technoworld
New Member
Tears for fears
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
|
Post by technoworld on Jul 7, 2018 6:59:47 GMT
why is it popular
|
|
|
Post by jonbain on Jul 26, 2018 19:52:48 GMT
People fight and die, either to preserve their honor, or because they are more fearful of their own leaders than they are of the enemy. Communism is a bit more honorable than fascism, so its a bit more effective on the battlefield. Sure there are other ways, perhaps, of dealing with fascism, other than communism, only the world hasn't really come up with a more effective one yet. But these are all just guises for corporate monopolies, with some offering a bit more honor and freedom than the next. Not too much. So communism was designed to expire once it had served its purpose. After all, the Nazis were just a front for Gelsenkirchen Bergerks AG. Coal and steel monopolists. Hitler was a pawn of Thyssen. He was not some mad genius as his reputation is portrayed in the monopolist media. That itself should be warning - that the facts of the matter are brushed over by the media. If you really have such a good appetite for reading try this free book: archive.org/details/hitlerovereurope009891mbpIt was written half a decade before ww2 in Europe started. It predicts Hitlers plans with uncanny precision. I have an original copy which I found in a village sale by luck, so I know its for real. The most essential reading on ww2 form Germany's perspective, written by a German So instead of addressing my point, you went straight on to Hitler, and then linked a book instead of actually making an argument from the content of the book. If you're not going to address my points and keep moving the goal posts im not going to continue responding . You just seem to repeat 'you don't address the point' every time I point out how you lack info. As it was your last post was just a bunch of quotes without any discernible context. The link to Hitler was precise to the point of how fascism evolves due to monopolies. The converse of this is Communism. Which attempts to stop individuals from too much power. With the time lag between posts, its probably better to include the object of your discussion in your post. EG: you don't acknowledge that Communism is an attempt to overpower monopolies, which is why it is popular. Whereby I address the question of the thread itself.
|
|
blueroad
New Member
Posts: 35
Likes: 18
Politics: National Socialist
Religion: Hindu
Age: 27
|
Post by blueroad on Jul 26, 2018 20:26:58 GMT
So instead of addressing my point, you went straight on to Hitler, and then linked a book instead of actually making an argument from the content of the book. If you're not going to address my points and keep moving the goal posts im not going to continue responding . You just seem to repeat 'you don't address the point' every time I point out how you lack info. As it was your last post was just a bunch of quotes without any discernible context. The link to Hitler was precise to the point of how fascism evolves due to monopolies. The converse of this is Communism. Which attempts to stop individuals from too much power. With the time lag between posts, its probably better to include the object of your discussion in your post. EG: you don't acknowledge that Communism is an attempt to overpower monopolies, which is why it is popular. Whereby I address the question of the thread itself. Somebody claimed that Communism is the necessary agent for combating Fascism, this is the context of this chain. So yes, you have failed to address the point.
|
|
|
Post by Διαμονδ on Jul 26, 2018 20:31:54 GMT
The fact that communism was able to create all the prerequisites for the destruction of Fascism/Nazism.
|
|
|
Post by jonbain on Jul 27, 2018 16:03:21 GMT
You just seem to repeat 'you don't address the point' every time I point out how you lack info. As it was your last post was just a bunch of quotes without any discernible context. The link to Hitler was precise to the point of how fascism evolves due to monopolies. The converse of this is Communism. Which attempts to stop individuals from too much power. With the time lag between posts, its probably better to include the object of your discussion in your post. EG: you don't acknowledge that Communism is an attempt to overpower monopolies, which is why it is popular. Whereby I address the question of the thread itself. Somebody claimed that Communism is the necessary agent for combating Fascism, this is the context of this chain. So yes, you have failed to address the point. The Soviet Union was the reason for Hitler's suicide. They reached Berlin first. Communism trumps fascism. The racist Afrikaner regime of South Africa was overpowered by the threat of Communism, whereby they made an agreement with the black nationalists. Again Communism trumps fascism. In China, the Nationalists were given the boot by the Communists. Once more... And then what of Vietnam, Cuba, Angola, Mozambique, Eastern Europe? I never said it was the ONLY way. Just that it was an obvious way because fascism is essentially neo-feudalism. The promise of Communist equality, however crude it may be, whatever its short-comings, is still attractive because it is better to wage a war and die for something honorable - like equality rather than live in fear your oberführer and likely die at his hand anyways. In addition I address the issue by claiming that it is better even for people of superior ability to unfairly be treated as bluntly equal under Communism, rather than unfairly be considered inferior under fascism. As for how capitalism degenerates into fascism, the book about the nazis spells it out in expert detail: archive.org/details/hitlerovereurope009891mbpThe reason why this occurs is a lack of free market capitalism. The thesis being that the Nazis were puppets of the German steel-coal monopoly which is called 'Gelsenkirchen bergwerks AG'. As I have read that book, (unlike you who only reads Charlottes web) The mineral rich province of Lorraine was ceded to France after ww1, which got a certain monopolist fascist named Thyssen all vengeful, and it was him who was the real architect of the Nazis. Hitler was just his pawn. The lesson being, if current trends towards monopolies are not checked, the world will likely be attracted to communism. Now putting a verbal stamp 'free trade deal' on a monopolistic process, is cynical fascism at its most obvious. So most likely, Communism will become popular - or something like it. The big error the Communists made was to be against religion. Had they embraced equality as a religious ideal... well, maybe next time, eh?
