Face-off

[Hool]

In your opinion, why do you think that in an open face-off, communism has lost every time it as stacked up against capitalism with the examples of East/West Germany, North/South Korea, and North/South Vietnam?

[Connolly]

communism has never existed. socialism has never existed.

Communism has existed and I will not defend the tyrany and oppressivness of it.

[Jazzratt]

Open face off? Do you even understand the situations in those countries or are you just an ignorant, trolling fucknut? Christ - I swear for every new cappie like A.Hamilton about a dozen of you sound-alike, repetetive idiots have to mash out a few irritating and stupid posts.

[Hool]

Originally posted by [email protected] 25 2006, 09:25 PM
Open face off? Do you even understand the situations in those countries or are you just an ignorant, trolling fucknut? Christ - I swear for every new cappie like A.Hamilton about a dozen of you sound-alike, repetetive idiots have to mash out a few irritating and stupid posts.
Wow, i can tell already this will be an intelligent discussion.

So are you going to share your opinions or not?

[KC]

Wow, i can tell already this will be an intelligent discussion.

You can't have an intelligent discussion on a question such as idiotic as the one you posed. That was his point.

[Hool]

All i've heard so far is a bunch of insults directed at me which the topic isn't about. If you want to throw insults in that's fine with me, but if you're going to call me "a trolling fucknut" at least explain to me why you believe that i'm wrong.

[KC]

There's historical conditions that you aren't taking into consideration at all. He already said that in his post. Learn to read.

[Connolly]

at least explain to me why you believe that i'm wrong.

communism has never existed (case closed)(full stop).

[Jazzratt]

Originally posted by [email protected] 25 2006, 09:22 PM
East/West Germany
You mean Eastern germany that was part of the, at the time of its 'defeat', USSR? That was already ravaged by war and being propped up by a state that also had been made to deal with the aftermath of a world war, versus Western germany that was heavily support by an allaince of European countries and (most importanatly the, relativley, unravaged) US. How exactly is this an 'open face off' as you put it.


North/South Korea By any serious marxist definition North Korea is far from communist.


North/South Vietnam The open face of was a victory for the North. The attrition of an underhanded economic powergame was the defeat.

Will you fuck off now?

[Avtomatov]

Originally posted by [email protected] 25 2006, 09:22 PM
In your opinion, why do you think that in an open face-off, communism has lost every time it as stacked up against capitalism with the examples of East/West Germany, North/South Korea, and North/South Vietnam?
I dont understand, are you talking about "communist" states failing militarily?

East/West germany never had a war. I dont understand how you can say they lost.

As for North/South Korea, North Korea would have captured South Korea easily. The thing is, half the world interferred. It was incredibly unbalanced.

As for North/South vietnam, didnt the communists win that war?

I meen youre post is so idiotic. What do you meen communism lost to capitalism? You are such an idiot.

Do you meen it failed economically? You are ignoring so many conditions. You cant prosper when the whole world refuses to trade with you. The reason why south korea grew so much compared to north korea, is 1) no one allowed trade with N.Korea. 2)The capitalist superpower invested in South Korea.

You can see Socialism is superior economics, by looking at the USSR and its rise to superpower status.

[Hool]

Originally posted by The [email protected] 25 2006, 09:41 PM

at least explain to me why you believe that i'm wrong.

communism has never existed (case closed)(full stop).
Capitalism has also never existed if you are talking pure, full on ideology. Case in point, the oil industry is nationalized and monopolies/trusts cannot exist in the U.S.

It was an open face-off in Germany because West Germany was supported by capitalism and the East was supported by communism is what i'm saying.

I can't think of a closer ideology for North Korea, i'm sure there is but i don't know it.

North/South Vietnam- Yes they won militarily through attrition but they had to force it on to a nation that didn't want it. I don't understand why the north wanted to invade the south so bad anyway. Vietnam is worse off now than it was when it was a communist state.

And jazzratt for the love of fuck open your mind a little bit. You're acting like an immature little prick.

[Avtomatov]

Youre wrong, capitalism does exist. The USSR was not mostly communist or partly communist. We are saying it was not communist at all.


I can't think of a closer ideology for North Korea, i'm sure there is but i don't know it.
Juche.

[Jazzratt]

Originally posted by Hool+Sep 25 2006, 09:51 PM--> (Hool @ Sep 25 2006, 09:51 PM)
The [email protected] 25 2006, 09:41 PM

at least explain to me why you believe that i'm wrong.

communism has never existed (case closed)(full stop).
Capitalism has also never existed if you are talking pure, full on ideology. Case in point, the oil industry is nationalized and monopolies/trusts cannot exist in the U.S.

