A tribute to Communism

May 23rd, 2007 at 2:24 pm by David Farrar

This five minute video is a good reminder of the evils of communism. It ignores the rhetoric and shows us that countries with all-powerful states, always end up with all-powerful supreme leaders. Repressive leadership is not an accidental by-product of communism, but a natural consequence.

The video has footage of the states that built walls with armed guards to stop their citizens from leaving, how in 1932 Stalin seized all food from the Ukraine for the collective good. Seven million Ukranians died – 25% of their population. Mao’s planned economy was even worse.

Just as we should never forget the Holocaust, likewise we should never forget the evils of communism.

Tags:

374 Responses to “A tribute to Communism”

  1. crimsonbaiter () says:

    Red meat for the wingnut rubes! Yum!

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  2. crimsonbaiter () says:

    Red meat for the wingnut rubes! Yum!

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  3. Peter () says:

    Thank you.

    I was born in a communist country, spent the first half of my life behind the iron curtain but now I priviledged to enjoy a happy and prosperous life in New Zealand.

    I have the impression that not many people in New Zealand are aware of evils of communism.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  4. Peter () says:

    Thank you.

    I was born in a communist country, spent the first half of my life behind the iron curtain but now I priviledged to enjoy a happy and prosperous life in New Zealand.

    I have the impression that not many people in New Zealand are aware of evils of communism.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  5. Peter () says:

    Thank you.

    Maybe you should call this “A Tribute to the victims of communism”?

    I was born in a communist country, spent the first half of my life behind the iron curtain but now I priviledged to enjoy a happy and prosperous life in New Zealand.

    I have the impression that not many people in New Zealand are aware of the evils of communism.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  6. Mr I.P .Freely () says:

    The New Zealand govt sponsered orgs sends printing to china because its (cheap)ie SLAVE LABOURs doing me out of a job.Auckland university gets it printing done in china ,CHEAP slave labour NO health and safety standards ,again my taxs pay for education ,who use slave labour to do me out of a job BECAUSE SLAVE LABOUR,in ASIA IS CHEAP, so beware, china and the cheap costs will do a lot of us out of job READ THE BOOK ,the red shed, stephen tindalls wreaking of our country.cheap shirts ,when you dont have a job

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  7. Damian () says:

    David,

    Great to see you allow comments on every post unlike Jordan Carter who hides behind slimey pot shots against National!

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  8. Clint Heine () says:

    The entire socialist and communist ideology is based on practises that go against human nature.

    Thanks for posting it. No doubt we will have a few who will try and make light of this, but you cannot ignore the facts on how evil socialism is.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  9. Deborah () says:

    I agree with you about the pernicious nature of all-powerful states, and that it is exemplified by Communist states.

    The video has footage of the states that built walls with armed guards to stop their citizens from leaving,

    That would be like the walls around the Palestinian territories, then?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  10. dad4justice () says:

    Communism is far past its use by date, as everything it touches it has withered with its foul tentacles of corruption and threatening oppression .Our very own hallucinatory supreme leader – Miss lemon face Hulun Klark – continually waters rotten roots when she honours Marx, while creating utopianism with her misguided fixation with absolute power. No wonder she drives the social engineering bulldozer with such a determined glaze in her delirious blazing eye balls .

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  11. the deity formerly known as nigel6888 () says:

    ah the moral equivalency mob will be out in force on this, don’t you see millions of citizens dying in communist gulags is just like exactly the same as the US behaviour at Gitmo bay. the Iron curtain to keep escaping to the West is just like exactly the same as the Israelis trying to keep out suicide bombers.

    yeah,right, keep it up guys. Maybe put your hands over your ears and eyes to keep the facts out will help too.

    Try watching the video, all of those facts are indisputable. Communism is a virulent ideology that has killed more people than any war in history. You want to be a socialist, you deal with what a bankrupt ideology actually achieves.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  12. kiwi_donkey () says:

    Amazing D4J. You’ve got three full stops in there, but somehow it still reads as if it’s all one sentence.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  13. Ben Wilson () says:

    Nor should we forget what both Russia and China were like before communism, and how it took two irrelevant peasant nations into the top 3 most powerful states in the world.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  14. RedRag () says:

    Or one might reasonably talk about the “evils of the totalitarian state” …which is after all the one thing that all monsters throughout history had in common…unrestrained power.

    The label that was attached to their political philosophy meant little to their millions of victims.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  15. Horace () says:

    The results of an extreme system do not eliminate the value of a single idea in any particular system. The real cause of the problem is the extremism.

    Examine any of NZ’s recent governments and you can pick policies out and say:

    that one is communist

    that is socialist

    that one is capitalist

    but put them back into context and they all live within the capitalist environment we have now.

    An unleashed free market capitalism would not be any more humane than those examples in the video. Only the method of suffering would change. Perhaps instead of starving in camps, people would starve in their homes.

    Inspect Argentina’s recent history under the Menem government and see just a small example of what can happen. All it takes is a leader who will lead blindly.

    Governments leaning to the right and allowed free rein destroy the people through neglect and the accumulation of wealth for a few and the leaders.

    Governments on the left and allowed free rein destroy the people by intimate interference and redistribution of wealth from a few to many, making no one wealthy, except the leaders.

    The blame is laid at the feet of names:
    Fascism, Socialism, Anarchy, Capitalism, Communism,

    but it is the push for the extreme example of each of those systems by people in power that causes the destruction. When it becomes apparent that one aspect of their ideas needs to change, they hold ever more tightly and ruthlessly to the idea, rather than make an adjustment.

    It will be different for NZ this time, right?

    Because it’s not Rodger Douglas, it’s Micheal Cullen? Because it’s not Robert Muldoon, it’s Jim Bolger? Or Mike Moore or Jenny Shipley or Helen Clark or Don Brash…

    or John Key?

    Each one has their extreme. Each one was or will be destroyed by their extreme.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  16. Danyl Mclauchlan () says:

    Nor should we forget what both Russia and China were like before communism, and how it took two irrelevant peasant nations into the top 3 most powerful states in the world.

    Russia and China have been powerful for centuries, and plenty of other agrarian states managed to industrialise without murdering a couple dozen million of their citizens in the process.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  17. Grant (a new one) () says:

    So all those millions of deaths, and all that brutality, were worth it then Ben?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  18. Bevan () says:

    “That would be like the walls around the Palestinian territories, then?”

    Just a slight difference Deborah, the Communists built the walls to keep their people in, the wall in Palestine was built to keep the terrorists out.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  19. sonic () says:

    While not excusing Stalinism it’s an interesting that no-one has ever added up how many deths capitalism has produced over the centuries.

    Probably because it is too high a numbet.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  20. peter mck () says:

    I sometimes wonder if Clark’s socialist government is merely a mild form of the extreme communism that we see in this clip.

    Certainly her abuse of power over the past few years is evident. Her attacks on any that have a different view of the world are stinging and vicious.

    I have no doubt she would shut down the “vast right wing conspiracy”, “evil right wing bloggers” and “extreme right wing columnists such as Matthew Hootten who are given air time on National Radio” if she thought for one second she could possibly get away with it.

    Supported by a sometimes lazy media, that vile woman gets away with statements and actions that would be well reported and commented in any other country.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  21. Ben Wilson () says:

    Since we’re all telling the truth, I’m just advocating that it’s the whole truth. Communism did actually do some good for those countries too.

    Danyl, the Persian Empire was once mighty too. Russia and China were totally backward and impoverished just prior to communism, with no end in sight. When they became communist they were attacked by fascists, which led to an massive increase in repression and militarization. It didn’t really help that after the war their former allies then declared them to be the new public enemy number one, especially when the world had just witnessed directly what happened to the old public enemy number one (however justified that was).

    New Grant, NO. I’m just trying to see the issue with something approaching balance. Anti communist hysteria in the West contributed to the problems that happened in communism. Who knows what Russia’s economy would have been like if they weren’t squandering their wealth on the Cold War.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  22. Bevan () says:

    “While not excusing Stalinism it’s an interesting that no-one has ever added up how many deths capitalism has produced over the centuries.

    Probably because it is too high a numbet.

    Well sonic, why dont you start doing some research then…

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  23. Redbaiter () says:

    Hahhah, one who uses the posting name redrag has the gall to pretend to dislike communism. You carry the flag in your name you poseur.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  24. Redbaiter () says:

    “While not excusing Stalinism it’s an interesting that no-one has ever added up how many deths capitalism has produced over the centuries.Probably because it is too high a numbet.”

    What is that “numbet” then numbnuts?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  25. Bevan () says:

    Ben, your knowledge of history is vastly lacking, Russia did not become communist just prior to WW2, it was during WW1. And on the other hand, China was not communist until the late 40’s – after WW2.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  26. sonic () says:

    Where would you start Bevan, slavery, colonialism, war, famine…

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  27. Redbaiter () says:

    Sonic and Ben Wilson posting iin support of murderous toatiatarian regimes.. they were just misunderstood and led astray from their admirable principles and objectives by the greedy grasping West right.. Aaaargh, you left wing scum apologising for murdering monolithic totalitarian regimes make me sick…

    Its not blood on their hands is it? Its red paint.. nothing has been more indicative of the moral bankruptcy of today’s would be elitist “intellectuals” than their refusal to acknowledge the evil of communism and communist tyrants. Even today, you’ll find them grovelling at the feet of scum like Castro, who has dungeons full of Cubans whose only crime was to agitate for democracy.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  28. Ben Wilson () says:

    Bevan, was WW1 not prior to WW2? And the Chinese revolution actually took a while. The civil war went from 1927 to 1950, and by the time the Japs invaded it was pretty clear who was winning.

    Both fascist empires tried to catch communism in it’s infancy, and it is a tribute to communism that they both failed, despite having crushed numerous non-communist nations utterly.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  29. Grant (a new one) () says:

    Sorry Ben, I can’t accept that.
    Don’t you think it was the communist policy of spreading the doctrine into other countries, by whatever means, that caused what you call “anti communist hysteria”?
    And, are you also saying that there would have been no gulags, repression, etc if the West had not been critical of the Soviets?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  30. sonic () says:

    Is anyone else getting that intermitent problem where random gibberish keeps popping up in the comment field?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  31. Billy () says:

    Keep up your brave “tributes” to communism in the face of all this “hysteria” against it, Ben. People really do need to put the few tens of millions of deaths in the context of all the good communism achieved.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  32. Bevan () says:

    So sonic, are you trying to tell me that “slavery, colonialism, war, famine” are side effects of capitilism alone?

    The war one would be very interesting, especially when you compare the wars started by Capilist countries, and then compare that with oh lets pick the obvious one off the top of my head, the Korean War.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  33. ben () says:

    Ben Wilson

    Honestly, you don’t have a clue. China was not attacked by fascists, yet Mao killed even more than Stalin.

    Do you really think the death of one hundred million people in the 20th century under communism is compensated by the creation of powerful states?
    Exactly what is served by having a powerful state, anyway? Absolutely nothing if the people living under it are dying.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  34. wicket () says:

    Peter said…
    I have the impression that not many people in New Zealand are aware of evils of communism.

    That is exactly correct. Lefties, Anti-Americans & Tree-huggers like Phil U, Sonic, Keith Locke and the Greens, Labour supporters, John Mintos, Matt McCarten, Sue Breadford, and all communist proponents are only aware of what the Americans are doing. They have no memory of the evil of communism. They would rather loudmouth and whinge about Saddam mass killing but they also whinge at his removal by the US. The same thing will happen for example if the US tries to remove Mugabe or Leadership in Sudan to stop the massacres in Dafur. These anti-american nutters only want the American to do what they wish, but not for them (US) to do what they see fit in with their own national interest.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  35. sonic () says:

    Well bevan you guys always argue that every single death that happened in Russia between 1917 and 1990 in Russia is a direct result of “communism”

    Why does it not work the other way round?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  36. slightlyrighty () says:

    China only became prosperous when it began to accept some capitalist ideals. Shanghai is a monument to capitalism, not communism.

    Mao’s stewardship of China, and the Chinese economy was disasterous, as was Pol Pot in Cambodia, as is Kim Il Jong and Kim Jong Il in North Korea, as is Robert Mugabe in Zimbabwe (Who is a communist).

    The soviet union did have an economic base, but it was always a war economy. If the focus was less on global socialism and more on the welfare of those it claimed to represent, who knows what could have happened

    I personally don’t think much would have changed. Communism ignores basic human nature. China now recognises this in it’s move to accept capitalistic ideals to help it’s economy grow and appease it’s ever growing middle class.

    That it has taken the deaths of so many to achieve this is the tragedy.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  37. cha () says:

    Some reading for those so inclined.

    http://www.marxists.org/archive/reed/1919/10days/10days/preface.htm

    http://www.marxists.org/archive/reed/1919/10days/10days/index.htm

    btw, I’ve thought about writing a personal disclaimer but I really can’t be arsed.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  38. kiwi_donkey () says:

    Defending the indefensible again, Sonic?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  39. Bevan () says:

    Ben that is the worst side step attempt Ive seen in a long time.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  40. sonic () says:

    Lacking reading comprehension again Kiwi_D?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  41. sonic () says:

    Missing the point again Kiwi_d?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  42. Matt Pilott () says:

    I thought the “communist” label was obsolete these days – these were single-party totalitarian regimes that picked and chose one or two aspects of Communist Theory, used their false ideologies to become agressively expansionist, and at the same time they became increasingly self-destructive.

    Unfortunately, humanity seems to balls-up pretty much everything it has a go at, given enough time.

    You can hardly claim the alternatives to Communism are a roaring success either(and I’m not being an apologist – I thing we’re a long way off making any form of political system work); communism in practice has indeed been as bad as the rest of ‘em…

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  43. Ben Wilson () says:

    Again, to all, I’m not approving of communism, just trying to see it in perspective. A perspective which is also lacking here in any criticism of the countless millions who have died for capitalism.

    Grant, it was not Western criticism I’m talking about. It is the gigantic militarization justified almost entirely by the ‘fight against communism’, the numerous wars in which Western nations poured massive firepower right next to the communist nations, the civil wars they meddled in, trying to fix the outcome against communism (and almost always failing). It is unfair to blame the huge loss of life in dozens of wars since WW2 entirely on communism. There were at least 2 sides to most of the conflicts, and many disgusting slaughters committed by western powers. That they were done with aerial bombing doesn’t make them any less disgusting than doing it up close and personal – just more cowardly.

    Ben, wtf? Was Japan not fascist when it invaded Manchuria?

    I do not like communism as a system. But I think it is a better system than some of the alternatives posed at the time – either warring anarchy, impoverished feudal aristocracy, or foreign invasion (particularly by fascists). It is extremely easy for us living in our cushy country that we nicked from the natives to judge harshly others who have faced much greater challenges than we have. And communism dragged both those nations into extraordinarily powerful positions, and furthermore it has pretty much ended itself peacefully, at least as an economic system. I wouldn’t want to live in either Russia or China, but I wouldn’t want to live in the US either.

    Balance is all I’m aiming for. Otherwise we’re no better than communists and all their bullshit propaganda.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  44. Max () says:

    Ha ha ha. Everybody knows that stalin was scum.

    But he defeated Hitler.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  45. Redbaiter () says:

    “You can hardly claim the alternatives to Communism are a roaring success either’

    Read the words written by these leftists well. Not only those I have highlighted above, but so many of them. Note well how these people are still, even after all the evil of communism we have witnessed, besotted with the power of the state and prepared to cloud and obfuscate and apologise for this disgusting political system.

    Note well their words, for these are the words of the people who presently hold political ascendancy in this country.

    HOW DID THIS HAPPEN??

    It happened because you let it. It happened because you fell for their lies and their propaganda and their deceit. Opposition to leftism/ socialism/ communism in NZ has been silenced by a pattern of academic and media intimidation. By the systematic marginalisation of those who dare to criticise the collective.

    Don’t let these horrible people continue to win. Its time to speak out against the left with much more vigor and force than ever before. We absolutely must take our country back from these totalitarian swine.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  46. Redbaiter () says:

    “Why does it not work the other way round?”

    Why don’t you just answer the question commie? How many?? You can’t can you? All you are ever good for is the cowardly unsubstantiated smear. That’s typcially communist too Sonic.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  47. Southern Man () says:

    I can’t believe anyone actually thinks that America invaded Iraq because Saddam was such a bad boy!!!

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  48. Matt Pilott () says:

    I genuinely feel sorry for you RB – I mean to like in a country such as this, to see the distorted shadows of history everywhere, and to actually think that what is happening here is representative of that past.

    You poor, deluded soul.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  49. Nutbar Alert () says:

    I just knew this thread was going to be hijacked by extreme rhetoric on both sides. Pity. Can we expect Dad4Lunacy to post on this thread, using “utopian” and “communism” in the same sentence?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  50. Southern Man () says:

    Agree with Nutbar Alert.
    A normal discussion would be nice.
    Economic system aside, many people die in the world just simply because other people are a little mean.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  51. Bevan () says:

    Well Ben Wilson, sonic, Matt Pilott – so if Communism is so darn delightful and the alternatives arnt much better, then why arnt you living in a communist country?

    And Matt, you may not want to live in the US, but it seems your comrades in Cuba are having a wee bit of trouble stopping their people using any means necesary to get there.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  52. AndyL () says:

    Ben Wilson :…want to live in either Russia or China, but I wouldn’t want to live in the US either.

    Yes, but the way you live your way life is the american way, isn’t it? You endorse the American way of life. Do you watch holywood movies or bolywood? I know which one that you frequently watch. So, this makes you a hypocrite.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  53. u () says:

    ah the moral equivalency mob will be out in force on this, don’t you see millions of citizens dying in communist gulags is just like exactly the same as the US behaviour at Gitmo bay. the Iron curtain to keep escaping to the West is just like exactly the same as the Israelis trying to keep out suicide bombers.

    Communism is just another form of government where the unimpeachable rule over the unempowered, so wherever this happens it is morally equivalent. It is not a dichotomy of capitalism/communism but rather democratic/undemocratic.

    Belgians in the Congo – millions dead. The Taiping rebellion in China was suppressed by the colonial powers, killed a lot of Chinese. British in India…my point is communism is not unique, but rather morally equivalent to other non-democratic regimes.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  54. Andrew Bannister () says:

    I wonder how many hard working capitalists have thanked their lucky stars that these communist regimes were there to exploit (cheap labour, shocking working conditions, child labour, poor environmental standards etc etc) and make a quick buck.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  55. Max () says:

    Saddam was as brutal a dictator as any other.