|
|
Bigbufyboy85
Junior Member
I am a young Christian conservative trying to find a balance with my political, and religious views.
Posts: 68
Likes: 52
Country: United States
Religion: Christian
Age: Young
Member Admiration & Reason: Elizabeth for her KIND HEART ♥ FIERCE MIND ♥ BRAVE SPIRIT ♥ UNBREAKABLE STRENGTH ♥ ENDLESS FIGHTER
|
Post by Bigbufyboy85 on Jul 28, 2018 0:12:43 GMT
The fact that communism was able to create all the prerequisites for the destruction of Fascism/Nazism. How do you think it created prerequisites? I think a lot of destruction has come from communism, but not the destruction of Fascism OR Nazism seeing as how they both still exist. Communism is popular among people who don't understand it because of what is on the surface. They want free stuff, they don't want to work for it. They are told they are owed everything they receive, and they aren't satisfied with whatever they DO receive. Only people who don't understand communism/socialism are for it.
|
|
|
Post by Διαμονδ on Jul 28, 2018 7:47:56 GMT
Somebody claimed that Communism is the necessary agent for combating Fascism, this is the context of this chain. So yes, you have failed to address the point. The Soviet Union was the reason for Hitler's suicide. They reached Berlin first. Communism trumps fascism. The big error the Communists made was to be against religion. Had they embraced equality as a religious ideal... well, maybe next time, eh? This is because communism does not accept private property.. but if you look at China, in General, they have created a favorable picture in which coexist and communism and religion. Communism in fact saved China. How do you think it created prerequisites? Competition during the war.. but as it turned out the Communist machine is more effective.
|
|
|
Post by jonbain on Jul 29, 2018 13:23:54 GMT
The Soviet Union was the reason for Hitler's suicide. They reached Berlin first. Communism trumps fascism. The big error the Communists made was to be against religion. Had they embraced equality as a religious ideal... well, maybe next time, eh? This is because communism does not accept private property.. but if you look at China, in General, they have created a favorable picture in which coexist and communism and religion. Communism in fact saved China. How do you think it created prerequisites? Competition during the war.. but as it turned out the Communist machine is more effective. Yes communism certainly saved China. Not sure what you mean by 'How do you think it created prerequisites?', please clarify. The Communism machine is more effective in the medium term, but it loses out in terms of innovation, which is a long-term process. So in the end it dies. Both religion and individual ownership allow the freedom to innovate. Monopolistic Capital suffers the same problems as communism, because prototypes always take a long time to become economically viable. Anyone who tries to innovate loses ground to the immediate demands of a monopolistic market. Only individuals with personal initiative making enormous personal sacrifices allowed for development of aircraft, for example. From a Christian perspective, this is normal. Sacrificing self for the good of the others. Monopolies always rely on how easy it is to take somebody else's ideas. Those with ideas, living in a monopoly, have no option but to simply give them up to others. Reading about patent squabbles for flying machines is sad. How much more advanced would the world be without all that. Still Where would we be today if Tesla had been properly rewarded? The way in which private ownership degenerates into monopolistic fascism still could use a serious fix.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 29, 2018 13:33:36 GMT
Although I am a strong critic of communism, I admit that there is no ideal political system..capitalism is the same rotten system that oppresses its people.. however, this can be understood from the comments of some people here from capitalist countries here! Yeah, but if you look at all of the first world developed countries, that is, the successful ones, they all practice some form of capitalism. Every communist society that has ever existed has become a totalitarian, poverty stricken, hellhole. Capitalism, you'd have to at least grant, is better than communism based on the empirical results right? Also, I'd be curious to know, what is your alternative to capitalism and communism? Which system would you propose replace them? well, the first world oppress the population of third world, they bring labors, cheap ones, and through their middle men, they exploit the natural resources of other lands. So this is how capitalism thrives. capitalism is a tool of massive oppression.