It was an open face-off in Germany because West Germany was supported by capitalism and the East was supported by communism is what i'm saying. [/b]
So East germany was supported by something that didn't exist at the time, what with the USSR being a deformed worker's state.


I can't think of a closer ideology for North Korea, i'm sure there is but i don't know it. State Capitalism, perchance?


North/South Vietnam- Yes they won militarily through attrition but they had to force it on to a nation that didn't want it. I don't understand why the north wanted to invade the south so bad anyway. Vietnam is worse off now than it was when it was a communist state. The last sentence is neither here nor there in the discussion. Consider the unbalanced nature of the attrition following the military campaign.


And jazzratt for the love of fuck open your mind a little bit. You're acting like an immature little prick. Don't get your panties in a bunch, you're the one who has set up a stawman version of communnism that declares all the abovementioned states 'communist' and then proceeded to ignore historical circumstances to make a pointless, trollish argument. Learn to argue in a sensible manner or fuck off.

[Connolly]

Capitalism has also never existed if you are talking pure, full on ideology. Case in point, the oil industry is nationalized and monopolies/trusts cannot exist in the U.S.

You are very right, but the comparison between Communism and communism couldnt be further apart, we can however draw much similarity between now and a theoretically pure capitalist system.

Your question is childish and based on complete ignorance.


I can't think of a closer ideology for North Korea, i'm sure there is but i don't know it.

Its called fascism (or a variation of, aka Communism).


North/South Vietnam- Yes they won militarily through attrition but they had to force it on to a nation that didn't want it. I don't understand why the north wanted to invade the south so bad anyway. Vietnam is worse off now than it was when it was a communist state.

Who honestly cares? its neither here nor there for us - we oppose both North and South Korea.

[KC]

Its called fascism (or a variation of, aka Communism).

Do you even know what fascism is? Do you think nationalized business is a characteristic of fascism? Either way you're looking like an idiot.

[Avtomatov]

Originally posted by Khayembii [email protected] 25 2006, 10:02 PM

Its called fascism (or a variation of, aka Communism).

Do you even know what fascism is? Do you think nationalized business is a characteristic of fascism? Either way you're looking like an idiot.
He is a fucking idiot, why is he in the commie club?


]
North/South Vietnam- Yes they won militarily through attrition but they had to force it on to a nation that didn't want it. I don't understand why the north wanted to invade the south so bad anyway. Vietnam is worse off now than it was when it was a communist state.Who honestly cares? its neither here nor there for us - we oppose both North and South Korea.

RedBAnner says this. But Hool was talking about vietnam not korea.

[Jazzratt]

*bollocks*

[KC]

why is he in the commie club?

Because that's what the commie club is full of.

[Connolly]

Do you even know what fascism is?

Do you?


Either way you're looking like an idiot.

Very right indeed - I am an idiot - and proud. :lol:

[Jazzratt]

Originally posted by The [email protected] 25 2006, 10:08 PM

Either way you're looking like an idiot.

Very right indeed - I am an idiot - and proud. :lol:
:rolleyes: Clearly.

[Avtomatov]

Originally posted by Khayembii [email protected] 25 2006, 10:07 PM

why is he in the commie club?

Because that's what the commie club is full of.
Im not surpised, after all it was the commie club that restricted me.

[Connolly]

RedBAnner says this. But Hool was talking about vietnam not korea.

How trivial :rolleyes:

[Connolly]

He is a fucking idiot, why is he in the commie club?

I might do this myself, attack and slander people without any clear reason.

You fucking twat, arsehole, prick, wanker, nutfuck.

We could - infact - create anarchy if we all did this. :lol:

[Jazzratt]

Originally posted by The [email protected] 25 2006, 10:18 PM
We could - infact - create anarchy if we all did this. :lol:
If that's what passes for anarchist revolution I'm glad I no longer associate with that idiocy.

[KC]

Everyone please keep discussion on the topic, even though the topic sucks.

[Connolly]

Everyone please keep discussion on the topic, even though the topic sucks.

I see im in your hall of shame :lol: , better there than forgotten :rolleyes: .

Find any correlations between Fascism and the DPRK yet?

[KC]

DPRK isn't fascist. Anyone with a hint of knowledge of what fascism actually is would know that.

[Connolly]

DPRK isn't fascist. Anyone with a hint of knowledge of what fascism actually is would know that.

Im sorry, but its a variation of fascism.

