a economic failure then why dose america feel so threatened by it? I think it's just a hold over from the time before the Iron Curtain fell. But IN THE DAY there was a real (though cold) war going on between the USA and the Soviet Union. Hundreds of nuclear warheads were built and aimed. There were all sorts of "proxy wars" between the two countries. And you had guys like Kruschev:
http://blogs.desmoinesregister.com/dmr/wp-content/uploads/2009/07/khrushchev_shoe1.jpg

Banging his shoe on the podium of the United Nations screaming out things like, "we will bury you!"

Besides for that Stalin (bless his heart) had infiltrated America government and sicence establishments with Communist party loyalists that took orders directly from him. Those people were dedicated to the SU overcoming the USA directly. (Not like you Free Range Commies who have no real plans for any sort of actual Revolution.)

They were heady days. Our current dislike of Communism is just a holdover from those times.

[RGacky3]

For the most part. Or for convenience sake maybe it's better to say "the Free World" countries as opposed to the "Iron Curtain" countries.

My point was those dictators did not benefit the people of the United States or of the "free world" at all, they benefited corporate interests.


No matter what you believe about the quality of their Communism the USSR and Communist China were at that time real ideological and military foes of the United States. As far as them being "real" Communists--they were what Communism look like in the real world. The same as the United States is what Capitalism looks like in the real world. It's interesting to have all these theories about what Communism really is or Anarchism or Capitalism--but I only go by what I see and I saw the USSR and the United States.

They were not what communism lookes like in the real world, tahts not a theory its a fact, and it can be deduced by the most basic logic, did the workers have control over their workplaces? no, did the sate? yes, was the State a functioning democracy? No. So it was'nt even socialist. I'm not saying it was'nt perfect communism or perfect socialism, I'm saying it was'nt even a bit socialist, I'm saying Norway is more socialist than the USSR, so I'm sorry, facts do matter.


It's just how the world is. It's not like Communism hasn't been tried--it has been tried in a LOT of places and empirically we have a pretty good idea what it looks like when Marx and his ilk are translated into real world situations.

We do, its called CNT controlled spain, Zapatista mexico, parts of Argentina after the crash, free Ukraine, Hungry during the anti-ussr revolution, and so on.

The USSR and China did'nt try and run the economy democratically did they? So Socialism was'nt tried there was it. Bud FACTS DO MATTER.


I mean it's all right to talk about fairy tale scenarios of no government and everybody being happy and equal and having robots doing your work, and there is a place for that. Just like there's a place for talk of Rand and Mises and those guys. But that's just dreaming. The real world looks like the world we have today.

Yeah ... And what? The real world looks like it is today, and 200 years ago the real world looked like it was back then, with slavery and the such. Whats your point? in the future chances are things will be better.


Agreed. As a matter of fact history is showing us that it is impossible.

You would have said democracic governments were impossible too, you probably would have said racial integration was impossible as well.


I think it's just a hold over from the time before the Iron Curtain fell. But IN THE DAY there was a real (though cold) war going on between the USA and the Soviet Union. Hundreds of nuclear warheads were built and aimed. There were all sorts of "proxy wars" between the two countries.

You forget the reason the US opposed the USSR, it was'nt just because they did'nt agree with their style, it was'nt that at all. It was that they were afraid of the idea that people could fight for their autonomy, THATS what it was, its important to remember that, the reason the US hates Chavez is not because he thinks differently, its because they are afraid of what he represents, autonomy from the US.

[Bud Struggle]

My point was those dictators did not benefit the people of the United States or of the "free world" at all, they benefited corporate interests. I'm not saying they didn't benefit corporate interests--but to a good extent (remember my figures on pension fund investment?) corporate interests benefit the people of the United States.