|
|
|
Post by jonbain on Jul 31, 2018 16:05:43 GMT
Yeah, but if you look at all of the first world developed countries, that is, the successful ones, they all practice some form of capitalism. Every communist society that has ever existed has become a totalitarian, poverty stricken, hellhole. Capitalism, you'd have to at least grant, is better than communism based on the empirical results right? Also, I'd be curious to know, what is your alternative to capitalism and communism? Which system would you propose replace them? well, the first world oppress the population of third world, they bring labors, cheap ones, and through their middle men, they exploit the natural resources of other lands. So this is how capitalism thrives. capitalism is a tool of massive oppression. Certainly. But look at the "virtual apartheid wall" which mostly consists of the immigration policies and exchange rates. Now when I was in London I added 6 little triangled pieces of pineapple to my pizza, which consisted of a small mouthful. The cost of that would have purchased me about 20 full size pineapples back home in Africa. Each pineapple being about half the size of my head. So who has the better deal here? Well the Western countries certainly think they are better off because they feel rich charging so much money, and they have rigged the exchange rates so they can buy our produce so cheaply. But as time marches on, and the difference gets worse, they have to keep rigging the economic system more heavily. The black market gets bigger, the real buying power of their money gets worse, and they need to live in an ever more oppressive state. They have to coerce their own people to oppress more, and eventually the system has to collapse one way or another.
|
|
|
Post by jonbain on Jul 31, 2018 16:13:43 GMT
Although I am a strong critic of communism, I admit that there is no ideal political system..capitalism is the same rotten system that oppresses its people.. however, this can be understood from the comments of some people here from capitalist countries here! Yeah, but if you look at all of the first world developed countries, that is, the successful ones, they all practice some form of capitalism. Every communist society that has ever existed has become a totalitarian, poverty stricken, hellhole. Capitalism, you'd have to at least grant, is better than communism based on the empirical results right? Also, I'd be curious to know, what is your alternative to capitalism and communism? Which system would you propose replace them? Its vital to see that totalitarianism can be communist or capitalist, and that a free market, whilst traditionally is said to carry the label 'capitalism' is quite different from monopolist capitalism. And any type of government is only superficially an economic model, the real power of monopolists lies in taking control of the legal process; which itself is subject to policing. So an ideal state would actually be a free-market based on communism which is somewhat like China. Now China is hardly in poverty. Nationalism had reduced it to the poorest in the world by 1930-1950, and semi-communism has made it the equal to America, which itself has been stagnating for 50 years. So it really comes down to individuals deliberately dismantling the monopolist mindset.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 1, 2018 2:29:14 GMT
well, the first world oppress the population of third world, they bring labors, cheap ones, and through their middle men, they exploit the natural resources of other lands. So this is how capitalism thrives. capitalism is a tool of massive oppression. Certainly. But look at the "virtual apartheid wall" which mostly consists of the immigration policies and exchange rates. Now when I was in London I added 6 little triangled pieces of pineapple to my pizza, which consisted of a small mouthful. The cost of that would have purchased me about 20 full size pineapples back home in Africa. Each pineapple being about half the size of my head. So who has the better deal here? Well the Western countries certainly think they are better off because they feel rich charging so much money, and they have rigged the exchange rates so they can buy our produce so cheaply. But as time marches on, and the difference gets worse, they have to keep rigging the economic system more heavily. The black market gets bigger, the real buying power of their money gets worse, and they need to live in an ever more oppressive state. They have to coerce their own people to oppress more, and eventually the system has to collapse one way or another. My point was also to emphasise that even the people, who live in capitalist society, and are common folks, they too get oppressed by the decision makers. These are the systems which are well connected by a nexus of certain people. Common people have to suffer, under all these systems.
