New Posts
  • Hi there guest! Welcome to PoliticalJack.com. Register for free to join our community?

Biden-Hur Transcripts

middleview

President
Supporting Member
You were discussing a “faux socialist nirvana” because you can’t discredit socialism without holding it to a distinctly higher standard … when you compare socialist societies with the capitalist societies they emerged from, or the first hundred years of socialist construction with the first hundred years of capitalist construction, you get a different answer.
and you cannot defend socialism unless you hold it to a distinctly lower standard.
 

EatTheRich

President
So now you want to switch to defending Socialism instead of Communism....practically every single first world nation has some degree of socialist policies...that has little to do with the extreme of communism which requires complete control of the economy, production, employment, housing and education. Would you let a government official tell you where you'd go to school, work, live...Your career is decided for you...your home is their choice...not yours.
I am defending the Marxist program of the smashing of the capitalist state by the revolutionary working class and the creation of a workers’ state on the basis of state ownership of the means of production, a state monopoly on foreign trade, and a planned economy. “Socialism” (a term I used because it was used in post #476) can refer to the first new mode of production erected on this basis, where state property is the basis for production “from each according to his ability,” but distribution remains on the capitalist basis “to each according to his contribution,” with only profits for non-producing rentiers eliminated. The term is also used, fraudulently, to refer to state capitalism and the welfare state. “Communism” then refers to the kind of society socialism begins to make possible, with distribution “to each according to his needs” and the disappearance of the state.

It seems to me an economic democracy wherein an elected government tells people where to work, live, etc., is preferable to an oligarchy in which unaccountable landlords and employers have the power to do so due to their wealth.
 

PhilFish

Administrator
Staff member
I am defending the Marxist program of the smashing of the capitalist state by the revolutionary working class and the creation of a workers’ state on the basis of state ownership of the means of production, a state monopoly on foreign trade, and a planned economy. “Socialism” (a term I used because it was used in post #476) can refer to the first new mode of production erected on this basis, where state property is the basis for production “from each according to his ability,” but distribution remains on the capitalist basis “to each according to his contribution,” with only profits for non-producing rentiers eliminated. The term is also used, fraudulently, to refer to state capitalism and the welfare state. “Communism” then refers to the kind of society socialism begins to make possible, with distribution “to each according to his needs” and the disappearance of the state.

It seems to me an economic democracy wherein an elected government tells people where to work, live, etc., is preferable to an oligarchy in which unaccountable landlords and employers have the power to do so due to their wealth.
Well, there has been no successful version of such a thing..so, there's that. Only failed violent versions predicated on slaughter, starvation, seizure, etc
 

Zam-Zam

Senator
Well, there has been no successful version of such a thing..so, there's that. Only failed violent versions predicated on slaughter, starvation, seizure, etc
Communism has led to tyranny and the wholesale slaughter of millions of people every time it has been implemented.

If there is any virtue in that, I fail to discern it.
 

EatTheRich

President
Well, there has been no successful version of such a thing..so, there's that. Only failed violent versions predicated on slaughter, starvation, seizure, etc
Again, what does success look like? I would say the first 50-year period without starvation in China’s history qualifies … of course conservatives like to focus on the period 1959-1962 when, largely due to the government’s departure from the Marxist program, China temporarily reverted to the famine conditions typical of the capitalist era, and typical of India today.
 

middleview

President
Supporting Member
Eliminating homelessness? Never done by capitalism. Organizing worldwide mass slaughters and putting fascist regimes in power? Never done by socialism.
You don't see fascist tendencies in both the USSR and North Korea? The corruption is entirely related to the kleptocracy that was implemented by the ruling elite. People who were not part of the ruling class never made it out of barely scraping by. Who owned cars? How about televisions? I'm not part of the ruling class and yet I have attained wealth that would have been out of the reach of most people in the USSR or China.

We have two events that could be called world wide mass slaughter...
The USSR conspired with Germany to start WWII. Stalin was certainly not innocent in the conquest of Poland or the war against Finland.
 

EatTheRich

President
Communism has led to tyranny and the wholesale slaughter of millions of people every time it has been implemented.