They were not what communism lookes like in the real world, tahts not a theory its a fact, and it can be deduced by the most basic logic, did the workers have control over their workplaces? no, did the sate? yes, was the State a functioning democracy? No. So it was'nt even socialist. I'm not saying it was'nt perfect communism or perfect socialism, I'm saying it was'nt even a bit socialist, I'm saying Norway is more socialist than the USSR, so I'm sorry, facts do matter. You kind of missed my point. I'm saying that it's difficult or maybe impossible for Socialism let alone real Communism to exist in the world. When its tried it falls apart into what the SU was. Not that a good deal of people care--look at all of the Maoist and Stalinists running around on RevLeft. To be honest with you if I thought YOUR Communism was a real possibility I might join the fight. But my fear--and it's a real one--is that we get another Mao or another Lenin or another Stalin. For me, and I bet a lot of other people it's not worth the gamble.


We do, its called CNT controlled spain, Zapatista mexico, parts of Argentina after the crash, free Ukraine, Hungry during the anti-ussr revolution, and so on. I call all of that good tries. Again my fear is that after a Revolution while there might be moments of when those fragile flowers will grow in the world in the world--the tanks of the Stalinists will role over them and crush them into the mud. A Revolution is too much of a crap shoot--if change is to come it can only be assured by gadual change into a world Social Democracy. Revolution is to risky.


The USSR and China did'nt try and run the economy democratically did they? So Socialism was'nt tried there was it. Bud FACTS DO MATTER. I'm thinking there were good well meaning men in both of those revolutions and they were stamped out by those greedy for power. I think that is the way of the world. I think it may be hard wired into human nature. I see it in me--that's why I want to be a businessman that controls his own world--and I'm a pretty nice guy (if I do say so myself.) There are monsters out there. I see them in the business world.


Yeah ... And what? The real world looks like it is today, and 200 years ago the real world looked like it was back then, with slavery and the such. Whats your point? in the future chances are things will be better. I see us all "living" in Norway in 200 years.



You forget the reason the US opposed the USSR, it was'nt just because they did'nt agree with their style, it was'nt that at all. It was that they were afraid of the idea that people could fight for their autonomy, THATS what it was, its important to remember that, the reason the US hates Chavez is not because he thinks differently, its because they are afraid of what he represents, autonomy from the US. Sure. But the Soviets weren't letting any Young Republican Clubs open up in Moscow, either. They were just as afraid--maybe even more afraid of our way of life. And they had good reason to be--they opened the door just a little and their whole world fell apart.

You have a point about Chavez. To me he's just a clown, but if he and the people of his country want to be "Socialist" I don't see that as America's business at all.

[RGacky3]

I'm not saying they didn't benefit corporate interests--but to a good extent (remember my figures on pension fund investment?) corporate interests benefit the people of the United States.

Thats like saying if the king and nobility of a country is rich it helps the people somewhat, So the country does things to benefit them, but you know what helps the people more? Actual policies that help them.

Also the benefits that corporate power gives to people are far far outweighed by the damage they do.

As far as the pensions, socialized pensions would do much better, because theres not need for profit.

But motivation is very important, these things help corporate profits but more importantly they grow corporate power, which is over the long term and short term detrimental to the liberty and well being of the people.


You kind of missed my point. I'm saying that it's difficult or maybe impossible for Socialism let alone real Communism to exist in the world. When its tried it falls apart into what the SU was. Not that a good deal of people care--look at all of the Maoist and Stalinists running around on RevLeft. To be honest with you if I thought YOUR Communism was a real possibility I might join the fight. But my fear--and it's a real one--is that we get another Mao or another Lenin or another Stalin. For me, and I bet a lot of other people it's not worth the gamble.

Look at the history, IT WAS'NT TRIED IN RUSSIA OR CHINA, MY communism NEVER fell into leninism or maoism when tried, what did fall into leninism and maoism was things that were maoist and leninist to begin with.

The thing is MY communism is based on principles, I fight for things that get me more toward that, so I fight for public health care, why? It makes for a more socialistic and democratic society, I fight in class struggles in the work place, why? Because it gives the workers more say, I fight against discrimination, I fight against corporatism and so on and so forth.

At the same time I fight for solidarity movements and the such that build the base for revolutions, big and small, and I fight against any sort of vanguardism (Leninists, you know what I mean by that), and hiarchies.