    But he was the US’s best friend over there.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  56. Bevan () says:

    “I can’t believe anyone actually thinks that America invaded Iraq because Saddam was such a bad boy!!!”

    And that has what to do with the discussion?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  57. Peak Oil Conspiracy () says:

    Since we’ve gone as far off-topic as Saddam Hussein, can we expect Phillip John to tell us that peak oil and communism are relevant to each other?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  58. Matt Pilott () says:

    Bevan, How did you guess I don’t want to live in the US? I never said it, but you did hit the nail on the head. I mean I have no friends there, no green card, no medical…

    Now if you read what I actually said, as opposed to your vivid imaginings, you’ll note the line:

    “communism in practice has indeed been as bad as the rest of ‘em…”

    not exactly an endorsement.

    And if you had half a clue about what communism actually mean, you’d realise that no such contry exists today. Cuba is another totalitarian regime. Try some reality – it’s mint.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  59. Southern Man () says:

    Bevan,
    nothing really.
    Wicket mentioned something about Saddam being removed and linked it to a removal of Mugame.
    He rants a little so I may have read it wrong.
    Just ignore me :-)

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  60. phillipjohn () says:

    When I watched this video it made me think of the evils of highly concentrated power, not communism, not left or right. A healthy distrust for the state is the only thing that will keep us from descending into these sort of dictatorships. This certainly goes for countries whos leaders, in a time of “conflict”, ask for more power, the right to impose censorship, and the right to deny civil liberties. Remember, the best to keep yourself from the clutches of tyranny is not through waging aggressive, illegal wars against tyrants, but to be ever vigilant about what’s going on in your own back yard.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  61. unaha-closp () says:

    You can hardly claim the alternatives to Communism are a roaring success either(and I’m not being an apologist – I thing we’re a long way off making any form of political system work); communism in practice has indeed been as bad as the rest of ‘em…

    This is BS. Any democratic system is always better than any so called “self selecting meritocracy” such as communism, facism or royalism in the long run. Under a democracy missteps are punished, under a so-called meritocracy missteps are enforced.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  62. Southern Man () says:

    I have a question that I would like opinions on.
    Try to limit both right and left wing rhetoric please.
    If socialism does nothing but cause suffering, why does Cuba have a high life expectancy?
    Honest answers please!

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  63. Robert Mugabe () says:

    “Remember, the best to keep yourself from the clutches of tyranny is not through waging aggressive, illegal wars against tyrants, but to be ever vigilant about what’s going on in your own back yard.”

    Quite right, Phillip John, we should just let Robert Mugabe get on with oppressing his own people?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  64. phillipjohn () says:

    Peak Oil Conspiracy:

    Can you please tell me how peak oil theory involves a conspiricy. Really interested to see what kind of wako crap you come up with.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  65. Clint Heine () says:

    Whats the bet that NONE of you have either lived in the US, or a communist country or even visited a communist or ex communist country.

    If you had, you wouldnt be spouting such absolute nonsense. Communism bought about misery and curtailed everybodys freedoms. People were indoctrinated to believe that their way was the best, which of course as soon as they realised it wasn’t they were oppressed.

    Can somebody please show some commonsense on this thread?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  66. phillipjohn () says:

    “Quite right, Phillip John, we should just let Robert Mugabe get on with oppressing his own people?”

    So you’re for an illegal aggressive war? i.e. the kind that the Nazis were hung for at the Nuremburg trials. They weren’t charged with genocide you know.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  67. Alec () says:

    Don’t forget the merciless papal crusades and inquisitions against heretical groups.The slaughter went on throughout Europe for nearly five centuries. The victims in those five centuries were literally countless.

    The crusades seldom get a bum rap from the right – they were genocide pure and simple.

    This post from Mr Farrar is dog whistling, nothing more.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  68. Colin () says:

    Yes the regimes that were/are in place are shocking – exteme to say the least. Is communism is bad – with the sort of people who get to the top of the tree, yes it is bad. However, let me ask for one expample where democracy has truly worked. Never has, its just the spin thats different. Don’t get me wrong, I have no plans to live in any other system than democracy – just saying its not the wonderful be all system we would be lead to believe.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  69. unaha-closp () says:

    Remember, the best to keep yourself from the clutches of tyranny is not through waging aggressive, illegal wars against tyrants, but to be ever vigilant about what’s going on in your own back yard.

    It is a judgement call as to whether the external threat of tyranny is greater or lesser than the internal threat. It is not an absolute argument one way or the other.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  70. Redbaiter () says:

    “why does Cuba”

    Because Castro puts out the figures for chrissake.. jeezuz wept..!!!

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  71. Grant (a new one) () says:

    Clint, I’ll take your bet re the first paragraph.
    Your second however is spot on.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  72. David Farrar () says:

    No Deborah – it is a simple concept – that wall is to stop people coming in. There is no restriction at all on Israeli citizens leaving Israel.

    But you knew that of course. Nice moral equivalence.

    And I love how Alec and others on the left now use dog whistling as a general term of abuse, even when it makes them look stupid. Yes I am dog whistling against communist dictators – shock horror.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  73. unaha-closp () says:

    Don’t get me wrong, I have no plans to live in any other system than democracy – just saying its not the wonderful be all system we would be lead to believe.

    You wouldn’t like to live under anything else, but say it is not the best system??? You lost me.

    Personally I can think of only one system better than a democracy – unaha-ism. Under this wonderful system you will thrive under the benevolent rule of the intelligent people (who are meritociously selected by the supreme leader, central committee and sub-committees). Full employment and no taxes, a multitude of liberal freedoms. You Colin are welcome to join, discounts apply to early enrollers.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  74. Matt Pilott () says:

    Clint – my point was that the examples given weren’t vaguely like Communism – they were totalitarian regimes in all but name. Yes they were awful regimes – no one’s disputing that. People are attacking an idea based upon its horrendously flawed implementation.

    A small example as I see it – Iraq was officially a Democracy (according to Saddam). You could vote ‘yes’ or ‘no’ for Saddam to stay in power, while a soldier with a gun watched you vote. He had a mandate from the masses – 100% in every vote. Now that’s obviously as far removed from Democracy as one can imagine. The USSR and Communist China were as far removed from the idea of Communism as Iraq was from Democracy.

    UC – it’s all relative though – I say again, the alternatives haven’t exactly been a success. Better, but the bar was set, and remains, pretty low.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  75. phillipjohn () says:

    “It is a judgement call as to whether the external threat of tyranny is greater or lesser than the internal threat. It is not an absolute argument one way or the other.”

    Sure, but my statement was based on the observation that many dictatorships have arisen as a result of domestic oppression, where as relatively few have come about because the particular country failed to invade another significantly weaker country.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  76. Joe () says:

    Sorry, I can’t help but to quote this:

    It has been said that democracy is the worst form of government except all the others that have been tried. – Winston Churchill

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  77. Matt Pilott () says:

    DPF you’re ignorant if you think that the wall in Occupied Palestine is there only to keep the terrorists out. Everything Israel has done is to keep the Palestinians in, and oppressed, as well. Hence talk of keeping them out to ‘keep the Jewish character of the state’.
    But you know that, didn’t you?

    I like the way you almost pretended the Palestinians don’t exist there though, not the first time that’s been done eh?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  78. Redbaiter () says:

    “You poor, deluded soul.”

    Witness readers, how the left try to denigrate and marginalise anyone who challenges their ascendancy. They have the power, they have the numbers, and they will continue to use every means possible within a so called democracy to suppress dissent. The difference between these people and Stalin is only their sophistication and their methods. Their objectives are the same. A one party state.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  79. Ben Wilson () says:

    Bevan, communism is not delightful. It’s also not necessarily hell-on-earth. Balance, dude. And I was born here, which is my main reason for staying.

    AndyL, I endorse the kiwi way of life, for those that want it. Yes I watch more hollywood than bollywood, but Pirates of the Caribbean and Star Wars have nothing to do with the American way of life, nor does singing constantly have much to do with the Indian way of life, which is not communist anyway. But for your information, the kind of films I love most are Kungfu movies, mostly out of China, and they also have absolutely nothing to do with communism. If they did they probably wouldn’t be allowed. Russian movies are too depressing for my tastes. I also like Japanese samurai movies without endorsing feudalism, and my favourite recent movie was Ong Bak, without in any way endorsing either monarchy or military juntas.

    The kiwi way of life, multicultural semi-agrarian semi-industrial semi-service based pacifist democratic capitalist socialism, takes the best of both capitalist and communist ideas and many others, and discards the shit. It’s not perfect either – I have many criticisms.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  80. llew () says:

    “Hahhah, one who uses the posting name redrag has the gall to pretend to dislike communism. You carry the flag in your name you poseur.”

    Hahhah! So do you you stupe.

    Baiter: A large or excessive amount.

    Idiot.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  81. Matt Pilott () says:

    Umm, baiter, if “we” have the numbers, then we wouldn’t need a one-party system – “we”‘d have a majority, and that works just fine in a Democracy.

    Who, however, “we” are, and what “we” are trying to do escapes me. And I think the same applies to you…

    And if, by “challenging asendancy” you mean those rants of yours.. I mean have you not noticed others arguing with facts and rationality? I feel more challenged by them to tell the truth.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  82. Billy () says:

    I agree with Phillipjohn. The problem of communism is that of concentrated power. The problem is, if you believe that the state is best placed to make all decisions about every citizen’s life, the state has to have that power. And it must abuse it. And people must die.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  83. Redbaiter () says:

    All you are concerned with Matt is what colour to paint the walls of your Potemkin village, and you will of course discuss that with anyone sucker enough to think it matters.

    I want to burn your stinking commie ghetto to the ground. Every time I write something here, I’m alerting other readers to the derilection of your back yard.

    That’s why you and your ilk will continue to try and denigrate and marginalize Redbaiter or anyone with similar objectives. You, (the collectivists) know we are dangerous to your one party state objectives.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  84. Murray () says:

    Socialism is a mental illness.

    As the comments in this thread have amply displayed.

    Good flushing there David.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  85. Greg Bourke () says:

    Horace et al.

    Sorry, but how many chances does Communism want to prove itself? Its influenced billions of people and deliberately and explicitly killed millions. How much more chance should it be given to prove Russia, China, and Cambodia were “incorrect” applications or a swell idea??

    It’s the idea itself that is inherently unstable and fatal not its incorrect application!

    Finally, Cuba st communists and relativists should also consider who developed and provided teh technology they use to argue their causes.

    (i.e. MS Windows or Apple OS, and an Intel CPU, an electrical grid supported by GE & Honeywell, an ISP, and numerous companies to complete the internet… and still you rail against it while using it!)

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  86. llew () says:

    “Why don’t you just answer the question commie? How many?? You can’t can you? All you are ever good for is the cowardly unsubstantiated smear. That’s typcially communist too Sonic.”

    So are you owning to being communist there RB? ‘Cos if it looks like a duck & quacks like a duck…

    “Witness readers, how the left try to denigrate and marginalise anyone who challenges their ascendancy.”

    Well I see that from you mostly. You can’t really be that stupid though, you must be having us on.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  87. dad4justice () says:

    I second that Murray -the leftie gits are total dickwacks !!!

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  88. unaha-closp () says:

    Sure, but my statement was based on the observation that many dictatorships have arisen as a result of domestic oppression, where as relatively few have come about because the particular country failed to invade another significantly weaker country.

    But on the basis of what you actually stated it is easy to see that many states have been oppressed as a result of not fighting hard enough against external tyranny. And there are exceptions even to the modified statement – France v. Germany 1933 springs to mind.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  89. Sam Dixon () says:

    D4J –

    Your cognitive abilties are the product of billions of years of evolution, the ascent of human to the highest known mental plains, 50000 years plus of language, 5000 years of writing, the insights passed on from the greatest minds in history, education and social systems refined and improved upon since time immemorial… is “the leftie gits are total dickwacks!!!” really the best you can come up with?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  90. Bevan () says:

    Well Matt, I was going to appologise for stating that as I see I confused you with something Ben Wilson stated.
    However it seems by your post you are getting a little personal. Why dont we stick to the subject matter instead eh.

    “Bevan, communism is not delightful. It’s also not necessarily hell-on-earth. Balance, dude. And I was born here, which is my main reason for staying.”

    Yeah I’ll admit, there would have been 100% approval of the system in Soviet Russia, mind you one would approve of anything so they didnt get marched off to Siberia.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  91. Duncan Bayne () says:

    Ben,

    I suggest you have a read of The Rise & Fall of the Soviet Union, by Dmitri Volkogonov ( http://www.amazon.co.uk/Rise-Fall-Soviet-Empire-Political/dp/0006388183 ). Volkogonov was a highly-ranked intelligence officer, and worked personally with four of the Soviet leaders. That should cover the gaps in your knowledge of the history of Russian Communism, in particular the murderous purges started by Lenin, and merely accelerated by Stalin.

    As for the economics, have a read of Human Action and Liberalism, both by Ludwig von Mises and available freely online ( http://www.mises.org/humanaction/pdf/humanaction.pdf and http://www.mises.org/liberal/liberalism-portrait.pdf ).

    Honestly, though, I’m astounded that you’re still defending Communism after the murder of more than twenty million people. Can I ask you a question – just what *would* it take for you to conclude that Communism is, in fact, evil?

    (For what it’s worth, the most strongly anti-Communist people I know are my Russian colleagues; do you actually *know* anyone who lived through Communist rule?)

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  92. Matt Pilott () says:

    Well Redbaiter, I’m sorry to have enraged you to the point where you refer to yourself in the third person. Quite frankly, I have no idea what you’re on about.

    As for denigration, I would look at the comments from Murray and Dad4Justice as examples. Left and right, people have been putting their views forward, and debating them – there’s no need for such comments.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  93. Duncan Bayne () says:

    > Umm, baiter, if “we” have the numbers, then
    > we wouldn’t need a one-party system – “we”‘d
    > have a majority, and that works just fine in
    > a Democracy.

    Which nicely illustrates the evil of unlimited democracy. As Franklin observed, democracy is like two wolves and a lamb voting on whom to eat, & liberty is a well-armed lamb contesting the vote.

    In a free society, human rights can *never* be subject to a vote. If the majority can vote away the rights of a minority, then what you have is mob rule.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  94. dad4justice () says:

    Just for Sammy dykson a red licker – The jejune fact that we “can’t deport them all” is supposed to lead ineluctably to the conclusion that we must grant amnesty to social misfits like the chronic , sam , pj, redrag queen and brain fart etc..etc.. who are mouldicating –maggot planting trolls. Go over to the commie wublic address and kiss Paris Hilton, as Wussell Brown finds me “scary” and along with the other dripsters blog, namely Tony Milne and Jordan I am banned, at least I scored my fifty at Wussels blog – theatre eh – give us a kiss Paris ? Truly pathetic and it is little wonder about half of the dickwacks that steal oxygen in Kiwiland wouldn’t take up arms against hostile invaders. To you commie sympathisers, I say this, why don’t you fuck of and live in Cuba where you can drive a 1950’s car and earn $ 15 pw?

    Can’t wait for the Phillip Field fiasco to start! – I hope we dusts off the wee black book and lets supreme maggot have it smack straight between the eyes. Future generations will study this lairbore government as a prime example of CORRUPTION.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  95. Redbaiter () says:

    “is “the leftie gits are total dickwacks!!!” really the best you can come up with?”

    Its concise and accurate. What more do you want? This is the internet, where the essence is brevity, and those of us with real jobs don’t have time to waste anyway on the kind of ponderous sermonistic opus you loafing commies usually produce.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  96. ChickenLittle () says:

    I know its only lunch time but…..

    My vote for fu*kwit of the day has to go to..no not Sonic, he’s been getting it too much lately, but our resident academic giant Philipjohn with this little gem –

    ‘So you’re for an illegal aggressive war?’

    Now PJ, I know I’m just a dumb,ignorant pleb but could you please point me to an unaggressive war?

    Just one will do.

    thx in advance.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  97. phil u () says:

    uh-oh..!

    mad muzza and dick 4 brains have arrived..

    (it must be time to leave..!..)

    phil(whoar.co.nz)

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  98. Redbaiter () says:

    “In a free society, human rights can *never* be subject to a vote. If the majority can vote away the rights of a minority, then what you have is mob rule.”

    This is a problem Duncan that can be solved by means of an appropriately worded constitution and the population must be educated to observe that constituion and ensure it is not breached by any elected government.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  99. chris () says:

    And unable to win an election, bitch slapped for eight long years by a party full of teachers, unionists, fags and dykes.

    Does that hurt bedwetter?.

    Heh!.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  100. phil u () says:

    and ‘chicky’ too..!

    the nutbars/nutjobs/whackos are all here..!

    phil(whoar.co.nz)

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  101. llew () says:

    “Its concise and accurate.”

    By your standards, by anyone else’s it’s lame. And ungrammatical.

    “What more do you want?”

    I’ve always been a fan of wit & intelligence – you think you could stretch yourself a bit? Or let an adult comment on your behalf?

    “and those of us with real jobs don’t have time to waste anyway on the kind of ponderous sermonistic opus you loafing commies usually produce”

    Since when? This must be very recent? You should re-read some of your stuff sometime I think. It might be good for those delusions.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  102. phil u () says:

    did someone call for a good old fashioned commie-bash..?

    is farrar ‘channelling’ mccarthy again..?

    phil(whoar.co.nz)

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  103. Andrew Bannister () says:

    How much more chance should it be given to prove Russia, China, and Cambodia were “incorrect” applications or a swell idea??

    It’s the idea itself that is inherently unstable and fatal not its incorrect application

    Greg, there is no cause and effect here. What you describe is simply correlation observation. How do you know that potential dictators don’t simply use the “communism” or “socialism” banner to further their own oppressive, dictatorial and totalitarian tendencies?

    It’s a chicken and egg problem. Did communism make the dictator, or did the dictator use communism?

    Also, many capitalist organisations never seemed to be too concerned about the oppressive nature of communism when it came to providing them with cheap labour. It appears that communism served the West quite nicely at times.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  104. James () says:

    Communism, like its twin fascism was chronically flawed and ultimately a mass killer of people precisely because of the ideas it was founded on.Altruism,egalitarianism,Marxism,collectivism….all All preached the subjugation of the individual to the group…and when you are the group humanity tends to leave quickly.

