chomsky was fourth?
Results 1 to 16 of 16
A global "election" was held to see who would be most desirable as a world leader by people.
Nelson Mandela won. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/in_depth/4298568.stm#123
But, more interesting, something that restores my faith in mankind...
"US President George W Bush was placed 43, ranking below two of his fiercest adversaries on the world stage, Fidel Castro - 36th - and Hugo Chavez, 33rd. "
Viva Fidel. Viva Chavez.
Economic Left/Right: -9.75
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -6.10
The time to speak the truth has come... The government of the United States cannot be on the side of peasants because it is an ally of the landowners. It cannot be on the side of workers anywhere in the world because it is an ally of the monopolies. It cannot be on the side of colonies because it is an ally of the colonizing powers.
--Fidel Castro
chomsky was fourth?
Lol, nice, but on the otehrhand 15 000 people voted so doesnt really mean mutch.
In what relations do the Communists stand to the proletarians as a whole? The Communists do not form a separate party opposed to other working class parties. They have no interests separate and apart from those of the proletariat as a whole. They do not set up any sectarian principles of their own, by which to shape and mould the proletarian movement.
-Karl Marx
It is only by strengthening ourselves ideologically, inculcating in ourselves the values and ideals of the struggle and building up the ranks of the revolutionary party that we will make it.
- Ta Power
The top 11 -
Not a bad list, from the moderate viewpoint. Shows there is some hope, especially as "More than half of votes came from users in the United States."
However Clinton at 2, I mean that is just ludicrous.
However this tickled me somewhat -
I mean, talk about a stark contrast.
A bit off topic, but who would everyone pick in their top 11? They have to be alive and have to include at least one "leader, thinker and economist."
To be fair, this is a novelty vote, and I have a feeling that many people who voted for Fidel weren't serious, but it does give hope.
He who was previously the money-owner now strides out in front as a capitalist; the possessor of labour-power follows as his worker. The one smirks self-importantly and is intent on business; the other is timid and holds back, like someone who has brought his own hide to market and now has nothing else to expect but - a good tanning. - Karl Marx, Capital Volume I
U gotta be kidding me. dailai? Tutu? BILL CLINTON?
thats it. Humanity has no hope.
Do not say that we have nothing,
We shall be masters of all under heaven!
Oh come on. At least they didn't choose Hitler, Mussolini, Bush Sr., Bush Jr., Franco, Reagan, Kim Jong Il, and Stalin.
No that would show no hope for humanity. At least this list has some positive aspects.
Clinton's crimes against humanity might be less severe than the ones u mentioned...I still dont know if this is a good sign, tho.
As for Dalai and Tutu...Somehow I never liked slavemasters and theocrats very much. Call it a bias.
Do not say that we have nothing,
We shall be masters of all under heaven!
1 - Nelson Mandela (cool)
2 - Bill Clinton (american liberal closet fascist)
3 - Dalai Lama (racist religious fundamentalist)
4 - Noam Chomsky (cool)
5 - Alan Greenspan (corporate pig)
6 - Bill Gates (corporate pig)
7 - Steve Jobs (corporate swine)
8 - Archbishop Desmond Tutu (lame ass figurehead)
9 - Richard Branson (more swine)
10 - George Soros (just another rich dude)
11 - Kofi Annan (Just plain lame, where's bono? <_< )
fuck leaders.
As an Anarchist, I strangely find myself getting along better with Maoists than Platformists!
I know Tenzin Gyatso is the Dalai Lama of Tibetan Buddhism, so that isn't the best thing, but what he stands for and what he practices are very close. On the political Compass he sits at -2 economic and -6 authority. I haven't heard a thing about him being racist, ever. However, Redcanada, the rest of your judgements I can't disagree with.
What you score on a test means nothing, it's what you actually do that should be recorded.
Or should it be a twat who did nothing to end apartheid, attacks the working class, and squanders their wealth on massive arms deals?
Anyway, this survey means nothing. People just answer with the first name that they have been told is good that comes to their head, or (like me) takes the piss out of the survey and answers Osama bin Laden or Pol Pot.
Metal up your ass
This guy forcefully expelled all foreigners from Tibet for a period of time to consolidate his rule. Plus he forces serfs to work in his orchard till death (if his guards dont beat them to death in the first place) :angry:
Do not say that we have nothing,
We shall be masters of all under heaven!
He had a few hundred worker slaves as well. Like litreally slaves, not in the metaphorical sense. He's become some kind of hero because he retreated when he had to and didn't get killed basically. That's not to say the invasion of tibet was kustified. jsut htat it wasn't good before hand either.
In what relations do the Communists stand to the proletarians as a whole? The Communists do not form a separate party opposed to other working class parties. They have no interests separate and apart from those of the proletariat as a whole. They do not set up any sectarian principles of their own, by which to shape and mould the proletarian movement.
-Karl Marx
It is only by strengthening ourselves ideologically, inculcating in ourselves the values and ideals of the struggle and building up the ranks of the revolutionary party that we will make it.
- Ta Power
That is fucking horrible, can you post me a link so I can read more?
What you score on a test means nothing, it's what you actually do that should be recorded.
Sorry i read it from a link posted here a while ago. But needless to say he was the head or if not that at the very least the face of a theocratic and tyranic reigieme. But i suppose ultimatley he was the representitivie of the tibetan rling class, tibet was basically a backward feudal country before the chinese invasion.
In what relations do the Communists stand to the proletarians as a whole? The Communists do not form a separate party opposed to other working class parties. They have no interests separate and apart from those of the proletariat as a whole. They do not set up any sectarian principles of their own, by which to shape and mould the proletarian movement.
-Karl Marx
It is only by strengthening ourselves ideologically, inculcating in ourselves the values and ideals of the struggle and building up the ranks of the revolutionary party that we will make it.
- Ta Power
I'm sure there are quite a few links u can find when u search for "dalai serf" on google.
Here's one.
http://baltimore.indymedia.org/newswire/di.../9130/index.php
What trigered Dalai's armed rebellion in 1959 was the land reform the communists tried to introduce. The communists insisted that teh Tibet priesthood, which controlled practically ALL land in Tibet, should give their land to the overwhelming majority of Tibetan population--the horrifically impoverished serfs.
The theocracy, led by Dalai, refused to co-operate and thus rebelled.
Do not say that we have nothing,
We shall be masters of all under heaven!
