|
ronya posted:this argument-from-history kinda ran out of steam around the time the decidedly liberal-dominated states had successful civil rights movements and the decidedly soviet ones did not Jee, I wonder why the states which adopted anti-racism and affirmative action immediately upon their founding didn't have civil rights movements 20 years later.
|
#
¿
Aug 1, 2016 17:54
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 27, 2024 12:30 |
|
|
ronya posted:well You're actually disgraceful in dismissing Communist efforts in civil rights as merely "mass secular education and abolishing polygamy". They were literally the first people in power anywhere to ban racial segregation, guarantee equal rights in law, and provide actively fight marginalisation of minority ethnic groups. They were literally granting in the 1920s what people were being killed for asking in 1960s America. This is why, surprise surprise, the 20th century civil rights struggle in America was absolutely full of communists. This is why your original point is loving stupid. You suggest that Liberal countries having mass movements that fought racist governments in the 1960s is a sign of how progressive liberalism is, compared to Socialist countries, which didn't have them because the governments were extremely anti-racist to the point of open racism being punishable with ten years in a goddamned labour camp. The USSR did not generate it's own Malcolm X to fight The Man, because The Man there was teaching that Malcolm X was correct. 
HorseLord fucked around with this message at 18:13 on Aug 1, 2016 |
|
#
¿
Aug 1, 2016 18:07
|
|
|
Tigey posted:'And you are lynching negroes' Apparently the phrase anticommunists use when they're mistaking an attempt to establish evaluative symmetry for a tu quoque
|
|
#
¿
Aug 1, 2016 18:25
|
|
|
TomViolence posted:Not to mention that the soviets were pretty antisemitic, racist and homophobic in practice, even if such discrimination wasn't always enshrined in law. That's pretty funny because, as we've already discussed, one of the biggest concerns of the soviet state and the party - which was always specifically enshrined in law - was the destruction of antisemitism and racism. What you're trying to do here is to point at the preexisting Antisemitism and racism of the various cultures inherited from the former russian empire and then use them to "prove" that "the soviets" (Who? The politburo? The creators of Marxism-Leninism? The new soviet man they wished to create? The citizens who opposed communism?) were defined by and endorsed those things. Using what logic - That they did not wave a wand and magically poof it all away on the first day of the October that was in November, therefore they were secretly lying every time they said racism is bad? Does that stand up to any scrutiny at all? Racism didn't end overnight, so all their great efforts to fight it were fake? You're trying to delegitimise the efforts of the party and government, of communists generally, in the fight against racism. You are doing this in a conversation where liberal ideology was praised as superior because liberal countries had governments racist enough to inspire resistance against it, while socialist countries who's governments actually made an effort to fight racism are considered inferior because there was nothing to cause an anti-racist rebellion against. I would like to know why, in such a conversation, you would pick the really loving stupid side to be on.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 1, 2016 22:21
|
|
|
"Shut the gently caress up TomViolence" - Huey P. Newton, probably
|
|
#
¿
Aug 1, 2016 22:25
|
|
|
Since the Stalin poo poo is starting again I should pose a question. If the rise in antisemitism experienced in the postwar USSR was down to Stalin how come he didn't get around to that earlier? I mean, dude was paramount leader since the late 1920s. Seems a bit odd he waited two decades and a massive war before doing anything.