    Sonics attempt to equate supoosed capitalist crimes with Communisms actual crimes is obsene and blatantly false.None of the actual things he lists are attributes of capitalism,quite the reverse.Capitalism is free trade between free people which obviously excludes slavery,colonisation etc…

    Ben tried to say that breaking a few eggs was fine by him if it meant Russia and China became powerful.I imagine if those “eggs’ had been members of his own family he may well have a different view…..but then Ben has stated in the past that there is no such thing as objective right and wrong….only opinions etc so mass murder and misery is no problem too him.

    For many more great videos on topics like this go to this online library…..

    http://www.tvliberty.blogspot.com/

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  105. Redbaiter () says:

    “Well Redbaiter, I’m sorry to have enraged you”

    A remark that shows clearly the limitations of the collectivist mind. Matt, so indoctrinated, really thinks that to passionately oppose socialism/ communism, one must be beyond emotional control. Rest assured Matt, I’m not enraged. Contemptuous of you and your ideology perhaps, but as calmly as I can, working to disempower you, and clear you and your contemptible governance and your perversion of democracy from my future.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  106. phillipjohn () says:

    oh dear CL, you really do make yourself look silly sometimes.

    In 1945, the London Charter of the International Military Tribunal defined three categories of crimes, including crimes against peace. This definition was first used in by Finnish courts to prosecute the aggressors in the War-responsibility trials in Finland. The principles were later known as the Nuremberg Principles.

    “In 1950, the Nuremberg Tribunal defined Crimes against Peace (in Principle VI.a, submitted to the United Nations General Assembly) as

    (i) Planning, preparation, initiation or waging of a WAR OF AGGRESSION or a war in violation of international treaties, agreements or assurances;

    During the trial, the chief American prosecutor, Robert H. Jackson, stated:

    To initiate a WAR OF AGRESSION, therefore, is not only an international crime; it is the supreme international crime differing only from other war crimes in that it contains within itself the accumulated evil of the whole.

    c – The “sovereignty” rule means that it is a crime of aggression to use armed force with intent to overthrow the government of a state or to impede its freedom to act unhindered, as it sees fit, throughout its jurisdiction.

    So yes, this is why the invasion of Iraq was illegal, and technically Bush and Blair could be executed for committing the invasion. Similarly, any country seeking to invade Zimbabwe and overthrow Mugabe.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crime_against_peace

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  107. Matt Pilott () says:

    James:

    If capitalism is just free trade between, and not responsible for deaths, does the same not hold true for Communism – it wasn’t the centrally planned economy or aspirations for a classless system that lead to the millions of abhorrent deaths, but the megalomaniacs that took advantage of the state itself.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  108. Matt Pilott () says:

    RedBaiter: “I want to burn your stinking commie ghetto to the ground.” – a metaphor perhaps, but not a happy one. Angry, perhaps…

    I was more questioning your purported correlation between the Government of New Zealand and those of the USSR or Communist China. You’ve yet to illustrate that there is, in fact, any remote correlation.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  109. James () says:

    “James:

    If capitalism is just free trade between, and not responsible for deaths, does the same not hold true for Communism – it wasn’t the centrally planned economy or aspirations for a classless system that lead to the millions of abhorrent deaths, but the megalomaniacs that took advantage of the state itself.”

    Sorry but wrong Matt..The results of Communism were already entrenched and inevitable in the idea of it.The enslavement/disempowerment of the individual and the abolition of his rights which is at the core of Communist/Socialist/fascist dogma is inseparable from any plan to bring about a society of “equality”.Free men are never equal and equal men are never free.

    A simple study of Mans nature as man and the requirements reality sets on man if he is to live and prosper shows that Communism is incompatible with that and will lead to Man’s death.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  110. Danyl Mclauchlan () says:

    You can’t make an omelet without breaking a few eggs

    – Joseph Stalin

    So where’s the omelet?

    – George Orwell (Attributed)

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  111. unaha-closp () says:

    Which nicely illustrates the evil of unlimited democracy. As Franklin observed, democracy is like two wolves and a lamb voting on whom to eat, & liberty is a well-armed lamb contesting the vote.

    Here Franklin is talking specifically about unlimited direct democracy, as opposed to the limited representative democracy he spent a good part of his life fighting for and building. All the functional democracies in the world operate under the system of representative democracy, including the one Franklin fought to establish.

    The evil Duncan refers to is confined solely to unlimited democracy and is not relevant to any discussion of existing democracies.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  112. dad4justice () says:

    Omelet is cooking in level 9 beehive , otherwise known as the ministry of love , you should know danyl as you work there don’t you ?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  113. AndyL () says:

    PJ said: So you’re for an illegal aggressive war?

    PJ fuck your legal or illegal international protocol. Are you an illiterate lawyer or not? You try to abide by the international law only in peace time. When someone crazy like Saddam massacres its own population, international law about sovereignty is out the window.

    Answer these very important questions:

    #1) Did the bombing of Serbia over the Kosovan disputes by US (and of course minority role by NATO) violate international law or not ?

    #2) Did the UN authorise such bombings ?

    Answers: #1) Yes. #2) No.

    There you go, fuck the UN, fuck international law. If the debate at the UN in 1998/1999 went on and on in trying to approve the bombing operation in Serbia, the whole population of Kosovo would had been wiped out completely from existence by the Serbs. Besides, waiting to be granted such an authority from the UN would deemed to fail as Russia was definitely intending to veto it . That is why we us in the West are being entertained by our media about massacres and crimes committed against humanity, from medium such as CNN, BBC, CBS, etc? We love to watch and moan while our fucking lawyers who are advising our politicians , tell them not to do this or to do that because it violates such fucking clause, chapter, and so forth according to the international law.

    Had I heard any praise from fucking anti-american such as Phil U , Keith Locke, Sonic, tree-huggers and snail lovers as the Greens? No, a single word of thanks to the US at all. Oh, wait , they will claim that it was a NATO operation. The operation was a fucking US operations with their planes supported by a few NATO planes. Give credit to where its due, Phil Ure.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  114. James () says:

    The difference between democracies is irrelavant if the individual is still forced to pay taxes,not allowed to associate with whom he chooses in his sexual life,not allowed to put into his body what he wishes and not allowed to use his property as he chooses.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  115. Duncan Bayne () says:

    > This is a problem Duncan that can be solved
    > by means of an appropriately worded
    > constitution and the population must be
    > educated to observe that constituion and
    > ensure it is not breached by any elected
    > government.

    Yes.

    > it wasn’t the centrally planned economy …
    > that lead to the millions of abhorrent deaths

    It *was* central planning. As von Mises observed, you cannot have a functional planned economy. If you attempt to enforce central planning on an economy, people will die to the extent that you succeed in that imposition, as you destroy their wealth.

    Witness the starvation in Russia, China, and North Korea – and note the improvements in China since they moved away from central planning of the economy.

    > did someone call for a good old fashioned
    > commie-bash..?

    Hell no. They should be shot at dawn ;-)

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  116. bwakile () says:

    You people who defend communism should just remember that it was the americans during WW2 that ensured that you are writing these posts in English and not Japanese.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  117. Ben Wilson () says:

    Duncan,

    “Can I ask you a question – just what *would* it take for you to conclude that Communism is, in fact, evil?”

    Evil is not an absolute quality. Communism is ‘more evil’ than some systems, less evil than a great many more, but not ‘just evil’. Some things about it are good, and that’s really what I’m saying, in a nutshell. To label something as evil and try to tar everything associated with it with the same brush is lazy thinking. Bevan has been indulging in it constantly on this thread, attempting to make an apparatchik out of me because he can’t be bothered to understand what I’m saying.

    Thanks for the reading hints, btw. I have to say the detailed history of communism is not something I take a great interest in, any more than any other system I basically disagree with. I’m sure a Google search will give you hundreds of thousands of books to read on the subject if you really are interested. Perhaps some of them will show you another side to your tale of pure evil. Be sure to read those ones too.

    And yes, one of my best friends grew up in communist Hungary. He is the best waterpolo player I have ever met, which goes to show communism is not without merit. He hates Russians, as do most Hungarians, but doesn’t go so far as to say he hates communism, having experienced the local variant they had as not so bad. He prefers democratic capitalism, but does admit it’s not the panacea that they all thought it would be.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  118. phillipjohn () says:

    “fuck international law”

    Says more about you than I could ever say.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  119. unaha-closp () says:

    Communism – it wasn’t the centrally planned economy or aspirations for a classless system that lead to the millions of abhorrent deaths, but the megalomaniacs that took advantage of the state itself.

    It was the unfettered empowerment of the central planners and the class police that Communism created that fed the megalomania of the same.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  120. AndrewK () says:

    Debates like this show me that the milk of human kindness is equally sour at both/every end of the political ideological spectrum.

    Humankind would be better off if we each critically analyised our own selfishness, pride and greed before laying the blame for the ills we see at the foot of a political system

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  121. Ben Wilson () says:

    James,
    “Ben tried to say that breaking a few eggs was fine by him if it meant Russia and China became powerful.I imagine if those “eggs’ had been members of his own family he may well have a different view…..but then Ben has stated in the past that there is no such thing as objective right and wrong….only opinions etc so mass murder and misery is no problem too him.”

    No I wasn’t. Nor are the millions of eggs the US has broken for their ideology fine by me.

    As for the moral subjectivity point, you are still yet to come up any intelligent rebuttal. I know it’s unfair for me to expect you to even understand something I majored in at University, much less argue it with me, but piping up with lies about my position is something I can fairly expect an intelligent person not to do.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  122. helmet () says:

    Don’t be daft guys, Ben, Sonic etc. I’ve been reading a book by Jung Chang and John Halliday called “Mao: The Unknown Story”. It’s a political biography of Mao and includes necessarily a lot of info about Stalin.
    If the book is correct, and I believe it is considered to be an accurate history, the rise of communism in those countries had nothing to do with a glorious peasant uprising, it was all about bloodshed, tyranny, deceit and conspiracy. Those men were were brutal, had no honor, and literally no concern for human life beyond their own. You guys should not be defending those men or the regimes they created. Mao carelessly murdered far more of his own countrymen than the west ever did, without anyy pressure from the west to create an imperative for his actions.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  123. James () says:

    As for the moral subjectivity point, you are still yet to come up any intelligent rebuttal. I know it’s unfair for me to expect you to even understand something I majored in at University, much less argue it with me, but piping up with lies about my position is something I can fairly expect an intelligent person not to do.”

    Well Ben if you are still unable to see that the reality you are standing on/in and that surrounds you has an objective existence outside of your whims and wishes and that it sets boundaries and conditions on man that can’t be ignored if he wants to live and prosper then you should try to get your course fees back….you were taken as a sucker.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  124. Redbaiter () says:

    “You’ve yet to illustrate that there is, in fact, any remote correlation.”

    That you need something so obvious pointed out to you is a helpful demonstration of the narrowness of your political understandings. The connection is very simply illustrated-

    “From each according to ability, from each according to need”

    I’m sure I wont need to point out the source of that phrase, or that it is a philosophy that underpins both communism and the political thinking of the multitude of leftists writing here.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  125. Horace () says:

    “Horace et al.

    Sorry, but how many chances does Communism want to prove itself? Its influenced billions of people and deliberately and explicitly killed millions. How much more chance should it be given to prove Russia, China, and Cambodia were “incorrect” applications or a swell idea??

    It’s the idea itself that is inherently unstable and fatal not its incorrect application!”

    You are of course incorrect. let me give you an example in the form of an analogy:

    A boy eats an icecream once a month. He grows and develops within the norms of his age.

    Another boy eats icecream every hour. He dies at age twelve, an obese sickly child.

    Now, is the idea of eating icecream inherently unstable or was it the application of the idea that killed the boy?

    Extreme left wing systems should be given no further chance. Extreme right wing systems should be given no further chance.

    Ideas can be stable or unstable. This does not mean all ideas are unstable, or that all ideas are stable. Unstable ideas do not only lie to the left of centre. Stable ideas do not only lie to the right of centre.

    Once unstable ideas are removed from choice, the choices of practical governance are few.

    Those choices that remain are then stable, until they are taken to the extreme, at which point they become unstable.

    Rapid change occurs where stable ideas are just about to become unstable. It remains with the statesman to exercise his skill and experience to recognise where that tipping point is to avoid the natural return to balance overwhelming the change he wanted in the first place. He must consider that ideas and change have a momentum of their own. The more the statesman desires power, the less likely he is to exercise his choice competently.

    Hope this clears it up.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  126. dad4justice () says:

    “Humankind would be better off if we each critically analyised our own selfishness, pride and greed before laying the blame for the ills we see at the foot of a political system ”

    Tell that to the parents who will be criminalised by the communists for trying to discipline their children . One thing this thread shows = NZ has many jellyfish dickwacks !

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  127. unaha-closp () says:

    Humankind would be better off if we each critically analyised our own selfishness, pride and greed before laying the blame for the ills we see at the foot of a political system

    Perhaps, but that will never happen in the real world. So let’s assume that a lot of people will always be selfish, prideful & greedy and operate a system that limits the ability of these bastards to occupy positions of power indefinitely.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  128. AndyL () says:

    bwalkile said…
    You people who defend communism should just remember that it was the americans during WW2 that ensured that you are writing these posts in English and not Japanese.

    Spot on. That is why Phil U is enjoying his writing, because young US marines came from faraway to an unfamiliar territory to defend our mothers and fathers in the Pacific war against the Japs. If they didn’t come, there would had never been any Phil Ure or Sonic also including myself, because there would have been an almost 100% definite that my parents and their parents had been killed by the occupiers or die in a gulag.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  129. James () says:

    No I wasn’t. Nor are the millions of eggs the US has broken for their ideology fine by me.”

    That would be the semi socialist,big government ideology that the US has been enthralled to since FDR? I agree….US socialism is nothing to be proud of but still comes no where near to the bloodshed of the real villains..

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  130. Danyl Mclauchlan () says:

    You people who defend communism should just remember that it was the americans during WW2 that ensured that you are writing these posts in English and not Japanese.

    Heh. Very funny.

    As von Mises observed, you cannot have a functional planned economy. If you attempt to enforce central planning on an economy, people will die to the extent that you succeed in that imposition, as you destroy their wealth.

    That explains why Sweden has turned into such a distopian nightmare state.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  131. Greenjacket () says:

    Ben Wilson:
    Russia had been rapidly industrialising throughout the late 19th century and was one of the world’s greatest industrial powers by 1914, and it had been a major European power since Peter the Great. Attributing the rise of Russia to communism is laughable.

    Your statement that in the 1930s the Communists were winning the Chinese civil war and the Japanese invaded China “to catch communism in it’s infancy” is risible. The Communists by 1934 were on the point of extinction at the hands of the Nationalists – however, Japanese invasion allowed the CCP to recover, as Nationalist forces were forced to fight the Japanese. Perhaps the most significant factor was immediately after the war and the intervention of the US General Marshall who insisted on a truce between the KMT and CCP and demilitarising much of the KMT – this meant the CCP, which in 1945 was still in a very weak position relative to the Nationalists, was given the opportunity it needed.
    Of course, the rise of the Chinese economy dates from when the Communist Party abandoned socialism and embraced the free market!

    Please Ben, next time you try to use historical justifications, do try to read something first. Trying to validate your defence of Communism by lies discredits your position.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  132. AndyL () says:

    PJ said..
    “fuck international law”

    Says more about you than I could ever say.

    No, PJ. Can you make a comment about the 2 points that clearly stated in my previous messages? Am I correct? If you think that I am correct, then I am right to say fuck international law, correct?

    BTW, are you a lawyer specializing in international law?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  133. unaha-closp () says:

    That explains why Sweden has turned into such a distopian nightmare state.

    A) Sweden is not a centrally planned economy.
    B) Sweden is not a distopian nightmare.
    C) Danyl is…

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  134. Ben Wilson () says:

    James,

    Moral subjectivity is not the same as subjectivity of the physical world. Like I explained to you at wasted length, moral statements could be more of the ilk of “Oysters are nice”. That’s a subjective statement, even though it makes a claim about the world, really it parses into “I like Oysters”.

    Quite a different proposition to, say, “the earth is flat” or “the world is real”. Really basic stuff man. Ethics 101. Logic 101.

    You actually managed to fool me into thinking you were the kind of person who might be able engage in the argument, but then you come here and spout stupid lies about my position. Your coffee table philosophy conflates all subjectivity together, when there are actually many brands. Hell, there are even Christian relativists, the entire Protestant movement being a classic example. The right to form your own opinions about the meaning of the bible is a form of relativism. They may not realize they are relativists, but that is only because they are ignorant of philosophy, despite having strong opinions on the subject.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  135. Mrs Disgusted () says:

    Dad4Lunacy wrote:

    “One thing this thread shows = NZ has many jellyfish dickwacks !”

    PETER BURNS – you are clearly out of your depth on this thread, as shown by your petty namecalling and inane gibberish. So PETER BURNS, I will speak in a language that you can understand: have you taken your friends Robin and Catwoman for a walk in Hagley Park today?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  136. Danyl Mclauchlan () says:

    C) Danyl is…

    Making a pretty obvious joke?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  137. dad4justice () says:

    Mrs Disgusting please f##k off as the fish smell is rather overwhelming .

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  138. James () says:

    That explains why Sweden has turned into such a distopian nightmare state.”

    The Swedes seem to think so as they are moving to dismantle their Welfare State and are embracing private alternatives…

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  139. Mrs Disgusted () says:

    PETER BURNS: Could you please google “a tribute to communism” and provide us with something remotely intelligent on topic? All we ever seem to get from you is namecalling – oh, and references to Hagley Park incidents.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  140. Ben Wilson () says:

    Greenjacket, Russia is considerably more advanced than they were in 1914 both as an industrial power and a world power. Care to argue that?