So Bud, your idea, that somehow fihting for democracy, and socialism will automatically turn into tyranny is rediculous, look at the History of Russia and China and you'll see there is no corrolation between workers movements and dictatorship. THere IS a corrolation between vanguardism and dictatorships, and dictatorships and dictatorships (both countries were dictatorships previously).


I call all of that good tries. Again my fear is that after a Revolution while there might be moments of when those fragile flowers will grow in the world in the world--the tanks of the Stalinists will role over them and crush them into the mud. A Revolution is too much of a crap shoot--if change is to come it can only be assured by gadual change into a world Social Democracy. Revolution is to risky.

Look at any social democratic change in any nation, any time a country became more free, just and civil, and its been a time when revolution was just around the corner. Civil rights in the US, you know how scared the ruling class was? Workers rights, at the time of workers rights the IWW and socialist party in the US were close to revolutions, all of it.

You don't get social democracy by asking for it, you get social democracy by threatening and trying to overthrow capitalism.

We are seeing this with Obama now, we asked for social democracy, we asked nicely and did'nt storm the barricades, did we get it? But who put the pressure on? THe corporations, did they get what they wanted? You betcha.


I see us all "living" in Norway in 200 years.

Norway has a relatively good system. If you want the US to have something similar, you've got to demand single payer health care, demand it loud and vigorously, voting won't do it, you've got to demand socialization of the banks, loud and vigorously, and what you might get is some oversight at least.


Sure. But the Soviets weren't letting any Young Republican Clubs open up in Moscow, either. They were just as afraid--maybe even more afraid of our way of life. And they had good reason to be--they opened the door just a little and their whole world fell apart.

You have a point about Chavez. To me he's just a clown, but if he and the people of his country want to be "Socialist" I don't see that as America's business at all.

Your right about the soviets, but what they were afraid of was'nt capitalism, it was freedom of speach and the such, and I completely agree with you. BUT its important that you realize the reason the US does what it does.

As far as Chavez being a clown? He does say some clownish things, but he does it to grab international attention and oppose US imperialism, its political, but the clownish things he says are not half as clownish as what George Bush said.

But what Chavez has actually done domestically, as in policy wise, its actually good stuff, he's democratized the country way more than the US has anywhere. Can you imaged in the US stopped giving corporate subsidies and supported cooperatives? Can you imagen if the US supported community autonomy?

BUt your right its not the US buisiness, well actually it is, "buisiness," but you do understand WHY the US opposes Chavez? It has nothing to do with ideology, it has to do with the concept, that people can be independant from US control.

[rednordman]

I see us all "living" in Norway in 200 years.You know, it always makes me laugh when I think about how Norway was. Its fair to say that the USA must have despised it, being as its so much more better a place to live than the USA. Im actually suprised that they didnt put some sort of economic sanctions on it, as well as its skandinavian neigbours for going their own way-but then again if they did do that, than they could well of all joined the eastern block in retaliation (or more likely threatened to).

Its ironic really, because now the cold war is over, the place is slowly getting forced into the same type of economy as the rest of Europe (and thus subsequently in at most ten years:the USA). I can strongly see problems on the horizon with these types of relentess movements.

During the cold war, these types of countries had the freedom to find there own paths (Western European and Skandinavia): they definitly do not now. They are all held ransom to foreign capital interests: comply or get destroyed (or even worse pariahed). Just look at the amount of investment interest that the former Eastern block gets: its rather pityfull, unless there is a HUGE subsidy of buisness.

[RGacky3]

You know, it always makes me laugh when I think about how Norway was. Its fair to say that the USA must have despised it, being as its so much more better a place to live than the USA. Im actually suprised that they didnt put some sort of economic sanctions on it, as well as its skandinavian neigbours for going their own way-but then again if they did do that, than they could well of all joined the eastern block in retaliation (or more likely threatened to).

Keep in mind that Norway is part of Nato, and when it comes to foreign policy is pretty much on board with the United States, also, in Norway it was done a long time ago after WW2, that was just when the US was getting real imperial power. Also there was no large US interests in Norway.