At 12/7/06 10:44 PM, BanditByte wrote:
You ignored what I said. I said the reason Russia did well under Lenin was because it nio longer had to suffer the incompetence and lackadaisical folly of the monarchy.
Right, but why wouldn't they tap into these vast resources?
This is actually untrue. Mexico has a great steel and oil industry, but the people live in poverty.
Why would they live in poverty if they have such a great economy?
Also, hurricanes only happen so often and would not significantly impede Cuba's progress.
Not just hurricanes; droughts are also frequent, and when you put those two together it's agrarian economy really suffers.
Can't say I am. Most nazi would consider me inferior and nazism doesn't sit well with me because I never thought much of the Aryan people. Nothing but a bunch of barbarians.
Okay, so you seem to dislike white people, and think that some people are genetically superior. Which race are you?
Could you provide an exerpt?
"I recognize the representatives of this race as pestilent for the state and for the church and perhaps I am thereby doing Christianity a great service by pushing them out of schools and public functions."
"The personification of the devil as the symbol of all evil assumes the living shape of the Jew"
"Jesus fought against the materialism of His age, and, therefore, against the Jews."
"He set out to kill people not for what they did but for who they were. Even Mao and Stalin were killing their 'class enemies.' Hitler killed a million Jewish babies just for existing." -Time
And no, I've never read Mein Kampf; it wasn't required literature at my highschool.
You only read books when you're forced too? No suprise there.
He was of jewish ancestry, which by technicality makes him partially one, correct?
That doesn't mean he didn't do it out of compassion for his fellow man.
I merely said the only reason Lenin worked to abolish these things was because he would be condemned by such a school of thought.
If that were true he would have never even risen to power in the first place. He freed the serfs, drove out the Czars, gave land to the poor, and tried to stamp out racial and religious intolerance, all out of kindness, not personal gain.
this bitch's hypocrisy is staggering.
Why attempt to hide your insults?
So I rhetorically and sarcasticly responded by saying I guess that's why the Communist leadership in the USSR was so quick to reshape it after Lenin's death to Stalinism; had it been such a perfect model of socialism.
Exactly. Those people were out for personal gain, and socialism doesn't allow for that especially not in leaders. Thus, they did away with Leninism and formed Stalinism and Maoism.
Actually, anyone in the middle class and upperclasses are targetted and butchered like cattle.
As opposed to the working class being treated as slaves or wage slaves and toiled to the breaking point?
These people(communists) are violent monsters and only emulate the most depraved of human nature.
I would expect that from a Nazi, or whatever racial supremicist group based on the NDASP you adhere to; you hate the communists as an evil plague apon the world.
Not really. They're pretty content with the mixed economics they already have.
Then why are they still moving towards socialism? Even the more right-wing parties in many of these nations think socialism is a good thing.
Socialism is a natural evolution in human society, just as we evolved from Feudalism to Capitalism.
I didn't look at it
Of course you didn't.
My point is anyone can run regardless of politics. Not whether or not a person can run on any platform and win.
And if there is 0 chance of winning, are they really running?
I hate what harms the US: dems fit that role.
And the Republicans; who have time and time again dragged the US into unpopular war and advocated social inequality; are better?
Show me in the law of these nations where they can call upon the death of a person.
There is no law about it; thats the point. They have true freedom of speech. Sure, there could be social backlashes, but never ones administered by the government.
Oh man, this actually made me chuckle.
Mind actually refuting claims instead of posting half-assed statements which have nothing to do with the argument?
Believe it or not the prodominate religion of a nation can affect the success of it.
That is utter bull. We have seen nearly every religion throughout history (excluding those formed in the New Age movements) rise to prominance through nations, not the other way around.
Don't measure me by your multiculturism bullshit.
Yes, curse me for tolerating people and believing that all humans should be treated fairly.
Capitalism is synonym for freemarket
No; if one can buy and sell whatever they want at a marketplace, then that is free-market. The next step up is having industries and corporations so big that they can determine market rules for the maket on a much larger scale.
You fucking kidding me? The US and Britain actually did honor the treaty.
Which treaty? SALT I? SALT II? Partial Test Ban Treaty?
Russians continued to hone nuclear technology to gain the edge. That's the reason they have some many nukes today.
Wait; advance nuclear technology, or stockpile nukes?
Every Oriental nation except Taiwan and Thailand.
So Japan, South Korea, Vietnam, India, etc. are all socialist?
I would rather have Nazi Germany than Soviet Russia - so yes.
Nations the United States 'liberated' in the Cold War.
Ever heard of the Berlin Wall?
The sole reason it was built was to keep the Americans, British, and French out of West Berlin so that it would eventually be starved (economically) into submission.
Another bullshit statements. The reason the Russia Mafia came to power was because of the Soviet Government.
The Russian Mafia has existed for centuries; long before the Russian Revolution. And during the Soviet Era, especially under Stalin, the Mafia was only a minor nusience.
Because of all the food and medicine shortages in the Soviet Union it opened a black market for the Russian Mafia to be a monopoly in the USSR.
You're thinking of Russia and the rest of East Europe solely from the 90s onward.
Any reason? I thought the war was the result of capitalism. Changing our stories now?
The indirect causes of the war were all capitalist; expanding industry, colonialism, militarism (in order to keep order in the colonies and at home), nationalism (to ensure the people that they were right in their exploitation of others), etc.
Like I said before, political assassination in the Balkans during this period was as common as a rainy day. Archduke Ferdinand was assassinated by the Black Hand, which was a Serbian nationalist group, therefore Austria-Hungary gave Serbia an ultimatum; allow military forces to investigate (therein occupying the nation) or go to war. The latter happened, and Russia stepped in to help it's Slavic brothers. Germany had a military pact with Austria-Hungary in case of war with Russia, and Britian and France had a military pact with Russia in case of war with Germany.
Although I admit that I forget how the Ottoman Empire was dragged in, but I know it was due to hatred against Russia as well as a dispute with them over Armenia.