    As for China, the Japanese motives were about as ridiculous as Hitler’s. That they were unable to predict the outcome of their moves doesn’t detract anything from their extreme hostility to communism. That they were happy to cheapshot the Nationalists too only shows how stupid many of their decisions were. That the Nationalists thought the communists would just go away shows how stupid they were too.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  141. sonic () says:

    Since it was the Russians who were the main force in winning World War Two does that mean we all have to show our gratitude to Putin?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  142. dad4justice () says:

    News Flash – The communist Mrs Disgusting – H1 or H2 or K1 or K2 has just released a international best seller called Red Fungus featuring all of her favourite putrid puns. This is the most caustic collection of revolting rhymes, hideous howlers, slimy sayings, rancid riddles and ghastly gags that you could possibly get your hands on.
    It is a most ingenious creation and proves disgusting is beautiful, however a gas mask and gloves are recommended when reading it.

    Available at any liarbore communist red book shop.
    Peter Burns must go as he is going to a HulunKayvision quiz show at the ministry of peace called the weakest stink .

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  143. James () says:

    Ben….you get through life as best you can then and I’ll do the same by walking through doors instead of trying to walk through walls,avoiding eating arsenic and cyanide even though there’s probably no really difference between them and cream cake and not trying to bounce speeding bullets off of my chest…unlike yourself who will decide on the spur of the moment…;-)

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  144. James () says:

    Since it was the Russians who were the main force in winning World War Two does that mean we all have to show our gratitude to Putin?”

    I would have said the yanks had that honour whilst the Satlin really overwhelmed the Germans with disposable cannon fodder.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  145. Ben Wilson () says:

    James, having a mind that isn’t already made up about complex issues is not the same thing as being delusional. In fact, it’s the opposite.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  146. sonic () says:

    You would say that as you know nothing about WW2 James?

    No change there then.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  147. unaha-closp () says:

    The Swedes seem to think so as they are moving to dismantle their Welfare State and are embracing private alternatives…

    Hmmm…the majority are trying to remove the right to free living from the minority, now I’d say that’s a function of a democracy and not the tyranny of the majority. But others disagree.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  148. phillipjohn () says:

    Anyone that wants to see the ugliness that a militerist-capitalist state can create should watch this documentary.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=26CaVAy6vxU&mode=related&search=

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  149. phD () says:

    Hey Phillip John – how is that thesis of yours coming along? Perhaps you should be writing that instead of promoting socialism and peddling us peak oil conspiracy theories.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  150. unaha-closp () says:

    Russia had been rapidly industrialising throughout the late 19th century and was one of the world’s greatest industrial powers by 1914,

    Japan, 1904-5, Baltic Fleet, Treaty of Portsmouth – care to comment?

    Other stuff pretty accurate about CCP.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  151. ben () says:

    Ben, wtf? Was Japan not fascist when it invaded Manchuria?

    Perhaps, but China was not communist at the time. And the Japanese were no threat to China or anyone else by 1949.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  152. phillipjohn () says:

    “When someone crazy like Saddam massacres its own population, international law about sovereignty is out the window.”

    When Saddam was massacaring his own people, with weapons the US supplied him with, the US continued to supply him with weapons, so he could carry out a US proxy war against Iran (in which 250,000 Iraqis died). No, the US invasion of Iraq had absolutly nothing to do with saddam being a bad guy or anything of the sort. The fact is that some of the world’s sneakiest war criminals live in the US, no this isn’t counting the 8,000 or so Nazi scientist that were imported after WW2, but some much less obvious figures.

    Take for instance Henry Kissanger’s “operation condor”

    Operation condor was a campaign of state terrorism and intelligence operations implemented by right-wing dictatorships that dominated the Southern Cone in South America from the 1950s to 1980s, heavily relying on numerous assassinations. This systematic state terrorism aimed both to deter democratic and left-wing influence and ideas disseminated in the region and to control active or potential opposition movements against these governments.

    The operation was jointly conducted by the intelligence and security services of Argentina, Bolivia, Brazil, Chile, Paraguay, and Uruguay during the mid-1970s. The right-wing military governments of these countries, acted in conjunction with a vast support mainly supplied by the United States.

    On May 31, 2001, French judge Roger Le Loire requested a summons served on Henry Kissinger while he was staying at the Hôtel Ritz in Paris. Loire claimed to want to question Kissinger for alleged U.S. involvement in Operation Condor as well as the death of French nationals under the Chilean junta. As a result, Kissinger left Paris that evening, and Loire’s inquiries were directed to the U.S. State Department. In late 2001, the Brazilian government canceled an invitation for Kissinger to speak in São Paulo because it could no longer guarantee his immunity from judicial action. On February 16, 2007, a request for extradition of Kissinger was filed at the Supreme Court of Uruguay on behalf of Bernardo Arnone, a political activist who was kidnapped, tortured and disappeared by the dictatorial regime in 1976.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  153. ben () says:

    Sonic

    Well bevan you guys always argue that every single death that happened in Russia between 1917 and 1990 in Russia is a direct result of “communism”

    Why does it not work the other way round?

    It does. Its just that capitalist democracies do not suffer famines, and their governments are unable to impose Great Leaps Forward, massive famines, and Cultural Revolutions on the population.

    Nobody is attributing natural deaths or war victims to communism. You can count 100 million dead from communism just by counting people worked to death in the gulags, or who were shot by the state or died in state-created famines.

    100 million.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  154. James () says:

    “You would say that as you know nothing about WW2 James?

    No change there then.”

    Can you identify anything in my statement that is untrue Sonic? Its uncontested that Stalin threw his peoples live away fighting the Germans ( not counting the ones he killed for all the other resons) and it was simply greater numbers and exhaustion (with Hitlers stupidity and Comrade winter playing major parts too) that beat the Germans.And from where was all that aid Stalin got coming ….? Oh yes…..America.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  155. ben () says:

    Phillip John

    The second half of your last post talking about Operation Condor was so much more sensible than everything else you write here I smelled a rat.

    Nice one.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  156. Bevan () says:

    “Bevan has been indulging in it constantly on this thread, attempting to make an apparatchik out of me because he can’t be bothered to understand what I’m saying.

    Well Ben why dont you refute me by detailing the positive aspects enjoyed by the citizens of communist coutries? Then weigh them against the attrocities…

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  157. phillipjohn () says:

    So I quoted from wikipedia and forgot to link it, oh no!

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  158. James () says:

    “Anyone that wants to see the ugliness that a militerist-capitalist state can create should watch this documentary.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=26CaVAy6vxU&mode=related&search=

    Penn and Teller debunked this crap on their show Bullshit.ballistics experts showed that a bullet striking someone in the back of the head causes a “jet” to emerge from the front pushing back the head…just as seen in the JFK shooting.

    Try again PJ

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  159. Bevan () says:

    Ben Wilson:
    “No I wasn’t. Nor are the millions of eggs the US has broken for their ideology fine by me.”

    Please detail these ‘millions of eggs’, or are you pulling facts out of your arse?

    “As for the moral subjectivity point, you are still yet to come up any intelligent rebuttal.

    Pot meet Kettle.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  160. Bevan () says:

    Ben Wilson:
    “No I wasn’t. Nor are the millions of eggs the US has broken for their ideology fine by me.”

    Please detail these ‘millions of eggs’, or are you pulling facts out of your arse?

    “As for the moral subjectivity point, you are still yet to come up any intelligent rebuttal.

    Pot meet Kettle.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  161. ben () says:

    Phillip John, actually its called passing off someone else’s ideas as your own, aka dishonesty. In your case its easy to spot, I’d be careful.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  162. Captain Crab () says:

    Ben, why are you surprised? PJ is only good at parroting others ideas. One of the perils of being a student with little life experience.
    Give him time though, he may grow up to be a sensible capitalist.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  163. phillipjohn () says:

    Penn and Teller !!!! Well the ballistics expert shown in the doumentray completly disagrees with those suckers. Watch and see.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  164. sonic () says:

    Thats right James, the whole Red Army that saved the world from fascism were just ants, not really human beings at all.

    Where to start with the victims of Capitalism Ben? The Atlantic Slave Trade? Colonialism? World War One? World War Two? Vietnam? Iraq?

    Heard of the Bengal famine?

    No-one is defending Stalinism, but look at the mote in your own eye before you climb on your high horse.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  165. James () says:

    Capitalism had nothing to do with Condor….it was all down to big government straying outside its area of legitimacy….again!

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  166. phillipjohn () says:

    “Phillip John, actually its called passing off someone else’s ideas as your own, aka dishonesty. In your case its easy to spot, I’d be careful.”

    I usually put in quotation marks and link – in this case I was to hasty to post. This may be a poor excuse, but it’s an honest reason.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  167. ben () says:

    Phillip John

    o I quoted from wikipedia and forgot to link it, oh no!

    Actually that’s bullshit, you remembered to deleted the spanish and portuguese at the start of the article.

    Integrity, my friend.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  168. James () says:

    “Thats right James, the whole Red Army that saved the world from fascism were just ants, not really human beings at all.”

    Its precisely the fact that they WERE human beings and that they were used and disposed of that is the issue for ignoramus.

    Where to start with the victims of Capitalism Ben? The Atlantic Slave Trade?”

    Unconsenting activity…Nothing to do with Capitalism.

    Colonialism?”

    Blatant disregard for property rights of others….nothing to do with Capitalism.

    World War One? World War Two? Vietnam? Iraq?”

    Statism and political power seeking…..nothing to do with Capitalism.

    “Heard of the Bengal famine?”

    And it had what to do with capitalism exactly?

    “No-one is defending Stalinism, but look at the mote in your own eye before you climb on your high horse.”

    Stop attacking strawmen and address the real causes of your examples Sonic.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  169. phillipjohn () says:

    “you remembered to deleted the spanish and portuguese at the start of the article.”

    and that means that I didn’t forget to quote and link why?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  170. Bevan () says:

    “Thats right James, the whole Red Army that saved the world from fascism were just ants, not really human beings at all.”

    Bwahahahahaha, damn that was funny! Dude, you do actually know there were a hell of a lot other countries that were involved in WW2 as well dont you? Please tell me you are not that dimwitted. BTW, you do know that when the Red Army ever advanced, the Comissars had quite a number of machine guns pointed towards the front line, although they wernt there to shoot the Germans, but rather at anyone who dared retreat.

    “Where to start with the victims of Capitalism Ben? The Atlantic Slave Trade? Colonialism? World War One? World War Two? Vietnam? Iraq?

    Please tell us how the Atlantic Slave Trade and Colonialism are a result of Capitalism, please I need a laugh…

    Oh and WW1, that was more a result of the complex treaty system the European countries of the time had in place and frankly had nothing to do with Capitalism. And WW2, um you do know that was started by the Germans right? Hitler and the Nazis hated free market capitalism, and especially the US brand. Vietnam: your stretching if you think you can link that to Capitalism, but again I need a laugh. Iraq – please tell me you know they invaded Kuwait in the early 90’s.

    Oh wait I think I get it, are you trying to say that the wars were started by capitalism just becasue the Yanks were involved?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  171. Matt Pilott () says:

    Just in general, hasn’t capitalism been largely responsible for an unequal global trade system whereby the rights of those in ‘have-not’ countries are ignored by those who ‘have’, whilst democratic governments look on?

    This system being largely responsible for the state of depravity within which over 2/3 of the worlds population live in. One child dying of hunger every three seconds. Things like that. Capitalism is the driving force behind this situation, it’s misleadingly termed ‘free trade’ despite the fact that there is no such thing, anywhere in the world. (and no – that doesn’t make communism better. Not one bit. Just an argument that Capitalism isn’t all sunshine, bunnies and Benjamins)

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  172. Greg Bourke () says:

    It’s disgracefully to see how attached people are to ideologies such as Communism of which they only possess a romantic intellectual experience.

    It’s notable the few commenting here that have practical experiecne are against Communism and those that lack personal experience attack red-herrings and strawmen. Oh and George Bush, cos he’s, like, worse than Hitler, man! Go back to the student union!

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  173. dad4justice () says:

    Great to see sonic the chronic has seen the light and is a regular poster over at Ian Wisharts blog , I knew Franksy would get off her your rocking horse and remove her thumb from her mouth one day, as she should be thankful as a recent arrival to this country .

    The communist supreme leader seems to have been caught out lying again over Silly Philly Titee affair , yawn , yawn ,……

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  174. cha () says:

    “Thats right James, the whole Red Army that saved the world from fascism were just ants, not really human beings at all.”

    Its precisely the fact that they WERE human beings and that they were used and disposed of that is the issue for ignoramus.

    Where to start with the victims of Capitalism Ben? The Atlantic Slave Trade?”

    Unconsenting activity…Nothing to do with Capitalism.

    Colonialism?”

    Blatant disregard for property rights of others….nothing to do with Capitalism.

    World War One? World War Two? Vietnam? Iraq?”

    Statism and political power seeking…..nothing to do with Capitalism.

    “Heard of the Bengal famine?”

    And it had what to do with capitalism exactly?

    “No-one is defending Stalinism, but look at the mote in your own eye before you climb on your high horse.”

    Stop attacking strawmen and address the real causes of your examples Sonic.

    Posted by James | May 24, 2007 3:23 PM

    FFS James, after reading this tripe I think you’ll give d4j a run for his money in the stupidest comment of the day awards.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  175. MrTips () says:

    I’m beginning to wonder if Karl du Fresne was right all along….

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  176. phD () says:

    Phillip John – noting your exceptionally high academic standards on display in this thread, can we expect you to apply similarly rigorous standards to your thesis? You know, like fact checking and citation of references? Because, as has been shown, you not only failed to cite your Wikipedia source, but then lied about it. Oh dear.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  177. sonic () says:

    Captalism was built on the slave trade, are you guys really as dumb as you act?

    As for capitalism and war, you dont get one without the other chaps.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  178. Redbaiter () says:

    “Where to start with the victims of Capitalism Ben? The Atlantic Slave Trade? Colonialism? World War One? World War Two? Vietnam? Iraq? ”

    Where to start with the brainwashed bullshit more like it. Good grief..!! You commies are so brain damaged its no wonder any country you get control of eventually goes tits up.

    The Atlantic Slave trade- participated in as much by the natives of Africa as anyone, and with equal enthusiasm, and resulting in generations of African Americans living today in the US, freed by the US civil war, who would otherwise be dying of famine or the other common and destructive outcomes of Socialist/ Communist government in Africa.

    Colonialism, without which the NZ Maori would have cannibalized himself into extinction.

    World War Two, saved millions of Jews from genocide at the hands of a totalitarian dictator and the German SOCIALIST worker’s party. What did you want Sonic, your good buddy Adolf to win?

    Vietnam, where communist aggression won the day thanks to their alliance with treasonists like Jane Fonda and so many others, who rejoiced when Hanoi fell and hundreds of thousands of Sth Vietnamese were annihilated by the invading communists.

    Iraq, where yet another murdering Stalinist dictator was deposed, a constitution written, a democratic system introduced and free elections held. Sonic and his mates want Saddam reinstalled right you disgusting propagandizing little slimebag???

    Such horrible people the left are.. nauseating.. utterly nauseating..

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  179. Rob Hosking () says:

    Colin wrote:

    “However, let me ask for one expample where democracy has truly worked. Never has, its just the spin thats different.”

    Depends what you mean by ‘worked’. Is it perfect? No, fo course not, because we don’t live in a perfect world.

    “Don’t get me wrong, I have no plans to live in any other system than democracy – just saying its not the wonderful be all system we would be lead to believe.”

    No, its not.

    But in a democracy you can say so, without being butchered for it or hauled off to ‘re-education camps’.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  180. Matt Pilott () says:

    Greg, from my reading of the comments, people aren’t actually defending the implementation of Communism, more the idea behind it. No-one’s actually saying it was good in countries such as Cambodia or the USSR. You’ve got a different perspective though, please share.

    And spare us all the anti-student rhetoric, stereotyping is so passe…

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  181. llew () says:

    “Such horrible people the left are.. nauseating.. utterly nauseating..”

    Um… there must be a word for this? Projecting your failings & prejudices onto others? But I cannot think of it offhand.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  182. J () says:

    “Just as we should never forget the Holocaust, likewise we should never forget the evils of communism.”

    can we have “an evils of fascism ” day too.

    “countries with all-powerful states, always end up with all-powerful supreme leaders.”

    I know it’s amazing how Bush can just ignore the opinions of his people, the Senate and Congress. The Republican Cabinet is a disgrace.Can we have their video tomorrow.

    The good news is that the American people are almost certainly going to vote in a much more socialist orientated leader. Power to the people.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  183. phillipjohn () says:

    “Capitalism had nothing to do with Condor….it was all down to big government straying outside its area of legitimacy….again!”

    This is semantics, they were ideologically capitalist states within capitalist countries (you can hardly say they were socialist states), just as the polit-bureau represented an ideologically communist state within a communist country.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  184. phillipjohn () says:

    “Capitalism had nothing to do with Condor….it was all down to big government straying outside its area of legitimacy….again!”

    This is semantics, they were ideologically capitalist states within capitalist countries (you can hardly say they were socialist states), just as the polit-bureau represented an ideologically communist state within a communist country.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  185. cha () says:

    The Atlantic Slave trade- participated in as much by the natives of Africa as anyone, and with equal enthusiasm, and resulting in generations of African Americans living today in the US, freed by the US civil war, who would otherwise be dying of famine or the other common and destructive outcomes of Socialist/ Communist government in Africa.

    Colonialism, without which the NZ Maori would have cannibalized himself into extinction.

    Posted by Redbaiter | May 24, 2007 3:41 PM

    Redbaiter, you’ve nailed it with this one sport, you win the award for stupidest comment of the day.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  186. Matt Pilott () says:

    “The Atlantic Slave trade- participated in as much by the natives of Africa as anyone, and with equal enthusiasm, and resulting in generations of African Americans living today in the US, freed by the US civil war, who would otherwise be dying of famine or the other common and destructive outcomes of Socialist/ Communist government in Africa.”

    -How many millions died for this one. How were their human rights over the centuries before emancipation? Ends justify Means for you I guess.

    “Colonialism, without which the NZ Maori would have cannibalized himself into extinction.”

    – Tell that to the American Indians

    “World War Two, saved millions of Jews from genocide at the hands of a totalitarian dictator and the German SOCIALIST worker’s party. What did you want Sonic, your good buddy Adolf to win?”

    – Yeah, the whole war was all about the Jews, nothing to do with nations’ self interest… Who cares that, for example, Poland lost 8% of its population.