HorseLord fucked around with this message at 22:37 on Aug 1, 2016 |
|
#
¿
Aug 1, 2016 22:35
|
|
|
StoneOfShame posted:The war was a more pressing problem? Stalin started being Stalin, Undisputed Leader of the USSR in 1928. The war began for the USSR in 1941. That's 13 years of which pogoms could have been organised but weren't. He could have even used the war as an excuse, had he wanted. He could have span it as "Hitler is invading to get the jews, the jews have brought this on us!" and had them all rounded up and gassed right during the war. He did not. Come on now, critical thinking please. Start with known facts, work towards a conclusion. Don't start with a preconceived idea and attempt to justify it, that's backwards.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 1, 2016 22:45
|
|
|
TomViolence posted:Rather than picking a side at all I'd much prefer to reject false dichotomies altogether. The recognition of capitalism and imperialism's historic crimes need not absolve those of the soviet empire. While the soviet union did much that was laudable, the actual breadth and depth of soviet commitments to racial and gender equality were always somewhat dubious and fueled at least in part by a pragmatic desire to support sympathetic movements in the third world. That's interesting because actually no. Soviet antiracism comes from the fact the founders were anti-racists of many different nationalities, who grew up, lived and fought in one multinational state and created another. I'll leave your crank theories about a soviet "empire" alone. TomViolence posted:Post-war soviet jews having a valid alternative to living in the soviet union might have had something to do with it. Intensifying antisemitic policies to crack down on the bourgeois zionists and prevent them from making a mass exodus from the country (which would no doubt discredit the USSR in the eyes of the world) makes a bit of sense in context. That's interesting, you're saying that they wanted to keep the jews so they were anti-semetic to them. drat, I guess that when they were doing all the really pro-semetic poo poo in the 1930s they were trying to get them to leave. ...Or, the rise in antisemitism in postwar soviet society is an aftershock from a recent huge war where jews were attacked and scapegoated, one which Anti-Semites within the soviet union used to incite resentment and blame against jews. It could be that.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 1, 2016 23:00
|
|
|
StoneOfShame posted:I actually don't know enough about anti semitism in the USSR to give a full description of it I was offering a possible reason. What you ignored was the main part of what I said and you keep ignoring which was Stalin was a mass murderer and sent poo poo loads of people to gulags. Please justify this instead of doing what you normally do either just say it didn't happen with no actual evidence or say but the USA does it to, use the critical thinking you so desire as what you normally do is exactly what you accuse other people of doing except you are coming from the position of being a Stalinist and a colossal moron. Well my first bit of critical thinking is: How come everyone who makes the mass murderer claims uses a different death toll? It's always a big multi millions number, but it's never the same one. I've heard everything from 20, to 50, to 100 Million dead. The second bit of critical thinking is how would any of those figures fit within known Soviet demographics, what would the birth rate even have to be? My third bit of critical thinking is, why do you think proper practice in a debate is to go "uh well I don't actually know anything about the subject, BUTANYWAYHERE'SANOTHERTHING bet you can't handle that, huh"? Be honest, you bring up death tolls and gulags in order to bail out from antisemitism into a subject of your choice that you think you might fare better with. Otherwise you would not have brought any other subject up. My fourth bit is wondering why you think I'd even care that people went to gulags. HorseLord fucked around with this message at 23:26 on Aug 1, 2016 |
|
#
¿
Aug 1, 2016 23:22
|
|
|
TomViolence posted:The "multinational state" they "created" was literally just a rebranded Russian empire TomViolence posted:Soviet antisemitism, at least where it manifested as a matter of discriminatory policy, concerned issues such as language and freedom of movement. Yiddish was encouraged instead of hebrew So now you say that it's antisemitic to encourage the native language of Jews. You're just saying rubbish now. You can love your liberalism and the true progressive goodness of cops shooting black people and getting vacations for it or whatever. But talking to you is a waste of time.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 1, 2016 23:37
|
|
|
tooterfish posted:Because they're estimates you wretched loving oval office? If your estimates are -/+ 70 Million people having actually existed in living memory or not they're poo poo mate. Oberleutnant posted:Assuming we're talking about the Holodomor. Death tolls from famines are notoriously difficult to estimate. One fairly usual methodology is to extrapolate a "target" population from averaging our pre-famine population growth rates, and then assuming that anybody "missing" from the target number after the famine had died of starvation (as opposed to emigrated, or looking at a lowered birth rate owing to malnutrition). This methodology may produce inconsistent or impossible numbers when compared against other objective data, and probably overestimates death tolls - but that doesn't function as evidence that a famine never occurred. That's good then because nobody actually ever says there wasn't a famine in the Soviet Union in the early 1930s.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 1, 2016 23:38
|
|
|
tooterfish posted:Do any of the estimates say 0? I've been confronted by people who claim 100 Million. You can do maths, what's 100 - 70? Hell, I was once told by a very angry man that Stalin killed 150 Million people, which would leave what, 15 million left in the entire USSR?
