Living Like Communists - Soviet Union

[Adux]

Are you talking about Stalin or the ideology? Read your own posts and make up your mind instead of context-switching.

Yup, Stalin would exist in a true democracy.

 

[pmaitra]

Thats not what i said, go back and read. What a failure of the intellect. My own words about your argument is probably... Haha

I have already read what you wrote and replied back. You can question my intellect if you must, but my reply shows your juvenile thinking.

It's post #88. Help yourself.

 

[pmaitra]

Yup, Stalin would exist in a true democracy.

One does not have to be a communist (and can win elections too) to be a dictator.

Hitler's rise to power
The July 31, 1932, election produced a major victory for Hitler's National Socialist Party. The party won 230 seats in the Reichstag, making it Germany's largest political party, but it still fell short of a majority in the 608-member body.

Read more: How Hitler Became a Dictator

However, you have deliberately chosen to focus only on those dictators who happened to be communist ignoring the many others who were communist yet not dictators. Your tunnel vision is your problem.

BTW, I ask again, are you talking about an ideology or just one individual called Stalin? Make up your mind and come back.

Edit: Never mind. Your thought process will not reach that level.

 

[Known_Unknown]

^^Arguing with trolls is fruitless. One liners and "gotcha" phrases don't make debates. Let them be...Ignorance is Bliss!

 

[Godless-Kafir]

^^Arguing with trolls is fruitless. One liners and "gotcha" phrases don't make debates. Let them be...Ignorance is Bliss!

Lol, So your a communist sympathizer too now!

 

[pmaitra]

Lol, So your a communist sympathizer too now!

I cannot speak on behalf of Known_Unknown, but I definitely admire Marxist ideals, if not believe in them entirely. I think it is better to be a godless communist egalitarian and utopian than be a godless troll.

So, GK, I am sure you must be rather pissed off that USSR helped India in 1971-72 no? After all, if one is a commie, he is by default evil, isn't it. You must have been happy if the USSR let us be invaded by Pakistan, PRC and USA. LOL.

 

[Adux]

One does not have to be a communist (and can win elections too) to be a dictator.

What about True democracy doesnt your pea brain understand?

However, you have deliberately chosen to focus only on those dictators who happened to be communist ignoring the many others who were communist yet not dictators. Your tunnel vision is your problem.

No because it really doesnt matter, maybe your pea brain doesnt get it, You live in USA for a reason and not in Venezuela or ertswhile USSR. Hypocrite much.

BTW, I ask again, are you talking about an ideology or just one individual called Stalin? Make up your mind and come back.

Yes, Commie's havent killed in China or any other country. Heck even in West Bengal. /Sarcasm (just so that you can understand), Communism is the most successful economic and political model ever! This is not even funny at this point.

Edit: Never mind. Your thought process will not reach that level.

So says the hypocrite. I have known your kind, earn capitalist salaries in the USA and sermon the poor us Desi Yahoo's about the benefits of Communism and being dirt poor. Fuck Off!

 

[Adux]

I cannot speak on behalf of Known_Unknown, but I definitely admire Marxist ideals, if not believe in them entirely. I think it is better to be a godless communist egalitarian and utopian than be a godless troll.

SO when are you moving?

So, GK, I am sure you must be rather pissed off that USSR helped India in 1971-72 no? After all, if one is a commie, he is by default evil, isn't it. You must have been happy if the USSR let us be invaded by Pakistan, PRC and USA. LOL.

Its called geo-politics dummy! Guess who came to Indian rescue in 1962? Yes, Commie's are intellectual farts, who have caused misery and pain world over. But how would you know, you live in USA.

 

[Godless-Kafir]

I cannot speak on behalf of Known_Unknown, but I definitely admire Marxist ideals, if not believe in them entirely. I think it is better to be a godless communist egalitarian and utopian than be a godless troll.

So, GK, I am sure you must be rather pissed off that USSR helped India in 1971-72 no? After all, if one is a commie, he is by default evil, isn't it. You must have been happy if the USSR let us be invaded by Pakistan, PRC and USA. LOL.

Go back and read my comment pmutton brain, my stand is totally diffrent. I dont support an 'isms".

 

[pmaitra]

What about True democracy doesnt your pea brain understand?



No because it really doesnt matter, maybe your pea brain doesnt get it, You live in USA for a reason and not in Venezuela or ertswhile USSR. Hypocrite much.



Yes, Commie's havent killed in China or any other country. Heck even in West Bengal. /Sarcasm (just so that you can understand), Communism is the most successful economic and political model ever! This is not even funny at this point.


So says the hypocrite. I have known your kind, earn capitalist salaries in the USA and sermon the poor us Desi Yahoo's about the benefits of Communism and being dirt poor. Fuck Off!

Go back and read my comment pmutton brain, my stand is totally diffrent. I dont support an 'isms".

GK and Adux, you guys are repeating your mistakes that you resorted to when you guys were new here. I strongly recommend you adhere to the forum rules. You have been warned.