    “Vietnam, where communist aggression won the day thanks to their alliance with treasonists like Jane Fonda and so many others, who rejoiced when Hanoi fell and hundreds of thousands of Sth Vietnamese were annihilated by the invading communists.”

    – That’s new to me-100,000’s of thousands of Sth Vietnamese what? Ants? So, what happened in Cambodia when the Vietnamese won? Pity they were on the wrong side, look where it is today…

    “Iraq, where yet another murdering Stalinist dictator was deposed, a constitution written, a democratic system introduced and free elections held. ”

    – Check out the life expectancy before and after, not to mention the provision of food, water and bomb-free marketplaces.

    Are these meant to be examples of unequivocal success? Or was that whole post left-wing satire? If so – you had me :)

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  187. cha () says:

    HONG KONG, May 22, 2007 – Villagers in southwest China erupted into violence after enduring two intense months of ruinous fines, mandated health checks for women followed by coerced abortions and sterilisations, confiscation of property and destruction of their homes for violating the one-child policy.

    The past four days have seen massive unrest in the autonomous Guangxi region, the New York Times reports, where native villagers and visitors say thousands of rioters enraged over the stepped-up population control measures have destroyed government offices, overturned vehicles, and clashed with police forces.

    In Bobai County, witnesses described one assault launched by thousands of peasants upon the government offices of Shapi Township. Villagers smashed through the wall surrounding the government complex, and then sacked the offices, smashing computers and destroying documents, before setting the building afire.

    Accounts give conflicting reports of deaths and injuries in the battle and ensuing clash with riot police, but some assert as many as five people have been killed, including three officials responsible for enforcing the harsh measures.

    Officials had imposed an unbearable “social child-raising fee” that retroactively punished any one-child policy violators since 1980 starting at 500 yuan ($65 US) to as ruinously high as 70,000 yuan ($9000 US). Witnesses said officials sent out “family planning work squads” to collect the tax even from violators who had paid previous punishing fines and that officials in Bobai County claim to have collected 7.8 million yuan in “social child-raising fees” from February through the end of April.

    Families who refused or could not pay the fines were forced to have their homes searched and belongings confiscated.

    “Worst of all, the gangsters used hammers and iron rods to destroy people’s homes, while threatening that the next time it would be with bulldozers,” a local peasant calling himself Nong Sheng told the Times.

    A Chinese student named Zhou told the UK-based Guardian that his family received a fine of 2,000 yuan for having three sons in the 1980s, but his uncle, who has five children, must pay an impossible 20,000 yuan. “He only earns 1,200 yuan per month … But if you cannot pay, the officials come to your home and confiscate the contents. If you refuse, then smash, smash, smash.”

    “Taking to the streets in protest is the only way the Chinese have of expressing their opinion,” Steven Mosher, President of Population Research Institute, commented to LifeSiteNews.com. Mosher was one of the first social scientists to have access to China’s rural population in the early 1980s and exposed China’s brutal abortion and sterilisation campaign as part of its one-child policy. Mosher added that he had seen entire “prefectures and counties” rise up against the one-child policy followed by the predictable heavy-handed government response.

    “China is developing economically and there is a growing desire on the part of Chinese for more freedom and part of the freedom they would like to enjoy is the freedom to decide for themselves the number and spacing of their children,” Mosher said.

    However, the Chinese government responds to more to the influence of the United Nations and International Planned Parenthood, which praise the one-child policy, which has led to more than 40 million men in China unable to find wives, and tens of millions of women and their unborn children harmed by forced abortions each year.

    “The one child policy will have to end sooner or later because it has been a disaster for China,” said Mosher. “So far 28 years into the policy [the government] show no signs of recognising the obvious.”

    Reports of the riots have reached western journalists at the same time as the United States begins to hold high-level trade talks today with China over its $232.5 billion trade deficit, which accounts for one-third of the US total record deficit of $765.3 billion. The trade gap has angered a number of US lawmakers although it is uncertain whether President Bush will address China’s human rights abuses as China has warned the US not to “politicise” their economic relationship.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  188. Duncan Bayne () says:

    > It’s disgracefully to see how attached people
    > are to ideologies such as Communism of which
    > they only possess a romantic intellectual
    > experience.

    But simple observation should lead people to draw the correct conclusions; witness for example the fact that people are willing to risk life & limb to swim shark-infested waters from Cuba to the USA … but not the other way around. Or the fact that people are starving in North Korea, but not South Korea.

    I guess the question is: why do people evade reality w.r.t. communism?

    My theory is that it’s because communism is the perfect expression of the political values they support. If they admit that communism is evil, then they have to admit that the ideals they’re working towards are also evil.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  189. Redbaiter () says:

    “Check out the life expectancy before and after, not to mention the provision of food, water and bomb-free marketplaces.’

    One of the things that is so boring about commies, their sappy faith in the bigoted ramblings of today’s left controlled mainstream media..

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  190. cha () says:

    Oh thats so nice, someone likes my name so much they c/p an entire article from wherever.

    Well done, twat.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  191. Andrew W () says:

    Capitalism is an economic system in which goods and services are traded between private organisations and individuals in a free market, Communism is a system in which the state owns a nations assets and the level and type of production of goods and services is determined by the state through central planning.

    The free market is, I think, more efficient at producing goods and services and better at producing goods for which there is a demand.

    You clowns are trying to blame and credit capitalism and communism with events that would have had nothing to do with the capitalism/communism nature of a given state.
    As far as sweatshops go, there are sweatshops in china and there were sweatshops in Dickensian England.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  192. dad4justice () says:

    Thank you for that informative post about China cha – our new red trade partner is a true tribute to communism . Oh dear , my, my….poor people ,my ,my …..fly the red flag ,my, my ……..

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  193. sonic () says:

    Thanks good there are people out there brave enough to justify the Atlantic slave trade.

    As long as these brave fighters against the nanny state, stifling ,PC, anti-servitude consensus exist then not all is lost.

    Next week, looking at how well modern Germany is doing how can anyone say Hitlerism was a mistake?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  194. Matt Pilott () says:

    Huh – I thought the Right and Big Business owned it – I guess that’s just what the media told me.. Bit of a paradox :-)

    Those wizards at Disney with those bomb sites though – they look so real!!!!

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  195. sonic () says:

    Come on Matt, any so called “fact” that contradicts RB must have been manufactured by the left-wing media.

    What other possible explanation can there be?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  196. sonic () says:

    “Capitalism is an economic system in which goods and services are traded between private organisations and individuals in a free market”

    Capitalism Andrew also requires a state structure. You cannot seperate one from the other.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  197. phillipjohn () says:

    “But simple observation should lead people to draw the correct conclusions; witness for example the fact that people are willing to risk life & limb to swim shark-infested waters from Cuba to the USA … but not the other way around.”

    I seriously doubt that anyone posting here wants to live in a communist country. In fact, my guess is that most of of the people criticising the more extreme right-wing governments want actually liek he idea of social democracy – you know, like the Scandinavian ones that don’t invade other countries 100 times weaker than them. The ones that abide by international law and generally act as good responsible global citizens, the ones that have the best social statistics in the world .. etc

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  198. Billy () says:

    Sonic: As for capitalism and war, you dont get one without the other chaps

    So pre-european maori were capitalists. And Alexander the Great.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  199. sonic () says:

    Billy if you took all of the victims of pre-colonial maori war and added all of the dead soldiers of Alexander the Great’s time you might manage to reach 1/100th of the casualties of the 1st day of the battle of the Somme.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  200. Andrew W () says:

    “Capitalism Andrew also requires a state structure.”

    Of course, that state structure doesn’t usurp the role of the market though, when it does we call it socialism.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  201. Johnphillip () says:

    WARSAW, May 22, 2007 – Back-to-back rallies in Poland are highlighting the growing struggle in that country to defend the sanctity of human life and the natural family. Increasing assaults by the internationalist abortion and homosexual movement on the social order, defined in Poland for centuries by Catholic social teaching, prompted the League of Polish Families to initiate an annual March for Life and Family. Although there was no media advertising, the 2nd annual March doubled its numbers from 2000 in 2006 to over 4000 as more Poles become aware of the growing threat to their traditional way of life.

    “This year’s attendance shows that Polish people begin to realize the need to speak up for the family. Especially now, when Poland just failed to pass a right-to-life amendment to the Constitution, although polls showed that the majority of people want the law to protect human life from conception to natural death,” said Lukasz Wrobel, one of the organizers of the event.
    The march came the day after the first legal “Gay Pride” parade was allowed in the ancient capital under pressure from the European Union. Homosexual organizers had anticipated a crowd of 10,000 but the day saw only 4000 with supporters brought into the country to participate.

    Education Minister Roman Giertych addressed the youthful pro-life and pro-family crowd. He told PAP news service, “I think that one has to oppose what happened here yesterday. Revolting pederasts came here from many countries and tried to impose their propaganda on us.”

    Participants, overwhelmingly young people and families with children, marched to the sound of gospel and popular Christian music, and were joined by several prominent politicians and pro-family parliamentarians, including MP Krzysztof Bosak. Bosak, at 24 years old, the second youngest person ever elected to the Polish Sejm, addressed the crowd saying, “We are very much concerned about the pressures from the international sexual minorities lobby and their growing demands.”

    “The people of Poland deserve protection from these destructive ideologies, especially children at schools should be spared homosexual indoctrination. We will not give up, too much is at stake.”

    Organizers criticized Polish media for underreporting and downplaying the event. March for Life and Family spokesman Maciej Koper said, “Reporters of one commercial TV news channel waited until the march was finished and all the people gone, then they showed an empty square and said that we just had 50 people participating.” The international homosexual press claimed the pro-life and family march had just 800 participants.

    “For some reason, these journalists did not want to show young, smiling people, nor families, nor children. It seems that they were searching for controversy and strange images of the pro-life crowd. That’s what worries us – the media that seem to be willing to sacrifice fairness and objectivism, to push anti-life and anti-family messages. This is not journalism, this is activism. We are sorry to observe it in our country,” said Koper.

    Warsaw Mayor Hanna Gronkiewicz Walz refused to ban the homosexual parade, telling Polish radio that she had no grounds. She cited a ruling earlier this month by the European Court of Human Rights that Warsaw’s former Mayor Lech Kaczynski – now Poland’s President – had acted illegally in banning previous gay pride marches.

    Last week, however, Giertych risked internationalist wrath when he unveiled draft legislation, sponsored by Krzysztof Bosak, that would make it a crime to “promote homosexual propaganda” in schools. The bill is already under attack by international organizations, including Amnesty International that last week claimed it would “deprive students of their rights to free expression and free association

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  202. phillipjohn () says:

    “Capitalism Andrew also requires a state structure”

    common sonic that’s just not true – The libertairains have a dream, a dream that one day, people will be free from the tyranny of the nanny state. Corporate private armies will gently stroll the streets at night, keeping us all safe and sound, Wackenhut will have a nice comfy bed in a nice private prison for anyone who falls through the cracks/canyons that result from the market. Poor kids will go to the poor schools, and the righteous sons and daughters of the market warriors will go to the rich schools.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  203. Matt Pilott () says:

    Andrew surely you don’t believe in the ‘free market’? The state intervenes in, and tries to control, the market on a daily basis. So the whole planet is under the auspices of socialism?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  204. Andrew W () says:

    PJ, Libertarianism is not Anarchism

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  205. Redbaiter () says:

    “Thanks good there are people out there brave enough to justify the Atlantic slave trade.”

    As usual, the only strategy this little commie propagandist has is to try and drag the discussion off topic. You’re the one attempting the justification Sonic- of totalitarian mass murderers and communism.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  206. Matt Pilott () says:

    RedBaiter, wasn’t the topic to which that post refers to actually talking about whether Capitalism was better/as bad/worse?

    It had nothing to do with “the justification … of totalitarian mass murderers and communism.”, you just made that up.

    You’re taking us for a tangent here, not the other way around.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  207. Andrew W () says:

    “The state intervenes in, and tries to control, the market on a daily basis.”

    Yes, States intervene in the market place, so we don’t have Laissez-faire markets, we do still have working market economies though.

    “So the whole planet is under the auspices of socialism?”

    The Western market economies are described as “mixed” economies.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  208. Mr I.P .Freely () says:

    CREATIVE NZ gets all its printing done in china,and ,vietnam ,now, PRINTERS in NZ have been shut out and they send everything to china and other asia slave labour hell holes. I pay taxes to support these tossier orgs ,ie CREATIVE NZ ,AUCKLAND UNIVERSITY but ITS CHEAP IN CHINA AND THE TRIP TO SHAGHIA WAS GREAT, ,the singsong boy for the gay in the party was enjoyed to , AND THE SUPPLIED GIRLS WERE GREAT werent they CREATIVE NZ ,

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  209. Billy () says:

    Sonic: As for capitalism and war, you dont get one without the other chaps

    I suppose that is true if one includes within the definition of capitalism, such well known capitalist systems as pre-European Maori, Spartans and the Vikings.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  210. Andrew W () says:

    “The Western market economies are described as “mixed” economies.”

    Should have read:The Western democracies economies are described as “mixed” economies.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  211. phillipjohn () says:

    “PJ, Libertarianism is not Anarchism”

    you know, you’re really splitting hairs here. i.e. what’s the difference between a libertarian objectivist like Ayne Rand and a Right wing anarchist like Robert Nozick? (actually he’s been called a libertarian as well, which kind of illustrates my point)

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  212. Billy () says:

    But that’s not what you said, Sonic. You said that, without capitalism, there is NO war.

    Were you just lying to make your position sound bettr, you naughty little hedgehog?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  213. Matt Pilott () says:

    Andrew – point taken, I thought you were implying that only Socialist regimes intervene in markets (when you actually said usurp the market, different story)

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  214. Andrew W () says:

    Sonic and I agree that Capitalism requires a state structure, are you saying this is untrue? Are you saying that Libertarians oppose any state structure? If so could you please give a quote by a Libertarian to this effect?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  215. James () says:

    “Capitalism is an economic system in which goods and services are traded between private organisations and individuals in a free market”

    Capitalism Andrew also requires a state structure. You cannot separate one from the other.”

    Its true a Capitalist economy requires an objective body that protects individual rights,enforces laws that protect those rights and runs the agenies that do so….but that’s it,nothing else.No meddling in the economy,nor in moral issues except those pertaining to individual rights protection.Libertarians/Classic liberals support having limited Government to carry out this role….its as obviously necessary as having a referee in a rugby match.

    But when the State steps into those areas that don’t involve rights protection the problems start.The State, to preform any other function, must become a rights violator itself and start subjectively picking and choosing who will win and lose from its largess.That is why Libertarians/free marketeers want Government to be strong and competent….but limited and its role clearly defined.

    “Captalism was built on the slave trade, are you guys really as dumb as you act?”

    No it wasn’t and you are a bare faced liar for saying so.Capitalism made slavery redundant because free people with a stake in creating wealth for themselves outperformed slaves with no such incentive.It was the Capitalist North that fought the slave owning South remember?

    “As for capitalism and war, you dont get one without the other chaps.”

    Again bullshit.War is the health of the state and politicians….indeed war can only happen if the State exceeds its role of protecting rights and becomes an aggressor and barrier to the liberty of the citizens. Capitalism, when practiced, prevents wars by opening borders to trade.People getting rich by trade have little incentive to want war.

    When goods don’t cross borders armies will….

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  216. Owen McShane () says:

    Not quite “One Bad Idea”.

    Socialism is the dark side of the Enlightenment tradition.
    Fascism is the dark side of the Romantic Tradition.

    Communism (as implemented in the Soviet Union, China, Cambodia, and North Korea) combines Socialism and Fascism into a single deadly brew.
    So maybe three bad ideas.
    (See my essay “The Rise of the Urban Romantics” for the latest expression of the dark side of Romanticism.)

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  217. James () says:

    But Capitalism (free trade) was in action long before States were created.Just as human rights have existed since day one and law and Government then evolved spontaneously to protect them….not the other way round.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  218. Owen McShane () says:

    Sorry, you can download it here.
    http://www.rmastudies.org.nz/documents/UrbanRomanticsUS.pdf

    The full title is “The Rise of Urban Romanticism or The New Road to Serfdom.”

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  219. Mr I.P .Freely () says:

    To SONIC and the rest of you posters do you think you will notice 1300 million stressed cancerious toxit chinese sitting on your collective faces, and your jobs are in the BIG RUBBISH BIN, no you could allways post, and not notice, FOOLS

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  220. Andrew W () says:

    “human rights have existed since day one and law and Government then evolved spontaneously to protect them….not the other way round.”

    And here James and I disagree, “human rights” are whatever “rights” people judge humans to have. They are not universal and objective but vary from nation to nation and generation to generation.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  221. John Dalley () says:

    Dick4J.

    Nice to see that you are of your medication again, It’s been so much fun just scanning down the treads whaching your marble slowly drop out your ass.
    I was probably over-optimistic that after your 3 bannings’ from this site that any future contributions might become more intelligent. O! Well not going to happen.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  222. dad4justice () says:

    John Dalley wipe the shit from your wimpish mouth you gutless snake !!

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  223. Andrew W () says:

    I find this blokes way of looking at things interesting Owen, I think his perspective is more related to a study of human nature and less idiologically based.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_Tainter

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  224. Anon () says:

    Dick4Jerk: have you followed up on your threat to beat up 15-year old James Sleep? You come across as a bitter and twisted man – with very little common sense to boot.

    Nice Daddy, yeah right!

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  225. James () says:

    “human rights have existed since day one and law and Government then evolved spontaneously to protect them….not the other way round.”

    And here James and I disagree, “human rights” are whatever “rights” people judge humans to have. They are not universal and objective but vary from nation to nation and generation to generation.”

    And this is a nonsense because human beings ARE human beings regardless of what time or place they live in.A peasant in Roman Britain and a accountant in 2007 Manhattan are as human as each other and therefore have the same intrinsic,individual rights regardless of the societal circumstances they are in.Mans rights are derived from our nature AS human beings…just as what’s “right” for a fish, a tree or a lion to do are naturally derived from the natures of those entities.

    Before anyone try s to say I must be basing this on “faith” I will say its nothing of the sort.Its based on observation of man’s nature as man and the requirements the OBJECTIVE universe we are in and that spawned us (How and by who/what is irrelevant)that we must respect and follow if we are to live as human beings with all that entails..