Note - wikipedia -

"Fascism is a political philosophy, movement, or regime (as that of the Fascisti) that exalts nation and often race above the individual and that stands for a centralized autocratic government headed by a dictatorial leader, severe economic and social regimentation, and forcible suppression of opposition."

[Avtomatov]

Originally posted by The [email protected] 25 2006, 10:33 PM

DPRK isn't fascist. Anyone with a hint of knowledge of what fascism actually is would know that.

Im sorry, but its a variation of fascism.

Note - wikipedia -

"Fascism is a political philosophy, movement, or regime (as that of the Fascisti) that exalts nation and often race above the individual and that stands for a centralized autocratic government headed by a dictatorial leader, severe economic and social regimentation, and forcible suppression of opposition."
That is only one aspect of fascism.

[KC]

Uh, you kind of missed one of the fundamental characteristics of fascism: corporatism. You know, the thing that North Korea isn't.

Read this (http://marxists.org/glossary/terms/f/a.htm#fascism).

[TC]

the DPRK doesn't do that and babbling rightwing propaganda isn't evidence or argument.

The DPRK's politics are collectivist not corporatist, there is no private ownership of production which is a prerequisit for fascism. Clearly you don't know what you're talking about and you're just trying to score points by making the most outragious anti-socialist comments you can think of.

[Dr. Rosenpenis]

Is equating communism with fascism part of the ideological platform of class war?

[Avtomatov]

Originally posted by Dr. [email protected] 25 2006, 10:42 PM
Is equating communism with fascism part of the ideological platform of class war?
Maybe he is an anarchist.

[Connolly]

That is only one aspect of fascism.

Generally, the DPRK maintains many characteristics of fascism and can be considered a variation of it.


Uh, you kind of missed one of the fundamental characteristics of fascism: corporatism. You know, the thing that North Korea isn't.

Read this.

You have linked Marxist.org which would have a tendency to defend Leninism - and therefore, in many ways, its failures. Useless.

Still, and as I have said, the DPRK maintains many fascist characteristics and historically will be viewed as such. For one thing - its not worth defending and it couldnt be further from what socialists want.


the DPRK doesn't do that and babbling rightwing propaganda isn't evidence or argument.

The DPRK's politics are collectivist not corporatist, there is no private ownership of production which is a prerequisit for fascism. Clearly you don't know what you're talking about and you're just trying to score points by making the most outragious anti-socialist comments you can think of.

Anti-socialist comments?

Where?

[Dr. Rosenpenis]

Originally posted by Avtomatov+Sep 25 2006, 05:47 PM--> (Avtomatov @ Sep 25 2006, 05:47 PM)
Dr. [email protected] 25 2006, 10:42 PM
Is equating communism with fascism part of the ideological platform of class war?
Maybe he is an anarchist. [/b]
I'm not refering to class war, as in what we're all (hopefully doing), but Class War as in the anarchist organization with which the red banner associates.

[Avtomatov]

Originally posted by Dr. Rosenpenis+Sep 25 2006, 10:51 PM--> (Dr. Rosenpenis @ Sep 25 2006, 10:51 PM)
Originally posted by [email protected] 25 2006, 05:47 PM

Dr. [email protected] 25 2006, 10:42 PM
Is equating communism with fascism part of the ideological platform of class war?
Maybe he is an anarchist.
I'm not refering to class war, as in what we're all (hopefully doing), but Class War as in the anarchist organization with which the red banner associates. [/b]
Oh, I guess he is an anarchist.

[Connolly]

Oh, I guess he is an anarchist.

I wouldnt define myself as such. The necessity of, or form of a proletarian state is not for me to take sides on.

I identify myself only as a communist with influences from both Marxist and anarchist fields. - its called sitting on the fence.

[Dr. Rosenpenis]

What the fuck, man?


Originally posted by YOU SAID:
Its called fascism (or a variation of, aka Communism).

So you're telling Dr. Rosenpenis that you support communism, from which you believe fascism is a variant?

[KC]

Generally, the DPRK maintains many characteristics of fascism and can be considered a variation of it.

I'm sorry but saying that the DPRK "maintains many characteristics of fascism" and "can be considered a variation of it" even though the DPRK is missing the fundamental elements of fascism, is completely fucking idiotic. By that logic they might as well be socialist because they "maintain many characteristics of socialism" i.e. nationalization of business.



You have linked Marxist.org which would have a tendency to defend Leninism - and therefore, in many ways, its failures. Useless.


Yes, marxists.org really defends "Leninism". :rolleyes:

If you have a qualm with the analysis of fascism that they present, then please let's hear it. Otherwise you're just avoiding the issue.