If there is any virtue in that, I fail to discern it.
The “tyranny” has been the tyranny of counterrevolution, employed first and foremost to stamp out communism. Life expectancy has gone up in every country that had a communist revolution (and even in those countries where socialism from above was imposed by the USSR). Outside the Soviet Union and China there was no such “wholesale slaughter of millions.” And they cannot compare to the far greater slaughters incident to the capitalist system. WWII ring a bell?
 

middleview

President
Supporting Member
Again, what does success look like? I would say the first 50-year period without starvation in China’s history qualifies … of course conservatives like to focus on the period 1959-1962 when, largely due to the government’s departure from the Marxist program, China temporarily reverted to the famine conditions typical of the capitalist era, and typical of India today.
How was it a departure from communist policy? Total government control over all phases of the economy. Ordering farmers to leave their farms to work in factories is typical of central control of labor and production. Stalin confiscated Ukrainian grain and murdered millions of the people there. Of course, hard core communists...like you, want to ignore those events.
 

EatTheRich

President
You don't see fascist tendencies in both the USSR and North Korea? The corruption is entirely related to the kleptocracy that was implemented by the ruling elite. People who were not part of the ruling class never made it out of barely scraping by. Who owned cars? How about televisions? I'm not part of the ruling class and yet I have attained wealth that would have been out of the reach of most people in the USSR or China.

We have two events that could be called world wide mass slaughter...
The USSR conspired with Germany to start WWII. Stalin was certainly not innocent in the conquest of Poland or the war against Finland.
What made the erection of a “ruling elite” and the associated “kleptocracy” possible were the weakness of the international communist revolution that forced the workers’ states into a centrist compromise with the capitalist international status quo.

Fascist tendencies, yes; fascism full-blown, no. The difference between a Stalinist and a fascist regime is like the difference between a gangsterism-riddled union (whose class collaborationist leadership is likewise conditioned on labor’s weakness) and a true company union.

When the British, French, and Americans made it clear, by refusing to cooperate with the USSR to save the Spanish Republic or stop Nazi Germany, that they would insist on a second world war, the USSR worked out an alliance with Germany in order to start the war on more favorable terms.
 

Zam-Zam

Senator
The “tyranny” has been the tyranny of counterrevolution, employed first and foremost to stamp out communism. Life expectancy has gone up in every country that had a communist revolution (and even in those countries where socialism from above was imposed by the USSR). Outside the Soviet Union and China there was no such “wholesale slaughter of millions.” And they cannot compare to the far greater slaughters incident to the capitalist system. WWII ring a bell?
The record is clear: First come the communists, with all their promises of Utopia, and then comes the tyranny and slaughter. Not just some of the time. Every. Single. Time.

No thank you.
 

PhilFish

Administrator
Staff member
Again, what does success look like? I would say the first 50-year period without starvation in China’s history qualifies … of course conservatives like to focus on the period 1959-1962 when, largely due to the government’s departure from the Marxist program, China temporarily reverted to the famine conditions typical of the capitalist era, and typical of India today.
Not communism..that's what it looks like..
 

EatTheRich

President
How was it a departure from communist policy? Total government control over all phases of the economy. Ordering farmers to leave their farms to work in factories is typical of central control of labor and production. Stalin confiscated Ukrainian grain and murdered millions of the people there. Of course, hard core communists...like you, want to ignore those events.
In both the USSR and China, the ultraleft programs of hyper-accelerated industrialization and forced collectivization were bureaucratic responses to the weaknesses created by years of right-opportunist policies favoring peasant and small business production at workers’ expense which had retarded industrialization and created strong pockets of primitive capitalism. The government, having eliminated substantive democracy in order to push through this capitalist-friendly program, then launched an insane overcorrection to prevent the immediate triumph of capitalist restoration and consolidate power in the party center … as communist dissidents like Trotsky and P’eng Shu-tse projected, based on Marxist theory, they would do when they first criticized the right-opportunist road.
 

PhilFish

Administrator
Staff member
In both the USSR and China, the ultraleft programs of hyper-accelerated industrialization and forced collectivization were bureaucratic responses to the weaknesses created by years of right-opportunist policies favoring peasant and small business production at workers’ expense which had retarded industrialization and created strong pockets of primitive capitalism. The government, having eliminated substantive democracy in order to push through this capitalist-friendly program, then launched an insane overcorrection to prevent the immediate triumph of capitalist restoration and consolidate power in the party center … as communist dissidents like Trotsky and P’eng Shu-tse projected, based on Marxist theory, they would do when they first criticized the right-opportunist road.