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  226. Patrick Dunford () says:

    To all apologists for Russia and China:
    There never would be a communist state that wouldn’t seek military might, as they have been involved in offensive military action worldwide. So, please, no more posts defending the military might of Communist countries on the grounds of defending themselves, because in all cases they have got themselves involved in spreading and promoting their revolution in other countries, in many cases a long, long way from their shores.

    In reality Russia was always going to spend that huge proportion of their GDP on a big military, because their ideology says that all their citizens are just State slaves and can be sacrificed for the greater good of the cause. This really cut in in a big way in World War II, when some of the big battles, like Stalingrad, were won not by superior military tactics, but by sheer force of numbers…cannon fodder.

    The reason labour costs are so cheap in China is that the communist government screws down wages and working conditions. Most of the countries with the cheapest labour costs have totalitarian governments seeking to line their own pockets, not concerned in the slightest with the wellbeing of their citizens.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  227. James Sleep () says:

    Fuck I hate you d4j , you mungrel bastird face

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  228. Andrew W () says:

    “A peasant in Roman Britain and a accountant in 2007 Manhattan are as human as each other and therefore have the same intrinsic,individual rights”

    But if you ask them both to define those “rights” you will get 2 very different answers, so those “rights” are subjective, not objective.
    James doesn’t stand at a priviledged point from which he is able to judge those “right” in objective terms while those who disagree with him are, in objective terms, wrong.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  229. Murray () says:

    Ah the child joins in with some of that well known socialist debating skill.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  230. Peak Oil Conspiracy () says:

    Why does Phillip John have to preach like a know-it-all? Peak oil, economics, peak oil, peak oil, economics… is there no limit to this guy’s talents?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  231. Murray () says:

    Only his grasp of reality.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  232. James () says:

    But if you ask them both to define those “rights” you will get 2 very different answers, so those “rights” are subjective, not objective.”

    Man’s rights are objective regardless of the limited knowledge or opinion of either one or anyone else for that matter.An ignorance of the lethality of cyanide to humans doesn’t change the FACT that it IS lethal.If both said that eating and breathing weren’t right for a human to do would that change the fact that they most certainly are?

    “James doesn’t stand at a priviledged point from which he is able to judge those “right” in objective terms while those who disagree with him are, in objective terms, wrong.”

    People who lived and died before I was born said and understood what I have whilst people living today are ignorant of it so its not a matter of hindsight although history provides ample evidence to show its correct.Facts are objective because we live in a universe that has absolutes….truth vs falsehood,life vs death….they are absolutes regardless of who says otherwise or how great their number…

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  233. James () says:

    Andrew…you seem to be confusing man made State decreed “rights”(privileges) with the natural,intrinsic rights of man by virtue of his BEING man I am referring to.

    Regardless of time and place would you not agree that its most certainly right for a man to seek to acquire food,water,air,a mate to breed with, a place to build and live on etc? That these rights to be rights are not dependant on anyone else’s permission?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  234. Andrew W () says:

    “Man’s rights are objective regardless of the limited knowledge or opinion of either one or anyone else for that matter.An ignorance of the lethality…”

    Here you are talking about phisiological requirements

    “People who lived and died before I was born said and understood what I have whilst people living today are ignorant of it so its not a matter of hindsight although history provides ample evidence to show its correct.”

    Don’t get your point.

    “Facts are objective because we live in a universe that has absolutes….truth vs falsehood,life vs death….they are absolutes regardless of who says otherwise or how great their number…”

    Yep, scientific facts are objective, what has that to do with human “rights”?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  235. Andrew W () says:

    “..would you not agree that its most certainly right for a man to seek to acquire food,water,air,a mate to breed with, a place to build and live on etc?”

    We have an instinct to seek these things.

    “That these rights to be rights are not dependant on anyone else’s permission?”

    In reality our ability to satify these needs are dependent on many factors, including the rules of the society we live in. You may see yourself as having the right to shelter, chucking your neighbour out of his house may satisfy this need, this is however likely to break societies rules, resulting in you being provided with alternative accomodation.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  236. AndyL () says:

    PJ said… When Saddam was massacaring his own people, with weapons the US supplied him with, the US continued to supply him with weapons.

    PJ, are you fuck’n daft? It seems that you are. Suppose you run over some on the road, who do you blame? The car manufacturer of the fuck’n driver. Saddam would have massacred his populations with or without the US weapons. Can you see that? If you can’t see that , then I suggest that you go and withdraw your course in LLB/LLM or whatever then put in an application to study engineering (mechanical, electrical, chemical, civil, engineering science) or perhaps science, so that your brain cells can learn to process information intelligently. Why you’re so fuck’n daft, because you think that law is an intellectual subject, nope, if you failed to be admitted to science ,engineering or other courses that require real intelligence, then I am surprise you ended up enrolling for law.

    Stop trying to act as an intellectual because your background in law is a field that requires no intelligence. Your IQ shows it all, it gives you the idea that Saddam wouldn’t have committed those massacres if the US didn’t supply him weapons. How unintelligent is your comment, heh?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  237. kiwi_donkey () says:

    So AndyL, can you recommend a good car dealer? I’m hoping to pick up some cluster bombs and a good RPG launcher.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  238. Adolf Fiinkensein () says:

    Reading this thread leads one to conclude that few of the participants have yet learnt to shave.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  239. Clint Heine () says:

    I see that the level of debate is no better from when I left it.

    It’s a pity I can’t send some of you into Europe so you can preach your nonsense. You try telling a 30 something guy from Budapest that capitalism is equally as bad as communism.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  240. Murray () says:

    Well not their palms certainly Adolf.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  241. Aftershave () says:

    I’m with John Dalley – “Dick4Jack-off” is an unreformed nutjob who adds nothing to Kiwiblog. And to think he threatened to smash a 15-year-old boy’s head in???

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  242. James Sleep () says:

    Stop the crap James Sleep please . Who owns the blog ?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  243. Mr I.P .Freely () says:

    D4j, why do you repond to the apes throwing coconuts at you from the trees , just dodge and smile,and know you are further up the evolutionary chain, than the snide coconut throwers who post here.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  244. Blogger () says:

    Nice try you dumbass. Looks like we have an imposter masquerading as James Sleep?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  245. Duh! () says:

    Oh yes IP Freely – go on down to the rose bushes you precious little petal.

    D4J is a shining knight in armour, you say? By his own admission he’s been assessed under the Mental Health Act. He’s apparently a regular customer in the court system. And he certainly comes across as a bitter and twisted old man on this blog.

    IP Freely and D4J in nutjob solidarity. Priceless!

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  246. libertyscott () says:

    It is revoltingly remarkably how so many can use this thread to diminish the most brutal political experiment in human history.

    Comments that take away for one moment how despicable Marxism-Leninism is and has been, are like saying “Yes he murdered someone, but so did other people” as if it lessens it.

    Apologists for Marxism-Leninism should be considered no better than Nazi-apologists. There is no “but” when a system is set up to enslave the entire population.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  247. emmess () says:

    I just watched the video link after reading through the first 50 or so comments
    And I just want to say I am absoluteley sickened how the leftists on this blog can defend a mass murdering ideology of the sort shown in the clip

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  248. ChickenLittle () says:

    Pure comedy folks, thanks for all the laughs.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  249. Mr I.P .Freely () says:

    Hi Duh , dont you like bitter twisted old men, THAT PRICELESS ,dont you intend to grow old ,and some of the fuckwits on the street and in power and some posters on this site (LOOK IN A MIRROR POSTERS)can make you bitter and twisted, and shit im not 60 yet (an old fart but im a old fart not a dead young tossier ) HA sit on that DUH, ps D4J could be your neighbour,:) :)

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  250. Duh! () says:

    Actually I think D4J is bitter and twisted for his own personal reasons – completely unrelated to age. But, as others have rightly commented, his deranged rantings on this and other blogs does his cause absolutely no good at all.

    And I seriously doubt that D4J lives next door. He has said that he lives within a stone’s throw of a certain prison in Christchurch. And frequents Hagley Park. So his usual haunts are, shall we say, far removed from mine :)

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  251. J () says:

    “It is revoltingly remarkably how so many can use this thread to diminish the most brutal political experiment in human history.”

    Libertyscoff, It’s more revolting that the dictatorships of Stalin and Mao are used as a deflection from the inefficiencies and abuses of our current economic path. The “more unchecked power to big business, less to the people” path.

    And the reason we’ll never see a Mao in this part of the world is because of the constant challenging of power by the so called “elite left” (freedom fighters) to greedy powerful unelected leaders. When that stops (or is stopped) we are in trouble. Power to the people means the people are allowed to challenge imbalances of power where ever they lie.

    Stalin and Mao were brutal products of their time; they are not representative of any kind of people’s movement. The people never backed them. They gained power through the vacuum left by their corrupt ruling class predecessors.

    Stop misinterpreting history for the convenience of insane corporate agendas.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  252. J-Walker () says:

    Oh lookie here – our resident “J for Jackass” is back in town!

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  253. J is a Jackass () says:

    J you insensitive tosser. You call it moral equivalence to compare communist murderers with modern-day corporates??? Fuck you and the horse you rode in on.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  254. Redbaiter () says:

    “There is no “but” when a system is set up to enslave the entire population.”

    Exactly, and these commies have the arrogance to refer to African slaves. What about a whole nation of slaves. What about the productive sector of NZ who are slaves to the perversion of democracy that these unproductive leftist call the electoral process??

    The fact is Sonic (and all the rest) its clear you’re commies. You know you are. I know you are. Any objective observer would have to agree. Why don’t you just come out and admit it? Put aside the charade and the deceit. Be honest with yourself (for once). If you were to do that simple thing, I might even find it in me to muster some microscopic infinitesimally small spark of respect for you.

    You know what the big give away is? Your mindset. The words you write here, that are never ever concerned with liberty or freedom. You never mention these concepts. You never use these words. You never think of these things. All you ever write here are calls for bigger more powerful government and measures that will diminish the status of the individual. All you ever write here is pro big government collectivist propaganda. Examples of your self hate and your envy and your obsession to control. You’re full of it. Like all good communists, its all you know.

    BTW, I made a small error in my reference to the phrase commonly identified as underpinning communism, using “from” where I should have used “to”. The correct phrase is – From each according to ability, to each according to need. (In actuality just a euphemism for legislative theft.)

    Apparently none of the “social democrats” on here wanted to discuss the fact that this phrase also encapsulates their own political outlook anyway. Now why would that be?? I’ll tell you. They know its solid evidence that such terms as “social democrat” and “socialist” and all the rest of those pathetic euphemisms are just camouflage. Call them commies… they are commies… and if they had any balls, they’d admit it, not only to everyone else, but to themselves.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  255. dad4justice () says:

    What the heck bombarded by some many angles, however water off a ducks back and to all the undue criticism and cynicism from gutless made in New Zealand wimps, who remain anonymous speaks volume for your pitiful cowardly characters. Your barrage of intimidation levelled at my integrity is a reflection of your own inadequacies and your rejection as a functioning credible member of anything worthwhile. Your often sickening personal attacks have degenerated into a rebellion unleashing the fury of your hostility and obnoxious backstabbing, which is typical from the jellyfish socialists writings that is manifested in anarchistic behaviour toward anything that challenges your corrupt communist authority. To my critics, you must have really shallow and boring lives, do us a big favour and please continue your verbal assaults as your frustration is obvious even to a blind mad women. Oh it’s so much fun being an Internet villain, its a bit like a Geber fighting the many witless windbags that resemble Enosh . Cheers big ears – what feeble, fragile communist arse lickers .

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  256. Mrs Disgusted () says:

    Dick4Jerk farts: “Your often sickening personal attacks”

    Hello PETER BURNS – take another look at the personal attacks you’ve made on this thread against, oh, Phil, Danyl, Sam Dixon (did you think Dykson was, um, witty?) et al.

    But when you are the subject of a personal attack, it is all too much to bear isn’t it?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  257. Mr I.P .Freely () says:

    I still hate the way the govt and that slave labour /communist country CHINA is deverstating my industry, printing here and in Australia.SHIT the govt ,creative nz and various universities ,SAY the price is right, CHINA is a toxic dump and they still put the bullet in the back of the heads, of disident workers ,HELEN C dosnt worry about carbon miles, SHIT IM A PROUD( GOLD MEDAL WINNING PRIDE IN PRINT) TRADEMAN ,looking forward to extinction,by some, CHEAP,dangerous,polutting factory in a toxic part of communist china and HELENS govt supports this. usless shits(MY THOUGHTS)

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  258. Utopialand () says:

    Can we have a “utopian” from you please D4J? You haven’t met your daily targets.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  259. Greenjacket () says:

    Fascism was an utterly vile political experiment. Apologists for fascism are a sick fringe who are rightly held up for public ridicule and disdain.

    Equally, there are still apologists for the equally despicable political experiment of communism. Step forward Ben Wilson and Sonic.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  260. Anon () says:

    Greenjacket – you can safely add J to the list (see 9:25 PM comment)

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  261. peter () says:

    I think you are getting the word ‘communism’ confused with the word ‘dictatorship’.

    But whatever… keep on bleating.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  262. dad4justice () says:

    That dam fish odour again Mrs Disgusting please close your legs madam speaker .

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  263. Mrs Disgusted () says:

    Perhaps you should have closed your legs, PETER BURNS. How many children did you have again? Oops!

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  264. Clint Heine () says:

    Hey poxy J, I see you’re still spinning the same tired old lines. Did you study that at University or did these ideas just float into that space between your ears one day.

    Have you ever been to an ex communist country or are you one of those people who has never left his village?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  265. Mrs Disgusted () says:

    Attention PETER BURNS: are you still trying to think of a decent comeback after all this time? Try googling “Family Court” and “police” for assistance with a personal insult.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  266. dad4justice () says:

    Mrs Disgusting I have many children and I am thankful I don’t live in communist China . I can’t stand the smell around here, as it gives me flashbacks of a crayfishing boat days . Good night you horrible venomous sea snake .

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  267. Anon () says:

    This thread is a breath of fresh air without smelly D4J farts.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  268. Kent Parker () says:

    To Patrick and others who doubt the ingenuity of the Russians in WWII. It wasn’t just sheer numbers that won the war, it was superior weaponry as well, namely the T-34 tank and the Russian ability to relocate factories to Siberia and mass produce 50,000 of them. The T-34 was superior to the German panzers at the time, on a battlefield in which tanks were crucial, and they kept modifying as the Germans modified theirs. The US supplied them with all their trucks and jeeps so they could focus on tank production.

    Stalingrad allowed the Russians time to build up their forces until they were superior to the Germans, a similar process to that which happened with the British between the Battle of Britain and El Alamein. It wasn’t Stalin who won the war but his two generals, and nothing much good happened until Stalin learned to take a back seat to them and leave them to it, which was about the time of Stalingrad.

    Tank for tank, the battle of Kursk was equally matched between Germany and Russia, but the Russians were fighting for their motherland (which runs deeper than any communist ideology) and won setting the Germans into permanent retreat. Another weapon the Russians designed and built was rocket powered artillary, forerunner to the technology they used to beat the Americans into space (who relied on the ex German von Braun for their entire space programme).

    For a good example of human cannon fodder you only have to visit the trenches of WWI. 60,000 Brits were gunned down by German machine guns in one day under orders from the British aristocracy.

    I am not an apologist for communism. Politics and war are complex and cannot be reduced to simplistic communist vs capitalist tit for tats. The ideal is probably some kind of healthy balance between the two, with a ‘mixed’ economy as has been suggested involving public ownership of education, health, justice, roading, national parks, water and other essential services and private ownership of other goods and services and residential and commercially zoned land. Our ‘left’ and ‘right’ wing governments merely play political football with where the boundary lies between private and public, and the overall picture changes little.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  269. Ben Wilson () says:

    Andrew W re James, I’ve had this subjectivity/objectivity argument at length with James. I did originally get the impression he was capable of at least understanding the other side of the argument, even if he disagreed, but I’ve since revised that. He basically doesn’t or will not understand what you are saying, and he considers that an argument in itself. I’ll have another go but it’s going to be the last.

    Firstly James, the logic. Do you understand that some statements are subjective? Do you actually get what the word means or are we simply arguing at cross purposes? By subjective I mean a statement whose truth is entirely relative to who is saying it. The example I gave is “Oysters taste nice”. Some people like them, some people hate them. So clearly the first kind think the statement is true and the second kind think it is false. Is one of them right? Do you reject entirely that this sentence does not have any absolute truth to it at all? Do you think that whether oysters are nice is something there will eventually be a consensus on? Some scientist will show once and for all that oysters are, in fact, yucky?

    If you do reject it, I’d like to know how you could even imaginably ever find the truth to this statement. Even if God does know the answer, how the hell can *we* know? Does that not make it *practically* subjective?

    If you don’t, then you are not lost. Some statements are subjective. Cool. Moving on.

    Now consider the possibility that moral statements are like this. I know to date this thought can’t enter your head, but just suspend disbelief for a second. What if they are? Does life end? Does the earth disappear into a black hole? Or do we just have a more complicated theory? I’ll pretend you’re rational enough to accept the last alternative. What I want to know is why you reject that more complicated theory outright, without argument, on faith. So far I have heard from you no arguments whatsoever. Just assertions that moral statements must be absolute.

    Perhaps it’s hard to imagine. Certainly people struggle with it, just as they struggle with calculus. Doesn’t mean calculus is all bullshit though.

    So, for instance, a statement that “x is a right” could conceivably not have a truth to it. It could only be true *for a person* or *for a group*. In which case the only way to parse the sentence back out into absolute truths is to say “Y believes that X is a right” where Y can be an individual or a group. Perhaps we might not know what Y believes, and perhaps they don’t even have a belief on the matter, but either way there is a fact of the matter. If they don’t have a belief then the statement is false. Perhaps you don’t like applying the true/false dichotomy to belief, saying there are shades or degrees of belief (I personally like that theory myself, despite it being unfortunately more complicated too), but it doesn’t matter. There is still a truth to the matter of whether they have that belief at that level.

    Which brings us to the possibility that all ethics is reducible to belief rather than fact. You believe in certain rights, but that doesn’t make them absolute facts, other than that they are absolute facts about you.

    And if there is one thing absolutely certain about ethical statements, it is that people will have different degrees of belief in them. It is perhaps the most controversial subject of all time. I can’t think of one ethical question that isn’t simply a matter of logic, that has *ever* been solved to the satisfaction of all. Even if such a question exists, it’s a rare beast.