For one thing - its not worth defending and it couldnt be further from what socialists want.

Nobody said anything about it being what socialists want.

[Connolly]

So you're telling Dr. Rosenpenis that you support communism, from which you believe fascism is a variant?

There is a difference between Communism and communism. The former relates to Communist China, USSR, Cuba and the DPRK etc., While communism is as you know it. I distinguished, rightfully, between the two.


I'm sorry but saying that the DPRK "maintains many characteristics of fascism" and "can be considered a variation of it" even though the DPRK is missing the fundamental elements of fascism, is completely fucking idiotic. By that logic they might as well be socialist because they "maintain many characteristics of socialism" i.e. nationalization of business.

:lol:

Its a "fundamental element" of fascism because it suits your own purposes to say it is. If the DPRK had that "fundamental element" youd probably find another "fundamental element" to prove your point.

The fact of the matter is, the DPRK is factually and historically a variation of fascist principles and can be compared as such.

It has f all to do with socialism and communism for that matter and should never be defended as its comparible to defending Nazi Germany or any other anti-worker, authocratic, despotic state.

If we are to defend the DPRK based on it being "communist" or "socialist" then I have just as much right to defend the United States as being democratic and free. Of course, both go by name only leaving any defence of them a double standard by those who claim to be actual communists.

[Jazzratt]

Originally posted by The [email protected] 26 2006, 10:06 AM

I'm sorry but saying that the DPRK "maintains many characteristics of fascism" and "can be considered a variation of it" even though the DPRK is missing the fundamental elements of fascism, is completely fucking idiotic. By that logic they might as well be socialist because they "maintain many characteristics of socialism" i.e. nationalization of business.

:lol:

Its a "fundamental element" of fascism because it suits your own purposes to say it is. If the DPRK had that "fundamental element" youd probably find another "fundamental element" to prove your point.
These fundamental elements are what make National Socialists (you know those guys, I understand they rose to power in some European country or other.) fascist as opposed to socialist. It's one of the primary differentiating factors, the DPRK is many, many things (shitty for a start) but fascist it ain't. Have some intellectual honesty.


The fact of the matter is, the DPRK is factually and historically a variation of fascist principles and can be compared as such.

It has f all to do with socialism and communism for that matter and should never be defended as its comparible to defending Nazi Germany or any other anti-worker, authocratic, despotic state. No one is defending it, we're simply pointing out it isn't fascist. Not all authoratrian/totalatarian systems are fascistic - I think you went wrong somwhere (It's the old "All Golden Retrievers are dogs but not all dogs are golden retreviers." wassname).


If we are to defend the DPRK based on it being "communist" or "socialist" then I have just as much right to defend the United States as being democratic and free. Of course, both go by name only leaving any defence of them a double standard by those who claim to be actual communists. There's a difference on pointing out that they're not fascist and defending them. If you find marxists.org unrealiable as a source on fasicsm why not read some Mousillini or Hitler?

[Connolly]

These fundamental elements are what make National Socialists (you know those guys, I understand they rose to power in some European country or other.) fascist as opposed to socialist. It's one of the primary differentiating factors, the DPRK is many, many things (shitty for a start) but fascist it ain't. Have some intellectual honesty.

I never said it was fascist, I said it was a variation of fascism with very similar characteristics.


No one is defending it, we're simply pointing out it isn't fascist. Not all authoratrian/totalatarian systems are fascistic - I think you went wrong somwhere (It's the old "All Golden Retrievers are dogs but not all dogs are golden retreviers." wassname).

I think you should take a look at Tragics post once more.

"the DPRK doesn't do that "

Thats a defensive comment. People are defending it.


There's a difference on pointing out that they're not fascist and defending them. If you find marxists.org unrealiable as a source on fasicsm why not read some Mousillini or Hitler?

Im pointing out its a variation of fascism.

Reading a bit fascist literature would of course open a greater understanding as to what constitutes fascism - id recommend to all who's interested to do just that. It certainly beats reading in many respects the propaganda of the opposition.

[Jazzratt]

Originally posted by The [email protected] 26 2006, 10:57 AM

These fundamental elements are what make National Socialists (you know those guys, I understand they rose to power in some European country or other.) fascist as opposed to socialist. It's one of the primary differentiating factors, the DPRK is many, many things (shitty for a start) but fascist it ain't. Have some intellectual honesty.

I never said it was fascist, I said it was a variation of fascism with very similar characteristics.
Which varition of facism exaclty? The pulled out of your arse variant? Name it.