 

[Known_Unknown]

Maybe it's time for a perma-ban, since the earlier one seems to have had no effect.

 

[civfanatic]

I support communist ideals, but I don't think a successful communist society can exist in the world as it is today, nor do I support a 'communist revolution' as an acceptable course of action. I consider myself a 'communist idealist' but not a 'communist' (in the modern political context) or a 'Communist' (with an upper case C).

From a more pragmatic point of view, I consider myself a "nationalistic democratic socialist", as the three ideals I value the most are nationalism, democracy, and socialism, in roughly that order. I consider the Scandinavian nations to be the best model based on these criteria.

Also, I would wager my entire year's salary (a capitalist one ) that the commie haters on this thread cannot provide a good definition of communism, nor that they can properly differentiate between communism, socialism, and Marxism.

 

[pmaitra]

I support communist ideals, but I don't think a successful communist society can exist in the world as it is today, nor do I support a 'communist revolution' as an acceptable course of action. I consider myself a 'communist idealist' but not a 'communist' (in the modern political context) or a 'Communist' (with an upper case C).

From a more pragmatic point of view, I consider myself a "nationalistic democratic socialist", as the three ideals I value the most are nationalism, democracy, and socialism, in roughly that order. I consider the Scandinavian nations to be the best model based on these criteria.

Also, I would wager my entire year's salary (a capitalist one ) that the commie haters on this thread cannot provide a good definition of communism, nor that they can properly differentiate between communism, socialism, and Marxism.

India is a Socialist state. So are many NATO countries, the so called anti-communist bloc.

I cannot, in my sane state of mind, think of living in a country with a single party rule. You are right, it is about the aims and objectives, rather than miseries totalitarian leaders brought upon their people that one seeks to admire. Of course, who would want to suffer like those that did under dictators?

 

[Adux]

GK and Adux, you guys are repeating your mistakes that you resorted to when you guys were new here. I strongly recommend you adhere to the forum rules. You have been warned.

Take your warning and put it were the sun dont shine. Regarding the Who came first to this forum or rather the Indian forum scene. LOL.

 

[Adux]

Also, I would wager my entire year's salary (a capitalist one ) that the commie haters on this thread cannot provide a good definition of communism, nor that they can properly differentiate between communism, socialism, and Marxism.

Now where have I read something on similar lines; Yup, Religious Zealots.
We have come to the point that we are gloating hypocrisy. Brilliant.

 

[The Messiah]

NATO is not capitalistic in its true sense and neither was USSR communist in its true sense.

 

[pmaitra]

CivFanatic,

You are right. However, let us not feed these trolls because their objective is to provoke people. We can continue to debate on the topic with people who have something useful to contribute.

Here in the US, there is a concept called social security. Now there is also a lot of debate going on regarding healthcare. So many people think that the US is capitalist. Probably most of it is capitalist, but there is a significant presence of congressmen with socialist objectives.

If you would study the primary causes for the recession and the housing bubble, it happened because the US Congress was pursuing a socialist agenda.

I guess the divide today is not so black and white.

 

[Known_Unknown]

I support communist ideals, but I don't think a successful communist society can exist in the world as it is today, nor do I support a 'communist revolution' as an acceptable course of action. I consider myself a 'communist idealist' but not a 'communist' (in the modern political context) or a 'Communist' (with an upper case C).

From a more pragmatic point of view, I consider myself a "nationalistic democratic socialist", as the three ideals I value the most are nationalism, democracy, and socialism, in roughly that order. I consider the Scandinavian nations to be the best model based on these criteria.

Also, I would wager my entire year's salary (a capitalist one ) that the commie haters on this thread cannot provide a good definition of communism, nor that they can properly differentiate between communism, socialism, and Marxism.

Food for thought: If you value socialist ideals, then democracy doesn't really go with it. In many western countries where they've experimented with long periods of democratic socialism including the Scandanavian countries, often after a while people elect rightwing, fundamentalist parties to power. These parties enact policies that serve to wipe out the gains made in terms of cultural, social and economic progress by the leftists, by focussing too much on the military, small government, and religious agendas. Hitler is a perfect example, and there are tons of more contemporary examples. Democracy is good as long as it is practiced in a framework where the choice is restricted to progressive parties only.

Another problem with democratic socialism is that it can only work in certain societies. These tend to be the ones with no external enemies, and which can hence devote a large amount of the state's resources towards welfare schemes such as EI, free healthcare, free education etc. Large countries tend to have great power ambitions, and hence their leaders want to invest more in military and industrial production. Other large countries like India tend to have external threats which force them to spend more on defence, thus taking away resources from social welfare schemes. Nehru tried to follow a democratic socialist model for India (a la Scandanavia), but 1962 made him realize that it was not possible.

 

[civfanatic]

Now where have I read something on similar lines; Yup, Religious Zealots.
We have come to the point that we are gloating hypocrisy. Brilliant.

Thank you for proving my point.

 

[Adux]

Thank you for proving my point.

You had none to begin with, but then again please do go ahead with your pointless discussion on an ideology you claim to love.