|
|
#
¿
Aug 1, 2016 23:44
|
|
|
StoneOfShame posted:You're actually dense aren't you? The moving onto something else was because you talking about a single aspect of Soviet Russia has to be taken in the context of you being a full on Stalinist propagandist so you should be challenged on all aspects of your stupidity. No it was because you don't know anything about Antisemitism in the USSR, but you still need to feel like you can win, so your brought along a backup subject you felt more confidant at. Most people would just say "To be honest I don't know." and that would be the end of it. StoneOfShame posted:Estimates for all genocides in history vary wildly therefore the holocaust didn't happen and neither did Cambodia's killing fields. That's interesting because we have very solid figures for the holocaust. We have proved exactly how many people died (to couple thousand), when, and where, as well as where they were from, who their family was, how they were caught, transferred into the camp system etc. Meanwhile, with Stalin, bad historians have just shouted random big numbers. StoneOfShame posted:I thought you would care about people going to gulags because I made the mistake of assuming you had a shred of humanity to you but you obviously dont. People go to prison all the time. You can't guilt me over anticommunists and other criminals going to prison, because I think that's good. If you'd like to guilt me over the falsely convicted, that's cool, we should meet up IRL and protest HM Prisons and the police together. Because alive falsely convicted people are more important than historical ones.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 1, 2016 23:55
|
|
|
Guavanaut posted:this is another interesting thing about classical liberalism in the current mode of analyzing causality. Nationalists and state socialists caused genocides by their evil manipulations, whereas if you go by the Economist at the time laissez faire capitalism simply failed to prevent one even though the market was the best solution it was very sad. Well it's actually the other way around. The British government's reaction to hearing of the Irish famine was to send soldiers to make sure Ireland kept exporting food to the UK. Livestock export actually increased.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 1, 2016 23:59
|
|
|
StoneOfShame posted:No, I feel that your defenses of Stalin need to be challenged everytime you start talking about him but tell me what my intentions are again please. Except your challenge to what I was actually talking about failed, because as you admit you don't know anything about it. So then you brought up some other poo poo I wasn't even talking about. StoneOfShame posted:The holocaust figures are more accurate yet but figures for other like I stated Camodia aren't, Indonesia to, what I wonder is why because the figures aren't exact you automatically assume it didn't really happen. How do you get from "these figures are worthless guesses" to "this historical event is made up". Like, literally in this conversation I pointed out that I don't deny the USSR had a big famine, which is what those numbers get attached to. What I will deny is the idea that the catastrophic consequences of over a decade's worth of (frankly poo poo) agricultural policy combined with extremely outdated farming techniques came about through malice. That damned famine has root causes going back to Lenin's time and before. StoneOfShame posted:Are you intentionally associating anticommunists as criminals? That is not good man It is good, anticommunists, in a country ruled by a communist party, are bad and should go to jail. In countries not ruled by communist parties they're free to blossom into the big piles of poo poo they are. HorseLord fucked around with this message at 00:17 on Aug 2, 2016 |
|
#
¿
Aug 2, 2016 00:14
|
|
|
OwlFancier posted:I uh, hope you're not suggesting that because they're in opposition to the ruling polity. Yes, because when you have done a big communist revolution you don't want to let the anticommunists hang around and undo that. This is 101 poo poo. You want people to be allowed to treason against socialism, go found the Union Of Liberal Democracies.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 2, 2016 00:20
|
|
|
OwlFancier posted:There's a fairly major issue with suggesting that opposition to the dominant political ideology is bad and people who support it need to go to jail. When the dominant political ideology is communism, opposition to it is bad, and the people who oppose it need to go to jail. Otherwise they overthrow it. I know you, OwlFancier. I know you want to hug everything out. But you can't do that with people who literally raise an army and start a civil war against you.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 2, 2016 00:24