No one is defending it, we're simply pointing out it isn't fascist. Not all authoratrian/totalatarian systems are fascistic - I think you went wrong somwhere (It's the old "All Golden Retrievers are dogs but not all dogs are golden retreviers." wassname).

I think you should take a look at Tragics post once more.

"the DPRK doesn't do that "

Thats a defensive comment. People are defending it. She's pointing out that it's doesn't do what you accuse it of doing, she is not 'defending' it from any correct critiscms. Merely pointing out mistakes in your argument is not 'defense' it's fucking honesty.



There's a difference on pointing out that they're not fascist and defending them. If you find marxists.org unrealiable as a source on fasicsm why not read some Mousillini or Hitler?

Im pointing out its a variation of fascism.
As I said earlier name the precise variant you're talking about and cite some texts which describe it.



Reading a bit fascist literature would of course open a greater understanding as to what constitutes fascism - id recommend to all who's interested to do just that. It certainly beats reading in many respects the propaganda of the opposition. One of the reasons I recommended you read it.

[Connolly]

Which varition of facism exaclty? The pulled out of your arse variant? Name it.

"Stalinismofascismo - ism" - straight from my arse.

[KC]

Saying that it's a variant of fascism is the same thing as saying as it's a type of fascism, which means that you are calling it fascist and are attributing a specific form of fascism to it.



"Stalinismofascismo - ism" - straight from my arse.


Thank you for proving yourself wrong.

[Vinny Rafarino]

Originally posted by Dr. [email protected] 25 2006, 05:29 PM
So you're telling Dr. Rosenpenis that you support communism, from which you believe fascism is a variant?
I was once in a ristorante in L.A. and had a table near Bill Cosby. All night long the guy kept saying to the waiter, "Bill Cosby wants this" or "Bill Cosby wants that".

I said, rather loudly, "hey Bill Cosby, tell Bill Cosby that that 3rd person shit is fucking stupid and to shut the fuck up".

Within 10 minutes I was asked to leave the restaurant; no problem there, I and the other three individuals had already eaten dinner and had a couple bottles of wine without even being presented a bill.

Regardless, that shit was lame when Bill Cosby did it back then and it's still lame when you do it now.

[KC]

Please leave the restaurant.

[Patchd]

What is the commie club meant to do or be anyways, seriously, it is an elected body or was it chosen from the top?

[Avtomatov]

The commie club itself appoints new members to the commie club.

There is more knowledgable people then them who are not in the commie club. The commie club chooses new commie club members based on conformity to the commie clubs party line.

[Patchd]

Originally posted by [email protected] 26 2006, 10:28 PM
The commie club itself appoints new members to the commie club.

There is more knowledgable people then them who are not in the commie club. The commie club chooses new commie club members based on conformity to the commie clubs party line.
Lol, this reminds me of...USSR. Although I cant be arsed to argue whether the CC is right or not. I acknowledge that this is a website, however Socialist principles could and should be implemented.

[RevMARKSman]

Originally posted by Palachinov+Sep 27 2006, 02:48 AM--> (Palachinov @ Sep 27 2006, 02:48 AM)
[email protected] 26 2006, 10:28 PM
The commie club itself appoints new members to the commie club.

There is more knowledgable people then them who are not in the commie club. The commie club chooses new commie club members based on conformity to the commie clubs party line.
Lol, this reminds me of...USSR. Although I cant be arsed to argue whether the CC is right or not. I acknowledge that this is a website, however Socialist principles could and should be implemented. [/b]
He's just mad because he's restricted. There's a Commie Club FAQ in the forum guidelines. Basically, if you have 150+ posts, have been here for 4+ months, and meet all the political requirements, you're in.

[Alexander Hamilton]

Thanks, Jazzratt, I think.

You wrote:


Christ - I swear for every new cappie like A.Hamilton about a dozen of you sound-alike, repetetive idiots...

I don't know that I am a repetitive idiot. Perhaps you were distinguishing me from this person who posted.

I am VERY new here, and do not recall your commenting on one of my comments. Sorry if I also bore. I try not to. But then again, if your reference to me was unkind, I don't believe it contibuted to any insight in the matters I have raised.


A. Hamilton

[KC]

He was complementing you.

He was saying for every cappie like you that comes to this site, about a dozen or so idiots do.

[Alexander Hamilton]

He was complementing you.

He was saying for every cappie like you that comes to this site, about a dozen or so idiots do.

In that case, I thank him. I was not farmiliar with the person who began this post.


A. Hamilton


(Though one of the regular members here called me "Aaron Burr's my Daddy" as a joke, and that got me to laugh.) A.H.