quote:

---

But is anarchy bad? I would say absolutely. Ayn Rand calls it the most anti-intellectual crusade ever, and I tend to agree with her

---

Justification?

quote:

---

more so than someone who claims he knows everything (Dante).

---

Proof lacking.

“I know, billions of people in this world have been killed horribly. Maybe im just steryotypical or whatever b/c Im Jewish, but, i have a feeling you are not of any minority group. you are a white, christian, male, right?”

Yes, you are being stereotypical. Didn’t you read what I wrote about my background? I’m a half- Hispanic Catholic with Eastern European blood and some Indian ancestors from the Andes somewhere down the line (not to mention my father was at a Zen Monastery for a while and got ordained there as a monk, but that’s another story). My mother is a Colombian; my father is from Long Island and has Lithuanian blood in him. What do both of those countries have in common? Left-wing extremists have killed millions in both of them.

“the leaders of america. but though more than 6 million people have been klled elsewhere, in the holocaust, 6 million people were killed which was like at least a third of the population. if a third of the people on this earth were killed in horrible conditions-how many people are there? 6 billion? so a third of that, 2 billion would be gone. think about that. 2 billion people dead. gone.than maybe you'd be a bit more of a minority, especailly if it was americans. and then maybe you'd sympathise with people more like my grandpa, who, ever since the beginning of a new war, wakes up screaming. you will never have to go through what he went through, and loose all of your family. you will never be scarred for life from something you never wanted to happen, you will never be stuck in a camp when you were just a kid and not get out untill you're 17.”

When did I say that I wasn’t sympathetic to Jews, or thought that the Holocaust wasn’t that bad? I never said that, what I said was that Stalin and his KGB thugs killed, tortured, mutilated, raped and ruined many times more than Hitler was able to. Stalin’s own ideas weren’t that much different than Hitler’s, right down to the idea of a “Superman” and a new race of the common people (His own version was the Soviet Man, Hitler’s of course was the Aryan Super Man). The only difference between Hitler and Stalin when it comes to oppression is that Stalin was more successful and unfortunately supported by many in the West, even when people knew he was murdering ten of millions of people deliberately through show trials, work camps, mass executions and starvation.

”so i know, there r manymanymany horrible killings each day, but i think hitler was horrible. and he didn't do it for a government, or for something that he actually might have thought would be good for the people. He had jewish relatives. he didn't look aryan, how he said people should look. yet he murdered millions of people who could've been him
i think he was horrible
you can nevereverever compare anyone to someone that horrible”

Hitler and Stalin were both horrible anti-Semitic mass murdering dictators responsible for the start of WWII. If Stalin killed more than four times the amount that Hitler did, and was responsible for killing Jews (as Hitler was), Polish (as Hitler was), Ukrainians, dissident Georgians (his own people!), Gypsies (as Hitler was) then why can’t I say he was as bad if not worse in some ways as Hitler?

JusticeConservatism:

I know, billions of people in this world have been killed horribly. Maybe im just steryotypical or whatever b/c Im Jewish, but, i have a feeling you are not of any minority group. you are a white, christian, male, right? the leaders of america. but though more than 6 million people have been klled elsewhere, in the holocaust, 6 million people were killed which was like at least a third of the population. if a third of the people on this earth were killed in horrible conditions-how many people are there? 6 billion? so a third of that, 2 billion would be gone. think about that. 2 billion people dead. gone.than maybe you'd be a bit more of a minority, especailly if it was americans. and then maybe you'd sympathise with people more like my grandpa, who, ever since the beginning of a new war, wakes up screaming. you will never have to go through what he went through, and loose all of your family. you will never be scarred for life from something you never wanted to happen, you will never be stuck in a camp when you were just a kid and not get out untill you're 17.
so i know, there r manymanymany horrible killings each day, but i think hitler was horrible. and he didn't do it for a government, or for something that he actually might have thought would be good for the people. He had jewish relatives. he didn't look aryan, how he said people should look. yet he murdered millions of people who could've been him
i think he was horrible
you can nevereverever compare anyone to someone that horrible

quote:

---

...or else civilization and the economy as we know it will completely collapse.

---

Like communism? If California is any indication, then, well, communism, socialism, whatever ...does not work. And will never work.


But is anarchy bad? I would say absolutely. Ayn Rand calls it the most anti-intellectual crusade ever, and I tend to agree with her more so than someone who claims he knows everything (Dante).

And that's a bad thing?

Joey: Well, it's identical to Anarcho-syndacalism to be precise, you aren't taking Anarcho-Capitalist libertarians like Milton Friedman into account. The only major differences between pure communism and left-wing anarchism is simple: Communism is what all socialists strive for as a goal, Anarcho-syndcalism is what left-anarchists want immediately. Anarchism when done in a small, voluntary commune level has worked. For obvious reasons though it can't work on a large compulsory level, or else civilization and the economy as we know it will completely collapse.