|
|
|
Namtab posted:If the revolution is righteous and the people are free then you don't need to have your secret police arrest or murder dissidents, because they'll come around of their own accord Yes I'm sure the bourgeoisie, nobility and aristocracy can be politely persuaded to give up everything and not make any power grabs. After they see their former employees move to housing with indoor plumbing, they'll definitely agree that its worth no longer owning a palace, three village's worth of farmland, or a several million dollar concern.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 2, 2016 00:30
|
|
|
Namtab posted:I'm going to be a liberal fucker and suggest there's a middle ground between polite persuasion and mass murder Yeah, put them in labour camps for ten years. OwlFancier posted:When the dominant political ideology is communism, perhaps. But as I said, that's not the same thing as declaring that merely opposing the ruling polity is bad. Me: it's bad to be anticommunist. People who want to destroy socialism and restore the old order should go to hell Owlfancier: How dare you say people who have differing ideas about how to implement socialist policy should go to hell
|
|
#
¿
Aug 2, 2016 00:34
|
|
|
OwlFancier posted:Horselord you appear to be suggesting that 100% of the people imprisoned for poltiical reasons in the USSR were capitalist infiltrators hellbent on the destruction of socialism. No. I've already mentioned that, as with all legal systems, sometimes people wrongly go to jail. Your problem is you don't think anticommunism is bad. That's why you originally had a problem with the idea that anticommunists should go to jail, which started our little part of the conversation here.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 2, 2016 00:41
|
|
|
Darth Walrus posted:You're aware of the ЧСИР, right? Yezhov sucks and should have been executed earlier. Oberleutnant posted:Lots of the people stalin had killed were longstanding party members you shitlord. So was Yeltsin.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 2, 2016 00:46
|
|
|
OwlFancier posted:What started it was you stated that merely opposing the establishment is grounds for imprisonment, I asked you to clarify whether that's what you meant, you said yes, I said that was silly, you said obviously the establishment was communism and that makes opposition to it bad, I pointed out that the establishment was not communism, you... sort of stopped arguing. You're playing with words, now. I never said that the USSR had achieved communism, which as we both know is stateless and without law or even politics. You've failed to establish why anticommunists should not be punished for opposing socialism, which is both immediate political economy and the road towards the achievement of communism. You are aware that an "anticommunist" is someone who is against the ideology called communism, and the people called communists, correct? If you are aware, what point are you even trying to make? Why shouldn't an anticommunist be excluded from socialism? You keep oscillating between the people to be suppressed being actual anticommunists, who are as described above, and who I would want suppressed, and other communists, who merely disagree on policy, who I wouldn't want suppressed. Pick one and stick to it, and then you can come up with an actual point. HorseLord fucked around with this message at 00:57 on Aug 2, 2016 |
|
#
¿
Aug 2, 2016 00:55
|
|
|
OwlFancier posted:My point is that desiring to put all anticommunists in prison is likely to lead to an extremely broad definition of "anticommunism" whereby any criticism of any aspect of the government's policy may be grounds for labelling someone "anticommunist" and locking them up. So now your concern is actually with the implementation. See you and I both have our concerns with that; the difference is that I know that when I'm sat in an armchair, detached from it by 80 years and a different country, it'd be really loving easy to spitball bullshit about what they should have done and feel smart for doing it. It'd also be loving meaningless, if either of us were magically transported there we would both do just as badly or worse. OwlFancier posted:Political environments have to be excessively permissive in order to have an actual discussion. If you want to prevent capitalists from gaining power you have options like state constitutions and supermajority clauses for passing some legislation, as well as state sponsored propaganda and education. There are myriad different ways to enforce ideological hegemony outside of locking people up for not agreeing with it, as is evidenced by our current species-wide love of capitalism. The stick is universally the least effective form of population control. Which is why most western societies don't rely on it as a first resort. And here you prove the point, you're saying a bunch of poo poo as if they didn't do any of it. If only Comrade Owlfancier had been around in 1917, things would have been so much better with him around to share his ideas that obviously nobody else already had. HorseLord fucked around with this message at 01:12 on Aug 2, 2016 |