    I put it to you the reason it is so controversial is because it is not something that is about facts, other than facts about our beliefs. It is basically people stating their preferences. Just like “I like oysters”.

    If you want to then ask why do I have ethical arguments, the answer is obvious. I have my beliefs. In arguing with you I’m seeking to alter your beliefs to be like mine. In some cases my views are not clear, even to me, so I’m seeking clarity, seeking beliefs that will fit into the rest of my belief matrix. That would be you convincing me. It can go both ways, and in some cases it can be a worthwhile thing to do.

    Of course a great deal of the time it goes nowhere, like this thread. Argument degenerates into “fuck you and the horse you rode in on”. In any forum but the anonymous internet it can degenerate into violence or other non-argumentative alternatives, like firing someone, or kicking them out of your house, or slandering them to all and sundry. I’d say the majority of ethical arguments go this way when the belief matrices differ substantially. Full scale war is very commonly over ethical questions, as per the US Civil War. Sometimes the only way to sort out who’s “right” is to find out who had the might. Of course that doesn’t really make it “right” because we’ve already accepted (in our suspended disbelief) that there is no fact of the matter. The mighty are only right in their own opinion. Everyone else thinks they are evil.

    So that’s my alternative take on moral absolutism. Now I reiterate my question – why do you think it’s a no-brainer that this alternative is false?

    You talk of “natural rights”. Perhaps if you are a believer you could call them “God-given rights”. I notice that believers tend to be the most insistent on absolutism, something which always amuses me when you consider that they very seldom agree on which absolutism is the right one, and revert always to the non-argumentative methods I mention above. But believer or not, you seem to think there is a fact of the matter about moral statements.

    Every example of an indisputable fact you have ever given is of the scientific kind. Humans need to breathe air, cyanide kills, humans like to mate etc. But you have not given one single example of an indisputable moral fact. Doesn’t that make you the least bit suspicious? Just because humans need to breathe air doesn’t mean humans have a right to breathe air. There is no logical connection at all between the fact and the moral statement. There is a missing premise. Perhaps something like “humans have a right to live”? Well that really depends on the humans, and who is judging that right. If it’s non-humans, they may well disagree, and definitely humans will disagree about which particular humans have a right to live. So you have two problems, justifying the right itself (so far it’s only an assertion) and resolving conflicts between them. It is the first part I’m asking you about. Why do humans have a right to live? How could you prove that, to the standard which you could prove that humans require air to live?

    Do you just have faith? If so, tell me, and end this argument right now. If not, I’m keen to hear the reasons. You stand an outside chance of adjusting my belief matrix on the issue, because I do not actually hold my position on faith. I simply find it likely, but I don’t claim to have divine insight, and if you have a compelling reason I haven’t thought of, hit me with it.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  270. James () says:

    Ben said…”If you don’t, then you are not lost. Some statements are subjective. Cool. Moving on.”

    Thats so obvious that Im embarrassed for you that it took you that long to spell out something I never objected to…that people have subjective preferences…yes and your point was what? What I’m saying is that there are OBJECTIVE facts that the universe about us has set that apply to ALL humans by virtue of the FACT that they ARE human.Do you disagree with the FACT that poison is deadly to man? That all man require sustenance to live? Taht they require water? Objective set in stone facts Mr Wilson and you nor I can change them or disregard them without suffering the inevertible and logical consequences taht reality imposes.

    “Now consider the possibility that moral statements are like this. I know to date this thought can’t enter your head, but just suspend disbelief for a second. What if they are? Does life end? Does the earth disappear into a black hole? Or do we just have a more complicated theory? I’ll pretend you’re rational enough to accept the last alternative. What I want to know is why you reject that more complicated theory outright, without argument, on faith. So far I have heard from you no arguments whatsoever. Just assertions that moral statements must be absolute.”

    Not my rules.Reality sets the boundries regardless of what subjective views you or I may wish were true.There is no grey area about being alive or being dead.There’s the ultimate absolute for living beings right there….or is that just a subjective position too?

    “Which brings us to the possibility that all ethics is reducible to belief rather than fact. You believe in certain rights, but that doesn’t make them absolute facts, other than that they are absolute facts about you.”

    I don’t have faith at all….I use reason.If looking at the species man and examining just what is required for him to live and stay living is not evidence enough you are not able to be convinced.

    “the belief matrices differ substantially. Full scale war is very commonly over ethical questions, as per the US Civil War. Sometimes the only way to sort out who’s “right” is to find out who had the might.”

    Who was right and who was wrong was already evident before any fighting began.The natural right to life and liberty denied the Blacks wasn’t up for a vote…it was wrong because human beings require liberty to prosper and live AS human beings…that reality s rules,not mine.

    ” It is the first part I’m asking you about. Why do humans have a right to live? How could you prove that, to the standard which you could prove that humans require air to live?”

    Because they exist.That which exists has the right to remain existing if it can.It requires no permission or license to do so….for who or what has the right to prevent humans from NOT living? Even Hitler and Stalin had the right to live because they existed….it was the fact that they were a threat to the right of many others who also wanted to remain alive that we condemn them and are glad they are dead or would have killed them in self defence..

    “Do you just have faith? If so, tell me, and end this argument right now. If not, I’m keen to hear the reasons. You stand an outside chance of adjusting my belief matrix on the issue, because I do not actually hold my position on faith. I simply find it likely, but I don’t claim to have divine insight, and if you have a compelling reason I haven’t thought of, hit me with it.”

    Why should I bother? Open your eyes and really look at the world around you and the people in it.There is no faith required….just the use of your reason.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  271. reAl () says:

    Ben says: “Communism did actually do some good for those countries too.” Rather moronic since it is irrelevent. One could say the same thing about anything. The Nazis builty a nice Olympic stadium, the autobahn and the Volkswagen, Mussolini got the trains to run on time. The 9/11 attacks brought people together in New York. Exactly what system couldn’t be praised in this manner?

    It is clear he is just trying to apologize for evil. Stupid comments abound from his posts: “Who knows what Russia’s economy would have been like if they weren’t squandering their wealth on the Cold war.” Isn’t that really saying: Who knows how rich Russia could be if people just surrendered to them? How well off would Nazi Germany have been if those silly other countries just stopped resisting them?

    He doesn’t ask: How rich would Russia be if it didn’t waste billions on concentration camps? Or on invading Finland, Estonia, Lithuania, Latvia, Poland, Czechoslovakia, etc?

    The lack of historical knowledge, or perhaps I should say, the dishonest twisting of historial facts is shocking. The idea that the Red Army saved the world is laughable. First, the Red Army (ie the Soviets) encouraged Hitler to invade Poland with the then secret Molotov-Ribbenthrop Pact. Then they they actually helped invade Poland and took half of it for themselves. The Red Army by itself had difficulty defeating Finland. The Red Army invaded peaceful Finland in November, 1939 while the Soviets were allies of Hitler. This in spite of out numbering the Finns 4 to 1 in manpower, 100 to 1 in tanks and 30 to 1 in aircraft. The Red Army suffered 127,000 casualties to Finlands 27,000 the wounded rate was similary bad for Russia: 265,000 to 40,000.

    And this was not due to Russia fighting elsewhere. This was during the period known as the “Phony war” and the only real fighting going on was in Finland. The Soviets approached Findland for a peace settlement (via Stockholm). After it became clear that Sweden would just sit on their butt and would not help Finland, or allow troops that were destined to help Finland through Swedish territory, then Finland decided to take up the Soviet offer to negotiate. Then again in June, 1941 the Soviets attacked Finland again. But of the countries in along the Soviet bordered earmarked for conquest Finland alone was able to hold out. The major expansion of Soviet power after the war was the result of nations having their military strength depleted by the Germans not by the Soviets.

    Russia did not single handedly defeat German though various Communists make that fanciful claim. We must not forget that Germany was forced into a two front war and faced the British and Americans as well. Nor should we forget that the equivalent (in today’s terms) of $158 billion in military supplies were given to the Soviets by the United States. The Red Army received from the US: 14,800 aircraft, 7,000 tanks, 52,000 jeeps, 376,000 trucks, 35,000 motorcycles, 8,000 tractors, 132,000 machine guns, 346,000 tons of explosives, 11,000 rail freight cars, 2,000 locomotives, 90 cargo ships, 105 submarine hunters, 197 torpedo boats, 8,000 ship engines, 4.500,000 tons of food, 2,700,000 tons of petroleum products,, 3,700,000 tyres. To say the Red Army saved the world is a bit hard to swallow with all that help from the US.

    And I suspect that the millions of people who died under Soviet rule might not feel so saved.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  272. Andrew W () says:

    James, some men are good bread winners while others aren’t. In times of hardship the families of the less successful men will go hungary in a capitalist society, despite his best efforts, A socialist would argue that this is immoral and this suffering should be solved by socialist means.
    Whats your position? Do you see forcing those with adequate food to support those with inadequate food as immoral? Surely as this is a moral issue and you are a libertarian who believes in objective morality this must be the case.
    How does this fit with your theory on the moral right to eat?
    For me there is no dilema, since I believe morality is subjective I recognise that it may be moral for a society to adopt socialism to address this situation, it’s a matter for that society to decide and not for you or I to judge.
    I think everyone can agree that inefficiencies within an economy that results in widespread poverty are not good for a society, communism quickly develops such inefficiencies, but waste also occurs under capitalism, and different people will define “waste” differently.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  273. David Seymour () says:

    FFS! Try reading Hayek’s Road to Serfdom before commenting any further on whether the happenings in this video were incidental occurences that coincide with both free market and communist states alike.

    The reality is that there are very good reasons why systems that don’t respect property rights -including ownership of one’s own body- end in tyranny. And yes those systems include much of the colonialism and slavery in the past 200 years too.

    Alexander Solzhenitsyn’s trilogy ‘the Gulag Archipelago’ is another good place to start looking before making the kind of ham-fisted comments that have ruined this thread.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  274. so lonely () says:

    In theory communism can work as a system. It has it bad points but by the 1970s it was lifting living standards through out the world.

    I am so so very lonely please talk with me.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  275. Redbaiter () says:

    “ham-fisted comments that have ruined this thread.’

    Get a life. This has been one of the most succesful threads ever in the last few weeks, with almost 300 posts in record time. This ain’t the damn Herald and Reader’s Write you know, this is blogging and its the friggin internet. Nobody is forcing you to be here or read every damn comment. As you say so sweetly, its your body, and your choice. You made a couple of good points, stop the infantile whining and get on with it.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  276. Redbaiter () says:

    “ham-fisted comments that have ruined this thread.’

    Get a life. This has been one of the most succesful threads in the last few weeks, with almost 300 posts in record time. This ain’t the damn Herald and Reader’s Write you know, this is blogging and its the friggin internet. Nobody is forcing you to be here or read every damn comment. As you say so sweetly, its your body, and your choice. You made a couple of good points, stop the infantile whining and get on with it.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  277. Ben Wilson () says:

    James, “Why should I bother? Open your eyes and really look at the world around you and the people in it.There is no faith required….just the use of your reason.”

    This has been your position in exactly every post you have made on the subject regardless of the questions posed. You have never bothered to understand my point, preferring to misconstrue it and stick to your assertions. You actually don’t even *have* a position on subjectivity vs objectivity, since you don’t care to understand what the distinction even *is*. For some reason you think objectivity supports your political views and subjectivity doesn’t (never argued), so your conclusions are all around fixing the argument to that. Which makes you both lazy and dishonest in this ‘debate’. It’s hardly a debate when all you have to contribute is “no, it isn’t”, and “open your eyes, the universe will tell you I’m right”.

    Again your only fact is irrelevant to the debate. Yes, poison is poisonous. So what? How does that lead to concluding that moral statements are absolute?

    You even appeared to get the possibility that *some* statements might be subjective,after browbeating me for labouring to wring that simple concession out of you. But then you go back to talking about simple factual statements about the world, a totally different class of statements.

    Your final ‘argument’ about one moral ‘fact’, the (possibly false, or subjective) statement “Humans have a right to live”, goes:

    “Because they exist.That which exists has the right to remain existing if it can.It requires no permission or license to do so….for who or what has the right to prevent humans from NOT living?”

    Your use of the phrase “has the right” here appear not to be a moral one *at all*. If everything that exists has a right to exist then the phrase is mostly meaningless. You could leave out “has the right” and it would be saying the same thing. When you say “Even Hitler and Stalin had the right to live because they existed”, you are basically saying “Hitler and Stalin existed”.

    So basically this argument sucks. It’s not even about the topic we’re discussing. Unless you really think moral statements are meaningless, in which case perhaps your absolutism is a correct conclusion, because there are no meaningful moral statements to even be subjective.

    I actually don’t get your follow-up rhetorical question “for who or what has the right to prevent humans from NOT living?”. I’m not sure if this is an accidental double negative. Are you saying humans have the right to death? I don’t see any connection between that and the right to live that we were discussing. Did you really mean to leave out the NOT but couldn’t resist the capitalization?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  278. Redbaiter () says:

    “ham-fisted comments that have ruined this thread.”

    Get a life. This has been one of the most succesful threads in the last few weeks, with almost 300 posts in record time. This ain’t the damn Herald and Reader’s Write you know, this is blogging and its the friggin internet. Nobody is forcing you to be here or read every damn comment. As you say so sweetly, its your body, and your choice. You made a couple of good points, stop shaking your bloody rattle and get on with it.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  279. J () says:

    It’s revolting that the dictatorships of are used as a deflection from the inefficiencies and abuses of our current economic path. Clint,Jwacker. Read that again and again. Now that’s not a defence of those regimes.

    China and Russia were a poverty stricken mess before those dictatorships.Both Stalin and Mao used the aspiration of the people to move out of that very weak position to their advantage. They set up their dictatorships in that mess.

    Freedom of speech and ideas and accountability of action are the lessons to be learnt here, not a simplistic paranoia of first world democratic, aspirational socialism. Wake up.

    Your political brains are childlike in your inability to grasp the framework of this debate…. and clint I’ve done a lot of travelling, thanks for asking.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  280. Murray () says:

    Who else if having a flashback to kindergarten with the level of debate here?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  281. Ben Wilson () says:

    ReAl,

    ““Communism did actually do some good for those countries too.” Rather moronic since it is irrelevent. One could say the same thing about anything. The Nazis builty a…etc”

    It’s neither moronic nor irrelevant to see things with balance. Quite the opposite. You will never understand Nazism if you can’t see why the people under it liked it, and to do that you have to iterate it’s good points too.

    The fact that its bad points massively outweigh the good, at least in contrast to modern alternatives, is not something I’d dispute or have disputed, or apologized for. Nor do I dispute it with communism. I also hold the same position wrt many implementations of capitalism. There is a very good reason that something as shit as communism seemed good enough for millions of people to prefer it.

    I simply prefer on a discussion thread to have a discussion, and this thread has turned into a discussion from the sad and tired “let’s condemn communism and go off on all sorts of tangential condemnations while we’re at it” that it was starting off as. I don’t claim all the credit, I’m quite happy to let others who really get into their communist history do the legwork after being given the “tag-in” that there are 2 sides to this discussion.

    The assault on communism by capitalists is not irrelevant to analyzing it’s success. It *could* be the case that communism is a good system, but not one that can successfully fight established capitalism. It certainly gave capitalism a run for it’s money, coming in at 2nd and 3rd place in world power brokers, and 1st place transformed more into socialism than capitalism.

    Time will tell if communist capitalism is more successful than socialist capitalism, certainly the Americans seem to fear that it could be. The Chinese have definitely “seized the means of production” to use some old Marxist jargon. You have to simply have faith if you think China is now going to follow the socialist west down a path towards democratization, just because they have moved towards a mixed economy. It seems more likely to me that they will move towards a radically different kind of democracy, which is much more of a meritocracy, far more in keeping with their ancient traditions. Open elections for which goon gets to spout nonsense at the top, a la the US, may never be allowed. Certainly worker rights are not even in their infancy.

    I just wish they had phonetic writing, personally. If they move into a massively powerful position in the world, I’d see that part of it as a big step backwards. It’s way worse than the Americans refusing to go metric.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  282. Andrew Bannister () says:

    James said:
    Do you disagree with the FACT that poison is deadly to man?

    Yes James, I do. Some poisons merely irritate, others make you feel happy or sad or funny, and yet others have absolutely no effect on people at all. Only a minority of poisons actually kill. Some poisons need to be taken in huge quantities to kill and others in only tiny doses. I think that statement of “FACT” (as you call it) is a good example of a subjective statement, yet you believe it it to be an objective FACT. It isn’t. It clearly demonstrates that you failed to grasp the concepts of objectivity and subjectivity.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  283. Ben Wilson () says:

    Andrew, I disagree. James has at least picked a statement that has a factual answer even if he is wrong about what that answer is. It is not subjective whether poison is deadly, it is true, or false, or somewhere in between. And James probably meant “Do you disagree with the FACT that *deadly* poison is deadly to man?”, since he’s fond of his truisms.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  284. reAl () says:

    It is odd to say that capitalism is built on slavery. First, slavery predates capitalism and was found all around the world. Second, the parts of the world consider capitalist were among the very first to abolish it. Slavery in Africa and parts of Asia lived long after the West abolished it and Soviet Russia was truly built with slave labor. In addition the areas of Europe that are consider the birthplaces of capitalism are Holland and Northern Italy and neither region had slavery.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  285. Ben Wilson () says:

    OTOH, I know what you are saying. Poison could be deadly for one person and not another (say, Rasputin). But it doesn’t matter what the person believes. “A large dose of cyanide will kill Andrew Bannister of NZ” is not a subjective statement. It doesn’t depend on who is saying it for it’s truth. If you want to get picky on “poison is deadly” you’d probably just have to say it’s imprecise. What poison, how much, and deadly to who, depending on what antidotes they had at hand. But once you get specific, there’s a truth to the matter. At least I believe so ;-). I don’t say subjectivism is true for scientific statements. Maybe I’m wrong, some people maintain that. But that’s taking it too far, IMHO. With the poison, you can always do the experiment, then the statement reduces to “Andrew died after taking cyanide”, which is starting to look a lot less subjective, don’t you think?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  286. Mad Muzza () says:

    “Who else if having a flashback to kindergarten with the level of debate here?”
    Posted by Murray | May 25, 2007 10:06 AM

    And what have YOU contributed to this thread Mad Muzza? Get back in the kindergarten sandpit.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  287. Andrew Bannister () says:

    Ben, what I meant was that the concept of a “poison” is subjective. Chemotherapy, asprin, alcohol, cyanide, opium, dandilions, even water can all be poisons.