|
|
|
Post by jonbain on Aug 1, 2018 20:42:13 GMT
Certainly. But look at the "virtual apartheid wall" which mostly consists of the immigration policies and exchange rates. Now when I was in London I added 6 little triangled pieces of pineapple to my pizza, which consisted of a small mouthful. The cost of that would have purchased me about 20 full size pineapples back home in Africa. Each pineapple being about half the size of my head. So who has the better deal here? Well the Western countries certainly think they are better off because they feel rich charging so much money, and they have rigged the exchange rates so they can buy our produce so cheaply. But as time marches on, and the difference gets worse, they have to keep rigging the economic system more heavily. The black market gets bigger, the real buying power of their money gets worse, and they need to live in an ever more oppressive state. They have to coerce their own people to oppress more, and eventually the system has to collapse one way or another. My point was also to emphasise that even the people, who live in capitalist society, and are common folks, they too get oppressed by the decision makers. These are the systems which are well connected by a nexus of certain people. Common people have to suffer, under all these systems. Sure. I reckon the problem is that too many people buy into the idea that the problem is one of 'system' rather than looking at individuals. Even a perfect politic can be corrupted by unthinking and heartless people.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 3, 2018 14:35:15 GMT
My point was also to emphasise that even the people, who live in capitalist society, and are common folks, they too get oppressed by the decision makers. These are the systems which are well connected by a nexus of certain people. Common people have to suffer, under all these systems. Sure. I reckon the problem is that too many people buy into the idea that the problem is one of 'system' rather than looking at individuals. Even a perfect politic can be corrupted by unthinking and heartless people. Exactly, it is people in power, who influence the system, based on their whims and fancies. The systems have been designed to be perfect, but the people in power forget that they are there to maintain this perfection. I think, power makes a person megalomaniac, if they don't take responsibility
|
|
czechpatriarch
New Member
Posts: 22
Likes: 7
Meta-Ethnicity: Slavic
Ethnicity: Czech
Country: Czechia
Politics: Monarchist/Paternalistic conservative
Religion: Rodnovery
|
Post by czechpatriarch on Aug 3, 2018 19:41:41 GMT
Yeah, but if you look at all of the first world developed countries, that is, the successful ones, they all practice some form of capitalism. Every communist society that has ever existed has become a totalitarian, poverty stricken, hellhole. Capitalism, you'd have to at least grant, is better than communism based on the empirical results right? Also, I'd be curious to know, what is your alternative to capitalism and communism? Which system would you propose replace them? Its vital to see that totalitarianism can be communist or capitalist, and that a free market, whilst traditionally is said to carry the label 'capitalism' is quite different from monopolist capitalism. And any type of government is only superficially an economic model, the real power of monopolists lies in taking control of the legal process; which itself is subject to policing. So an ideal state would actually be a free-market based on communism which is somewhat like China. Now China is hardly in poverty. Nationalism had reduced it to the poorest in the world by 1930-1950, and semi-communism has made it the equal to America, which itself has been stagnating for 50 years. So it really comes down to individuals deliberately dismantling the monopolist mindset. You say China was reduced by nationalists to poorest in the world which is total lie. Chinese economy was way worse during last years of Qing dynasty. Also you can blame japanese for totally destroying most of chinese industry during 2nd sino-japanese war (1937-1945) which led to breakdown after ww2. knoema.com/mpeqfkc/gdp-levels-and-per-capita-gdp-for-china-japan-and-south-korea This clearly shows china was indeed better off during first year of communist rule(economy inherited from nationalist china post ww2) than during Qing dynasty(year 1900 and 1913 two years after revolution) And here is graph that clearly shows chinese GDP started to get higher very quickly after privatization of farms which is indeed big diversion from communism. It got even higher when chinese economy started to get more open. Same graph(link) also shows that japanese nationalist goverment transformed japan from feudal country to strongest asian nation with strongest industry in several decades.
|
|
|
Post by jonbain on Aug 4, 2018 12:58:32 GMT
Sure. I reckon the problem is that too many people buy into the idea that the problem is one of 'system' rather than looking at individuals. Even a perfect politic can be corrupted by unthinking and heartless people. Exactly, it is people in power, who influence the system, based on their whims and fancies. The systems have been designed to be perfect, but the people in power forget that they are there to maintain this perfection. I think, power makes a person megalomaniac, if they don't take responsibility I think megalomania is a result of over-weening. The power-monger seeks power as a consequence of being breast-fed for too long as an infant. When he realizes that power will not satisfy the subconscious urges, he starts to vent anger, which can win him more unsatisfying power; the vicious cycle ensues. The egotist's personality is nearly always fixated on psycho- demands. There is also the opposite personality too, which is cold detached egotism, but that normally results in the dis-organised psychopathic loner/killer. It had much to do with those first 6 years of personality development; but we must not reduce to this either. Past lives also have their super-sub-conscious effect; karma.
|
|