|
#
¿
Aug 2, 2016 01:10
|
|
|
Guavanaut posted:Maybe that's what Euro Truck Simulator should have spent all that money on instead of the roads and the gear ratios and such. Man I would absolutely play USSR Tropico
|
|
#
¿
Aug 2, 2016 01:16
|
|
|
Illuyankas posted:What is the absolute minimum number of people killed by Stalin's regime, so that I have a ballpark figure for the number of deaths that Horselord is just handwaving aside? Over 5 million axis soldiers
|
|
#
¿
Aug 2, 2016 01:28
|
|
|
foot posted:No, you're probably right, especially with the threatened PLP split mirroring the SDP split which gave the Conservatives the huge majority in '83. Who is even interested in the PLP's politics? I'm fairly sure the SDP got more than five people and a dog to show up for free ice cream.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 2, 2016 01:55
|
|
|
add pissflaps to your ignore list my ignore list is massive
|
|
#
¿
Aug 2, 2016 21:16
|
|
|
Don't quote people on my ignore list.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 2, 2016 21:30
|
|
|
ukle posted:Serious point, but do you believe Corbyn is the best MP to lead the labour party? Owen emptysuit doesn't even have a remote chance of becoming leader. He has no chance at all, just like all the other people who sign up for elections and get 6 votes.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 2, 2016 21:59
|
|
|
"the best challenge anyone can muster towards corbyn is a loser idiot who literally failed to give free ice cream away to a city full of people who'll have anything if it isn't nailed down, and this is bad for corbyn"
|
|
#
¿
Aug 2, 2016 22:04
|
|
|
ukle posted:He is going to get >20% of the vote, describing that as the same as someone who only gets 6 votes in a council election is slightly preposterous. What the gently caress do you expect to boost his popularity enough to get 20%? Regenerating timelord style into an actually interesting or capable person?
|
|
#
¿
Aug 2, 2016 23:02
|
|
|
goddamnedtwisto posted:Police in NI - where terrorists have been targeting coppers families for almost half a century - manage to get along without dressing up like NPCs in a Call of Duty game. mate 
|
|
#
¿
Aug 4, 2016 01:04
|
|
|
StoneOfShame posted:You prefer you're police vans to have gassing capability rather than armour. Please explain this reference.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 4, 2016 01:35
|
|
|
StoneOfShame posted:https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gas_van I was referring to the gas vans invented by the Soviets in 1936 for use on political prisoners. The Nazis later borrowed the idea. Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn is not a reputable source.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 4, 2016 01:46
|
|
|
StoneOfShame posted:Errrr his work is widely considered to be a pretty accurate summary of what was going on in Soviet Russia, he's one of the most significant authors of the 20th century and drat fine prose stylist at that. The majority of criticism aimed at him comes from apologists. There are also multiple other sources listed in footnotes there. All the other sources in the footnotes just repeat the claim, with no additional details beyond Solzhenitsyn's claim. Solzhenitsyn is not a reputable source, he has a very very nasty record which includes, amongst other things, literally endorsing Nazi Germany's attempt to conquer eastern europe and the USSR, Endorsing Pinochet, and agitating for the United States to reinstall the Estado Novo in portugal. You really shouldn't go to die on the hill of Solzhenitsyn. Instead prove the Soviet gas vans are real. I'm actually looking for proof myself, but all google is bringing up is Stormfront and "revisionist-moderated holocaust discussion" sites. HorseLord fucked around with this message at 02:06 on Aug 4, 2016 |
|
#
¿
Aug 4, 2016 02:04
|
|
|