Okay, so what you're saying TennLeftWinger, is that Communism, pure Communism as proposed by Marx, is in reality an anarchist state?

.......and WHO'S misguided?

quote:

---

This is the most ridiculous thing I've ever heard.

Communism equals control. Communism minus a dictator STILL means control. State control of the production and redistribution of goods, wealth, etc.

Misguided. Severely misguided.

---

Actually, not according to Marxism-Leninism. Marx theorized that when there was true Communism the State would simply disappear because it would be useless. You're still thinking of the Right's... er... "true patriot's" definition. The scientific definition of Communism is "A classless society with no exploitation. No state machine used by one section of the population to oppress another section. No need for professional armies or police forces. No use of production for profit or exchange. Society runs in accord with the principle: From each according to his ability, to each according to his need." (Source: www.communism.org) In a true Communist state, society would maintain itself. You might be referring to what has passed as "Communism" in the past. I will admit that human society today is incapable of evolving to a true Communist society, but there are still those who wish to work for that goal. These people do not desire a dictatorial state. Ask anyone from the CPUSA and they'll tell you that a true Communist society has never existed. Communism is perfect without a doubt. Your view of Communism is the totalitarian regimes we've seen in the past. Please don't get the two confused.

quote:

---

true Communism is the ideal form of government because there is complete economic and social freedom.

---

This is the most ridiculous thing I've ever heard.

Communism equals control. Communism minus a dictator STILL means control. State control of the production and redistribution of goods, wealth, etc.

Misguided. Severely misguided.

penmagic, herein lies the argument I have tried over and over and over to make with the Brits:

liberal to England is completely opposite of liberal in the U.S.!

That's why I just say Communist and not liberal hardly. Because liberal, in contemporary politics, in AMERICA, means a favor of Communistic ideas.

Trade "liberalization" in England means "free trade." Does it not? Does "liberalizing" the economy not mean promoting it to a free-market economy? Does it not?

That's in England.

This is America, where I'm from. Two varying degrees of definitions. Think of the f-word to describe gay people; think of it that way. You have a totally, totally different meaning there than we do here.

quote:

---

Liberals are communist.
Stop denying this.

---

And the problem with communists are...? Some in America seem to treat Communism as if it were the plague. However, true Communism is the ideal form of government because there is complete economic and social freedom. Is it a crime to aspire to that (no matter how unlikely a goal it is)? You're confusing Communism with the one-party dictatorships which masquerade as "Communist". Before you assign an economic philosophy to a group maybe you should be aware that it's silly and juvenile to do so. I'm about as far left as they get and yet I'm not a Communist, I'm a Socialist (which I'm sure you do not see the difference between the two). Oh well... I love being a liberal... tolerance is a good thing.

ICM: Can you please try not to post Flame bait? Especially since some people here are already fighting?

quote:

---

Socialism/Communism has killed more people than Hitler's armies ever did.

---

So it's "gun's don't kill people", but "communisim" does? And you purport to support personal resposibility...

::wooosh:: (the sound of hot air being let out of Joey)

Ann Richards on How to Be a Good Republican:

1. You have to believe that the nation's current 8-year prosperity was due to the work of Ronald Reagan and George Bush, but yesterday's gasoline prices are all Clinton's fault.

2. You have to believe that those privileged from birth achieve success all on their own.

3. You have to be against all government programs, but expect Social Security checks on time.

4. You have to believe that AIDS victims deserve their disease, but smokers with lung cancer and overweight individuals with heart disease don't deserve theirs.

5. You have to appreciate the power rush that comes with sporting a gun.

6. You have to believe...everything Rush Limbaugh says.

7. You have to believe that the agricultural, restaurant, housing and hotel industries can survive without immigrant labor.

8. You have to believe God hates homosexuality, but loves the death penalty.

9. You have to believe society is color-blind and growing up black in America doesn't diminish your opportunities, but you still won't vote for Alan Keyes.

10. You have to believe that pollution is OK as long as it makes a profit.

11. You have to believe in prayer in schools, as long as you don't pray to Allah or Buddha.

12. You have to believe Newt Gingrich and Henry Hyde were really faithful husbands.

13. You have to believe speaking a few Spanish phrases makes you instantly popular in the barrio.

14. You have to believe that only your own teenagers are still virgins.

15. You have to be against government interference in business, until your oil company, corporation or Savings and Loan is about to go broke and you beg for a government bail out.

16. You love Jesus and Jesus loves you and, by the way, Jesus shares your hatred for AIDS victims, homosexuals, and President Clinton.

17. You have to believe government has nothing to do with providing police protection, national defense, and building roads.

18. You have to believe a poor, minority student with a disciplinary history and failing grades will be admitted into an elite private school with a $1,000 voucher.