Lol...cram more 'capitalism' in one passage. That'll get em...
 

middleview

President
Supporting Member
The “tyranny” has been the tyranny of counterrevolution, employed first and foremost to stamp out communism. Life expectancy has gone up in every country that had a communist revolution (and even in those countries where socialism from above was imposed by the USSR). Outside the Soviet Union and China there was no such “wholesale slaughter of millions.” And they cannot compare to the far greater slaughters incident to the capitalist system. WWII ring a bell?
Of course they can compare...Stalin's holodomor killed 3.9 million people in just Ukraine. Millions more were killed in the Gulag and the executions of anyone considered critical of the government.

Excess mortality in the Soviet Union under Joseph Stalin - Wikipedia
 

middleview

President
Supporting Member
Where’s the “tyranny and slaughter” in Cuba?
Fidel Castro's dark legacy: abuses, draconian rule and 'ruthless suppression

The newly victorious rebels executed hundreds – some say thousands – after seizing power in 1959. Debate still rages over whether this was a legitimate settling of accounts with Fulgencio Batista’s henchmen or kangaroo court-sanctioned atrocities.
Fidel Castro's dark legacy: abuses, draconian rule and 'ruthless suppression' | Fidel Castro | The Guardian
 

Zam-Zam

Senator
Where’s the “tyranny and slaughter” in Cuba?

The government continues to repress and punish virtually all forms of dissent and public criticism, as Cubans endure a dire economic crisis affecting their rights.

Authorities responded with brutal, systematic repression and censorship when thousands of Cubans took to the streets in July 2021 to protest the Covid-19 response, scarcity of food and medicines, and long-standing restrictions on rights. Trials of hundreds of such protesters in 2022 often violated basic due process guarantees and resulted in disproportionate prison terms.

Demonstrations across the country continued in 2022, triggered by blackouts, shortages, and deterioration of living conditions.

The government’s repression and apparent unwillingness to address the underlying causes that took people to the streets have forced Cubans to leave the country in unprecedent numbers.

The United States continued a failed policy of isolation towards Cuba, including a decades-long embargo on trade with Cuba.



World Report 2023: Cuba | Human Rights Watch (hrw.org)

Also:

Human rights in Cuba Amnesty International

Cuba arbitrarily abused, arrested protesters, Human Rights Watch states (nbcnews.com)

Cuba: Fidel Castro’s Record of Repression | Human Rights Watch (hrw.org)



Many, many other sources.
 

middleview

President
Supporting Member
What made the erection of a “ruling elite” and the associated “kleptocracy” possible were the weakness of the international communist revolution that forced the workers’ states into a centrist compromise with the capitalist international status quo.

Fascist tendencies, yes; fascism full-blown, no. The difference between a Stalinist and a fascist regime is like the difference between a gangsterism-riddled union (whose class collaborationist leadership is likewise conditioned on labor’s weakness) and a true company union.

When the British, French, and Americans made it clear, by refusing to cooperate with the USSR to save the Spanish Republic or stop Nazi Germany, that they would insist on a second world war, the USSR worked out an alliance with Germany in order to start the war on more favorable terms.
WTF! How did the western democracies insist on a world war? Your boilerplate rhetoric is a lot of words and little logic. Stalin made war on Poland and Finland...at the same time Britain and France traded away part of Czechoslovakia for "peace in our time"....somehow you interpret their actions as wanting WWII. Did you know Stalin let German troops train on Russian territory and sold raw materials to the Nazis?

By the way...your comment comparing the fascism evident in the governments of several communist nations to labor unions is simply bizarre....Nazi Germany did not allow independent labor unions...neither did Moscow.
 

PhilFish

Administrator
Staff member
WTF! How did the western democracies insist on a world war? Your boilerplate rhetoric is a lot of words and little logic. Stalin made war on Poland and Finland...at the same time Britain and France traded away part of Czechoslovakia for "peace in our time"....somehow you interpret their actions as wanting WWII. Did you know Stalin let German troops train on Russian territory and sold raw materials to the Nazis?

By the way...your comment comparing the fascism evident in the governments of several communist nations to labor unions is simply bizarre....Nazi Germany did not allow independent labor unions...neither did Moscow.
\he's playing you..
 
Top