StoneOfShame posted:The other footnotes are either in Russian or referring to books not internet references a more useful check would be check Solzhenitsyns references but I'm pretty sure I dont have a copy of the text that quotes from. That would provided proof or throw his claim into doubt. Solzhenitsyn's claim is made in his widely hated by historians book, Two Hundred Years Together. I'm looking for the English language translation now, but I'm having a little difficulty getting hold of a copy that isn't literally hosted by stormfront. Meanwhile, I found an investigation into claims of Soviet Gas vans, done by a historian of the USSR and Nazi Germany who specialises in debunking holocaust deniers. http://holocaustcontroversies.blogspot.com/2016/01/a-study-in-hypocrisy-revisionist.html EDIT: I found a English translation of part II, where the claim is on page 264. Apologies for not uploading a screenshot but I'm getting 0.01Mbps upspeed right now. http://mailstar.net/Solzhenitsyn-200YT.pdf The entire thing is left with one (1) citation, number 63, which turns out to be a tabloid newspaper. This is really really thin, man. StoneOfShame posted:Also remember with a lot of the criticism you've made of him he did himself state that the KGB published things pretending to be him in attempts to discredit him and him and others have claimed they tried to murder him, but there gonna have to choose who to trust I wouldn't trust the KGB at all. Unless the KGB replaced him with a clone just before his speeches to the US Senate and the AFL-CIO, he absolutely did say those things. HorseLord fucked around with this message at 02:58 on Aug 4, 2016 |
|
#
¿
Aug 4, 2016 02:37
|
|
|
I think it's very dishonest to take his works as if they are not motivated and biased by his political beliefs. If a dude says weird fascist poo poo you should take his claims with a pinch of salt. Or is challenging everything someone says as a matter of principle only something you do if that person is a communist? Hmmmmmmm
|
|
#
¿
Aug 4, 2016 03:01
|
|
|
StoneOfShame posted:No its not and he's not the only person who has made such claims with regards to gulags, the horrors of Stalinism are well documented. Also I criticise blind Stalinists because I feel defending Stalinism is damaging to the goal of furthering socialism, we should acknowledge and learn from failed attempts not try and mimic them, the idea should be providing the best life for the most people millions shouldn't have to die. This is some real disingenuous poo poo to say because "mimicking" Stalin era USSR would first require mass de-industrialisation, the reintroduction of several diseases that basically no longer exist, and somehow unteaching most of the country to read. So it doesn't even make sense as a thing you can accuse somebody of wanting to do in the modern world. and also if your only response to "it's very dishonest to take his works as if they are not motivated and biased by his political beliefs" is "no it's not", then mate, really? You're not supposed to take things at face value. You're especially not supposed to do that when you know the person has a motivation to be creative with the truth. Otherwise you're basically one of those grandmas who believes weird chain emails, because if it's on the internet it must be true.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 4, 2016 03:33
|
|
|
StoneOfShame posted:You know full well I'm referring to things like the gulags, secret police and human rights abuses when I refer to things we shouldn't adapt from Stalin or do you feel the good things he did were dependent on them. Gulags are another thing that it makes no sense to accuse me, or any other "stalinist" of wanting in a modern country, because crazily enough none of the conditions which caused them to come into being exist or can exist in such a modern country. Over the past century we've (We as in, all humanity) have made tremendous strides in coming up with much better ways to rehabilitate prisoners and those methods should be adopted. There's not even an argument to be made economically, because Britain isn't in need of cheap labour for big infrastructural programs. We have a job shortage, not an early soviet labour shortage. Accusations of wanting to "mimic" previous socialist states are incoherent because those states made decisions they made based on circumstances they are in. So a new one, having different circumstances, would make different ones. You cannot launch a big program to mechanize farms, for example, if they already have been for a century. Decreeing that teachers are to go door-to-door signing people up for introductory adult literacy lessons would be a waste of time in a country with 98+% literacy. So "acknowledg[ing] and learn[ing] from failed attempts" is literally what "stalinists" do. As for secret police and human rights abuses, the challenge is making any kind of state not need those. Every government ever is neck deep in that poo poo. HorseLord fucked around with this message at 03:55 on Aug 4, 2016 |
|
#
¿
Aug 4, 2016 03:49
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 27, 2024 12:30 |
|
|
NewMars posted:So basically what you are saying is that you shouldn't care about doing bad things because not doing them is hard. No, that's nothing at all like what I said, at all.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 4, 2016 04:33
|
|