Comrade: The EU has a higher rate of unemployment currently. In a few years due to Europe's aging population, much of the welfare state is expected to be cut back or else collapse as the number of people supporting the system through their taxes and labor is going to be greatly outnumbered by the amount retiring and expecting government handouts. The idea of the EU surpassing the US economically with its own "Death of the West" occurring and it's still nasty undercurrent of Xenophobia is highly unlikely (However, I do believe that China and Brazil will become economic powerhouses due to their combination of Economic & Social Reforms as well as their dirt cheap labor.). Anyway on another thing: How is the US pouring money into its military going to lead to its ruin? We've already produced the most powerful military force in the country. If anything, it will make us safer and the war economy which we may develop will lead to economic prosperity for a long time. The biggest problem I think the US has to worry about is it's soon to be gone Social Security, aging Baby Boomers and the general apathy/ignorance of the population.

I don't support communism. Many thousands of people have died through communist totalitarian regimes.
I think communism is one of the stupidest forms of government.

I am a liberal. I believe in the freedom of an individual to be themselves and express their views, as long as this does not harm others.
I am not a communist.

Communist ideas theoretically champion equality and fairness, i.e. you will get the same amount of potatoes as the next man, because as human beings you are equal. You may have worked harder for your potatoes, but that doesn't mean you deserve more.

It pretends to be fair but in practise it isn't. If I work hard growing my potatoes then I shouldn't have to give them up to the guy that didn't do a decent day's work in his life, just so that he has the same as I have. I think this is fundamentally unjust.
Metaphorically speakin g of course. It isn't just about potatoes.

Communism is oppressive - everybody is allowed to express their views- as long as those views are pro-communist. And the leader of the communists is almost always some guy sitting in a palace on top of a pile of gold, eating caviar, whilst everybody else is eating exactly the same portion of, say, potatoes (metaphorically speaking).
Equality my ***. People living in a communist regime have very little freedom, in fact it is often an oppressive dictatorship system. This is not a liberal ideal, or, paradoxically, a communist one. But that does tend to be how communist regimes end up.

The two standpoints are completely different. Liberal is pro-freedom. Communism isn't.

Joey seems to be in a state of denial about this.

Maybe we should stop trying to force this new idea into his narrow mind. It might be too much for him to take. His head might explode. Do we want to be responsible for Joey's head exploding? I think not, he is, after all, still a young man. He has his whole life ahead of him. I know I couldn't live with the guilt. Could you?

quote:

---

Inky, haven't you heard of all the anti-war protestors they arrested here for no reason? Or the outing of a CIA agent b/c her husband opposed the war?

---

This hasn't been reported in england, at least I don't think so. I haven't hear d of it, so I doubt Inky has.
In the light of that I'd say that yes, it is persecuting people for their beliefs, and therefore leaning towards fascism.

This is funny: http://www.parachutingtrees.co.uk/bush.htm
I hope nobody out there is dumb enough to think it's taking itself seriously.

-Pen

mkt16a17:

The Soviet Communists also had death camps, ever hear of the Gulags? Stalin himself killed many times more than Hitler ever did, in just the years 1932-1933 over seven million Ukrainian farmers were deliberately killed as an example to dissidents to name one of his many genocides. In Poland which both the Stalinists and the Nazis attacked, two million Poles were sent to the Gulags, half of which died from overwork and starvation. Under the Soviet Communists, Ukrainians, Balts, Russians, Jews and many others all were murdered, starved, mutilated or else ruined financially by the KGB and other Communist thugs. To say that Totalitarian Communists aren't or weren't as bad as the Nazis is as bad as denying the holocaust. If you don't believe me, go ask the people in the Chinese Fulong Gong spiritual movement, most people in Cambodia's S-21, or the USSR's Katyn. Oh wait you can't, they're all dead, missing or "Re-educated."

Well just bc people r conservative doesnt mean that they're always bad, thats just the same as the steryotype that all liberals r 4 gun conrtol, abortion rights, etc,etc,etc(which i am n im al iberal, so it can b true) but i have a friend whos a repiblican( or her parents r n she just goes along w/ them) But shes still really cool, we just dont talk about it.
But back to my main point: no matter how horrible some consertative people r or no matter how bad communists are, they arent as bad as the nazis. Im Jewish n my grandpa was left w/ only 1 very very distant cousin after WWII. They would do more horrible things than you can imagine. There were death canps where they would load all the people in2 the back or a tuck, gas the truck, and leave them in a pit. They would make a space a sqare foot, and five feet tall, and stuff 4 or five people into it untill they all died of hunnger. The ones who died last would be stuck with the bodies of the dead squashed next to them. You have no idea how bad it was, and no one can ever be as bad as the nazis

I truley hate many Republicans and conservatives, (LIKE OUR STUPID PRESIDENT!) but they aren't all bad. Thats just the same as steryotyping all liberals as for abortion rights, gun control, etc, etc, etc (which i am 4 an i am a liberal, so it can b true) But i have a very good friend who's parents are republican an she just goes along w/ her parent. i disagree w/ her but we just dont talk about it, or id leave her really confused about y i hate "her" ideas.