The Real Threat; Not Communism, but Big Gov't and the Left

kiwimac · 01-04-2006, 04:02 PM

Blackwatch wrote,

Quote:

that is not even worth commenting about.....you come and tell me about socialists after you see children excuted because their fathers was a village leader or a minister and refused to kow-tow to the socialists and the entire village burned to the ground....by the socialists for a 'better' society....

You are talking about Communists here, there is as much a difference between Socialists and Communists as there is between between the US Republican party and the Nazis.

My country, NZ, is broadly speaking socialist, do we round up folk and shoot 'em, nope. I am a priest, is my life threatened because of it? Nope.

You need to differentiate, because one thing is SIMILAR to another does not make them the SAME. Falling out of a plane with a parachute and without one is exactly the same but for one difference.

Kiwimac

DerAdlerIstGelandet · 01-05-2006, 11:07 AM

I agree with you kiwi on this. Communism may be derived from Socialism but it is different.

Communism is normally run by a dictator or ruthless leader aka: Lenin, Stalin, that N. Korean ****, etc...

Socialism is elected by the people for the most part with regular elections set at regular intervals.

Communism everything is government run.

Socialism private enterprise is allowed.

Communis everything is for the government.

Socialism everything is typically for the people.

marconi · 01-08-2006, 12:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Blackwatch

Soviet Union 1927 Ukraine...1 MILLION people starved to death per Stalins orders because the Urkarin faught back against the communists and Stalin shut off ALL food to the region.

It was in 1932-1933 actually.Btw there was famine in other parts of USSR.
And I never heard that genocide was the ideal of socialists.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Harvard

Marconi, I've noticed you are from Ukraine. It sounds to me like you don't really know. Ukraine is just starting out. You might want to learn from other countries where democracy/capitalism (non-socialist) has worked.

Harvard, Ukraine is starting for 15 years.Its true that Ukraine was a part of USSR, but when I went to school I was already living in a new country, which wanted to forget anything connected to USSR and communism.By the way democrasy and capitalism is not the same.Capitalism is an economical system and democrasy is a form of government.

DerAdlerIstGelandet · 01-08-2006, 01:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by marconi

And I never heard that genocide was the ideal of socialists.

Your right, that sounds to me more like fascism and communism.

marconi · 01-08-2006, 02:30 PM

I also never heard that it was one of ideals of communism.

Maybe you're confusing communism and so called communist states?

DerAdlerIstGelandet · 01-08-2006, 02:34 PM

That is another point that I have been trying to make, but I could never be right....

Delusional · 01-08-2006, 03:14 PM

Harvard,
Your ideas make little sense. You say a smaller government would work if everyone involved in that government was honest and unselfish. Yet you have said over and over again that power corrupts and makes even the most honorable person a greedy, lying dirtbag. In a smaller government, would not everyone share the power? And would not everyone desire more and more power, therefore becoming more and more corrupted? It is human nature to want more. Do you expect to find humans who go against basic human nature for this small government you so desire? If so, I can tell you that are you living in the wrong country for the job.

DerAdlerIstGelandet · 01-08-2006, 03:18 PM

That is one way to look at it.

kiwimac · 01-09-2006, 01:24 AM

Actually Fascism is not genocidal normally, Nazism is but Nazism and Fascism are different beasts as well.

Kiwimac

DerAdlerIstGelandet · 01-09-2006, 03:22 AM

As are Socialism and Communism.

kiwimac · 01-09-2006, 07:19 PM

Correctimundo!

Harvard · 01-09-2006, 10:59 PM

Delusional:

Quote:

Harvard,
Your ideas make little sense. You say a smaller government would work if everyone involved in that government was honest and unselfish. Yet you have said over and over again that power corrupts and makes even the most honorable person a greedy, lying dirtbag. In a smaller government, would not everyone share the power? And would not everyone desire more and more power, therefore becoming more and more corrupted? It is human nature to want more. Do you expect to find humans who go against basic human nature for this small government you so desire? If so, I can tell you that are you living in the wrong country for the job.

You should use quotes, because you have misunderstood.

Delusional · 01-10-2006, 08:10 AM

Harvard,
Well then perhaps you should actually outline your views rather than saying very little while typing quite a bit. I thought I did quite a good job at summarizing your ideas and then proving how they made no sense. Your greatest fault is that your ideas may all be well and good on paper, but you do not know how to carry out those ideas. This is probably because those ideas are unable to be carried out in a real-life situation. When you decide to come back to reality, perhaps you will realize this truth, and maybe then you will submit some ideas that are actually worth hearing, i.e., practical solutions rather than dreams of a more noble human society.

kiwimac · 01-10-2006, 08:33 AM

Actually, AFAIC, there's nothing wrong with dreaming about a "more noble human society." As long as its followed up by action.

Kiwimac

Delusional · 01-10-2006, 06:32 PM

I believe that was exactly the kind of point that I was trying to make by urging practical solutions over dreams.