    Paracelsus wrote “Alle Ding’ sind gift und nichts ohn’ gift; allein die dosis macht, dass ein ding kein gift ist
    (All things are poison and nothing is without poison, only the dose determines that someting is a poison)”.

    Saying “a deadly poison is deadly to man?” is like saying “oysters that taste good are tasty oysters”. They are tautologies, not objective statements of fact.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  288. reid () says:

    On the subject of repressive leadership, I once read an observation to the effect that it was amazing the number of times that terrible dictators come from a minority tribe or from an external source, who then reign over their subjects with utter disregard.

    Hitler was Austrian, Napoleon was Sicilian, Stalin was Georgian. Wonder where Mao, Saddam and Mugabe come from.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  289. Murray () says:

    Why would I “contribute” to this shit pile, you’re producing enough for all.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  290. Mad Muzza () says:

    No Murray – this is your once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to impress us with your wisdom. Tell us something useful about “a tribute to communism”. Lest we think you have shit for brains.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  291. Andrew W () says:

    “I once read an observation to the effect that it was amazing the number of times that terrible dictators come from a minority tribe or from an external source”

    Often dictatorships occur in societies in which tribal conflict occurs, ie there is more than one tribe, this gives a leader with dictatorial tendences an opportunity to use the conflict to demonise the others to solidify their own power, in Hitlers case he was able to demonise both the WW1 allies for the treaty of Versailles, and the Jews.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  292. Ben Wilson () says:

    Andrew, I was being pedantic, sure. But the argument James was trying to have was that kind of argument, where precision over the use of words matters. I wouldn’t want him to think I was letting you off lightly just because you aren’t joining the chorus in condemning everything communism has ever touched.

    The precision is lost on him, I’m sure, but it’s not lost on me. Which is why I get pedantic one last time: Tautologies and their cousin truisms are actually about the only objective statements of fact there are. They definitely are true. But they contain no information about the world external to language and logic. You can make perfectly true tautologies about objects that don’t exist: Unicorns are unicorns after all. That there are no unicorns won’t change the truth of the tautology. It’s still a fact, just as 1+1=2, even though 1 and 2 don’t physically exist.

    Anyone, like you, who’s familiar with a bit of logic, knows this. James is another matter. “Er weisst nicht, dass er weisst nicht”, Parcelus might say :-).

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  293. unaha-closp () says:

    J is right,

    Freedom of speech and ideas and accountability of action are the lessons to be learnt here, not a simplistic paranoia of first world democratic, aspirational socialism. Wake up.

    Hear, hear.

    It all comes down to the ability to monitor and correct mistakes. Communism and all planned economies are imperfect and fail badly if rigorously enforced by unwaveringly biased parties. Same with capitalism. Dictatorships always need the success so badly to validate their rule that they will ignore or repress signs of distress. Democracies get around this by having almost half the leadership pointing out flaws (real or imagined) 24/7.

    Or perhaps the failure is inevitable and uncontrollable and the democracies suceed because they have scapegoats who can easily be sacrificed.

    Ben is wrong,

    All talk of China adopting meritocracy, ancient tradition imply a belief in some inviolable perfection of the state system. He gets it sadly wrong in saying that it is merely a matter of faith that they will follow towards western democracy. It is ideal to function of the state when leaders are seen as “goons” who “spout nonsense” by at least some part of the populace that is free to do so. If the Chinese get respected leaders, then that will unfortunately extend to respecting errors and respecting failures and some overzealous state officials will feel it necessary to enforce respect.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  294. James () says:

    “James, some men are good bread winners while others aren’t. In times of hardship the families of the less successful men will go hungary in a capitalist society, despite his best efforts, A socialist would argue that this is immoral and this suffering should be solved by socialist means.”

    It never has been….indeed Socialism made many more people poorer than they had been and enriched a few privileged elites.Capitalism creates abundant wealth meaning charities can serve the poor and desperate from voluntary contributions that the majority make because there is abundant discretionary wealth available to help their fellow man…and its in their own selfish interest to do so too.

    “Whats your position? Do you see forcing those with adequate food to support those with inadequate food as immoral? Surely as this is a moral issue and you are a libertarian who believes in objective morality this must be the case.”

    Yes because it is….and as described above its unnecessary as well.

    To force someone to feed another would be immoral….one man’s needs are not a license to violate the rights of another man.

    “How does this fit with your theory on the moral right to eat?

    There is a right to seek to attain food to eat but not a right to be GIVEN food which must mean someone elses rights NOT to deal with you or surrender their property are violated.Genuine human rights don’t conflict….law of non contradiction.

    “For me there is no dilema, since I believe morality is subjective I recognise that it may be moral for a society to adopt socialism to address this situation, it’s a matter for that society to decide and not for you or I to judge.”

    Then you are an advocate of murder,slavery and oppression Andrew.If morality is subjective as you say then its a free for all, might makes right hell on earth you have in store for the rest of us.

    Society’s are abstractions …not concrete actuals.Individual human beings have rights….abstract groupings do not.Thats how you end up with Socialism,Communism,Fasicim mass murdering people.All of them follow the creed of altruism…the idea that the moral ideal is for the individual to sacrifice to others with no right to live for himself.You yourself have just admitted you favour this morality Comrade
    .
    “I think everyone can agree that inefficiencies within an economy that results in widespread poverty are not good for a society, communism quickly develops such inefficiencies, but waste also occurs under capitalism, and different people will define “waste” differently.”

    But Capitalism ends wasteful activity far quicker than Communism because its harmful to profit making and so is dealt to.States are renowned for massive waste and inefficient practices because there is no profit incentive to do otherwise…the worst pollution in the world occurs on State/public land….not privately owned land.

    When I said poison Andrew I assumed you would realise I meant something like cyanide which is fatal to man.But if you are unable to be flexible in your thinking then please substitute “cyanide” for “poison” in my post…thanks….sigh!…

    Ben….we are going in circles…you have it your way and I’ll have it mine.But what will be WILL be….and we are not free to escape the consequences…

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  295. Andrew W () says:

    “Then you are an advocate of murder,slavery and oppression Andrew”

    Rubbish James, we each have our own moral code (which with most people is pretty flexible), I will advocate my code within my society, I am only advocating not forcing my moral beliefs on others, whereas you believe that your own beliefs are morally better than others and so believe you are morally justified in forcing those beliefs on others. You should have been a missionary.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  296. AJ Chesswas and his Moral Code () says:

    AndrewW – you should get together with AJ “Moral Code” Chesswas?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  297. Andrew W () says:

    “AndrewW – you should get together with AJ “Moral Code” Chesswas?”

    What are you talking about??

    Chesswas is a Christian who likes to preach his morality, believing that it is superior to others, I’m an agnostic who refrains from preaching my own moral codes, and I’m in fact arguing that people who force their codes on others in the belief of their own moral superiority are kidding themselves. It’s hard to see how you could think we should “get together”.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  298. unaha-closp () says:

    Andrew & James,

    The unifying theory ;-)

    Andrew argues the ends justify the means and James that the means define the ends.

    James concludes: Then you are an advocate of murder,slavery and oppression Andrew.If morality is subjective as you say then its a free for all, might makes right hell on earth you have in store for the rest of us.

    Yes – might makes right, always has and always will, but might is an objective value not subjective. As might is objective, its moralities are objective also. We have seen the collapse of communism with its oppression, slavery and state sanctioned killings (murder) before the much more benign democratic states. This fall did not occur due to any moral realisation amoung Communists, but was a victory of absolute might over weakness. The moral values James speaks to largely created the might that Andrew advocates getting.

    I say that if the ends Andrew desires are arrived at by the means James advocates. You are both right.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  299. phillipjohn () says:

    Since Russia became a capitalist country its population has decreased by 9 million people, and the UN has warned that Russia’s 2005 population of about 140 million could fall by a third by 2050.

    poverty, abuse of alcohol and other substances, disease, stress, and other afflictions are said to be responsable for the decline. It is estimated that there are more abortions than births in Russia. In 2004, at least 1.6 million women had an abortion (a fifth of them under the age of 18) and about 1.5 million gave birth. The reason behind this high abortion rate is the fact that the birth of a first child pushes many families into poverty.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_Russia

    In March 1997, over two million people took part in a national strike protesting the economic hardships of privatization and over 100,000 attended rallies in Moscow and St. Petersburg. The government, however, was committed to privatization and largely ignored the parliament and the protests. During the financial crisis of 1998, Russia became the first modern country to default on its debt. The subsequent collapse of the ruble and investor flight left analysts concerned that Russia would face famine and even governmental collapse.

    So I guess people will say that the looting of Russia by USA companies, the World Bank and Russian crony capitalists had nothing to do with this. In fact I can bet that within 10 minutes someone will be dream up a way of blaming this on communism. Come on let’s see it.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  300. Andrew W () says:

    If you’re not confused you obviously don’t understand whats going on.

    James and I do have very similar views as to the type of society we would like to live in.

    He sees such a society as desirable as it is (in his opinion) of a higher morality.

    I see such a society as desirable as it should be more efficient in delivering the desired wealth and freedom I want for myself and my family.

    The guts of this debate is not about that though, we are debating whether morality is subjective or objective.

    “Andrew argues the ends justify the means and James that the means define the ends.”

    I don’t see it that was at all, If this is a reference to the actual acheivement of a libertarian society, I would argue that the means define the ends, it is the structure and history of a society that will determine its nature.

    It is the dead who govern.
    Look you, man, how they work their will upon us!
    Who have made the laws? The dead!
    Who have made the customs that we obey and that form and shape our lives? The dead!
    And the titles to our lands? Have not the dead devised them?
    If a surveyor runs a line he begins at some corner the dead set up; and if one goes to law upon a question
    the judge looks backwards through his books until he finds how the dead have settled it – and he follows
    that.
    And all the writers, when they would give weight and authority to their opinions, quote the dead; and the
    orators who preach and lecture are not their mouths filled with words that the dead have spoken? Why,
    man, our lives follow grooves that the dead have run out with their thumbnails!

    M. Davisson Post, Uncle Abner

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  301. Andrew W () says:

    Sorry PJ, didn’t see your comment in time to meet your deadline, obviously it’s all those dead communists who are responsible as it is communism that has allowed corruption instead of honest self reliance to become established in Russia, this is why the transition to capitalism has been so difficult.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  302. unaha-closp () says:

    In fact I can bet that within 10 minutes someone will be dream up a way of blaming this on communism. Come on let’s see it.

    Piece of piss.

    People leaving – there was 75 years of pent up demand and once they left they were way too impressed by the capitalist West to go back to that communist hellhole.

    Economic deprivation – the communists promoted, vetted and empowered each of the people who sold off the family silver for a fraction of the real value in the early 90s. It wasn’t their fault, they had been educated to believe that the assets had no value by the stupid communists. The lack of real world experience allowed these commie rubes to be exploited by the only class in Russia with an understanding of ownership value, the criminal classes.

    The concern of analysts – this shows the undying ability of media pundits to predict the worst and make stuff up. Famine never happened & collapse of government never happened.

    Damn I’m over 10 mins.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  303. phillipjohn () says:

    “wasn’t their fault, they had been educated to believe that the assets had no value by the stupid communists.”

    How dare you talk about Michael Fay and David Richwhite like that! Ohhh right, actually no scratch that, they were merchant bankers, selected from NZBR staff, by Rodger Douglas, to sell NZ govt assist to themselves.

    Next.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  304. phillipjohn () says:

    “People leaving – there was 75 years of pent up demand and once they left they were way too impressed by the capitalist West to go back to that communist hellhole.”

    mmm, that’s probably a contributor, but I’ve never seen it mentioned in the literature as a prime cause.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  305. phillipjohn () says:

    “obviously it’s all those dead communists who are responsible as it is communism that has allowed corruption instead of honest self reliance to become established in Russia, this is why the transition to capitalism has been so difficult.”

    So, had communism continued, there would have been no population decrease?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  306. Ben Wilson () says:

    James, if we are going in circles then that should perhaps put you off using circular arguments for your case. My case was a loooong straight line. And it was only long because when it was short you just couldn’t get it. And it is actually quite a complex problem, contrary to your simplistic solutions.

    Andrew W actually put what I had to say succinctly with ‘Yep, scientific facts are objective, what has that to do with human “rights”?’.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  307. James () says:

    “Rubbish James, we each have our own moral code (which with most people is pretty flexible), I will advocate my code within my society, I am only advocating not forcing my moral beliefs on others, whereas you believe that your own beliefs are morally better than others and so believe you are morally justified in forcing those beliefs on others. You should have been a missionary.”

    I have never advocated forcing my views on anyone.As a Libertarian that claim is simply stupid.At an individual level yes…we all have subjective ideas on what is a right thing to do and what is wrong….some will think gay sex is wrong and immoral….others will say its not wrong or immoral as it doesn’t violate the individual rights of another(my view)even if I persona;llly find it disgusting.

    Im talking about at the species level….and that man the species has limitations and requirements imposed by nature,reality.The rights to life and remaining alive,liberty and the right to strive to remain so,property and the right to control its use, and the pursuit of your own happiness even if it makes you worse off or unhappy.As we are all human beings it follows we must all have these rights by virtue of belonging to the species man.And as we live amoungst others of our species we must address the issue of all of us having these rights equally whilst trying to live and prosper.

    The above mentioned negative rights (meaning that others simply must NOT do anything to violate them,not that must act TO provide you with something) are the only non-contradictory rights that all men can have whilst imposing no unchosen obligations on any one else therefore not violating these exact same rights held by those others.Its the only way we can achieve equality between men.

    unaha-closp….Might does not make right…might may impose the will and wishes of the mighty on the weak but that does not make it right.A posse of rapists are not in the right because they overwhelm a women by superior numbers….no?

    Andrew…”It is the dead who govern.
    Look you, man, how they work their will upon us!
    Who have made the laws? The dead!”

    If you are saying that having to obey morals and laws created by those who came before us just BECAUSE they came before us (tradition) is wrong I agree.Laws repressing women,gays,blacks,atheists etc and banning certain consentual acts were created long ago and they were bad and immoral laws and mans nature as set by objective reality was the guide to knowing so….but that’s not what I’m advocating.

    The fact of an objective universe that we are part of is as real today as any time in history….the fact that our ancestors promoted laws and morals is neither here nor there,what is important is if those laws are objectively right or wrong by the standard of mans life..Murder,rape theft etc are wrong at all times and all places because its still human beings having their inalienable rights violated at all those times and places.

    You are right that we both probably want the same things…but I recognise the boundaries and restrictions of the “game” we are in whilst you don’t seem to want to accept any limitations on you by anything including reality itself.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  308. unaha-closp () says:

    I am a deist

    I see such a society as desirable as it should be more efficient in delivering the desired wealth and freedom I want for myself and my family.

    My suggestion is that you have personal goals such as freedom and wealth and are starting from your current position which is subjective. Therefore to get to your goals you must follow an moral path which is subjective to you. So in this sense you are correct.

    However wealth and freedom are largely societal constructs purchased from the group and government. To maximise your subjective wealth and freedom ambitions within your society you must conform to the societal morals, as much as possible. Societal morals are objective, the combined product of the society which is itself the higher power than yourself. Thus if the objective societal morals James advocates are such that they maximise your aspirations they are the objective morals you should want your society to adopt.

    At least that is the way I reconcile.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  309. Andrew W () says:

    “So, had communism continued, there would have been no population decrease?”

    Why did it not continue? Was it because the system was becoming too inefficient and that living standards were slipping?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  310. phillipjohn () says:

    “Why did it not continue?”

    well, I honestly don’t know.

    “Was it because the system was becoming too inefficient and that living standards were slipping?”

    If the communists were the monsters that they’re made out to be is this really a viable reason? Would they really care?

    No, my guess would be that the Russians could see that they were fighting a loosing battle. The market is the ultimate productive machine, and for all their planning and organisation the Soviets were never going to be able to keep up with the yanks in the arms race.

    Also, a life as a ridiculously wealthy capitalist has got to be easier than being a member of the coordinating soviet class. But these are all just guesses.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  311. Andrew W () says:

    “Andrew…”It is the dead who govern.
    Look you, man, how they work their will upon us!
    Who have made the laws? The dead!””

    “You are right that we both probably want the same things…but I recognise the boundaries and restrictions of the “game” we are in whilst you don’t seem to want to accept any limitations on you by anything including reality itself.”

    What I argue is that if you want to see a libertarian society you need to have a sturucture to make it work, the system we have now works as it does because of the contribution of past generations. You would be foolish to think you can rely of the force of your moral convictions to make any social system work for long. For intergenerational stability the structure (laws, customs etc) must be stronger than individual leaders.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  312. Andrew W () says:

    Not a lot to disagree with in your last post PJ, I think living standards rather than arms was the race that communism needed to win to survive though.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  313. unaha-closp () says:

    Think I’m in shock.

    “How dare you talk about Michael Fay and David Richwhite like that! Ohhh right, actually no scratch that, they were merchant bankers, selected from NZBR staff, by Rodger Douglas, to sell NZ govt assist to themselves.

    Next.”

    Did PJ just dismiss criticism of state asset sales?

    So confused.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  314. muzz () says:

    Anyone who thinks communisim is ok has rocks in their head.A few facts about russia.1 in ww2 russia stood by and let the nazis murder the population of the warsaw ghetto by not allowing the allies to use their airfeilds to supply the polish resistance.And why did this atrocity take place?.Because russia intended to annialate the jewish race itself.2 It was russias mistrust and loathing of the west that led to the iorn curtain.
    But not until Japan dropped bacterial bombs at Changte, did President Roosevelt issue a strong statement of protest on June 5, 1942, warning against Japan by saying that if Japan continued to use poison gases or other forms of inhuman warfare, it would invite U.S. retaliation in full measure. It was about this time, U.S. started its own biological warfare research with the approval of Roosevelt, but that ever since has been kept secret from the public. Also kept from the public is the U.S. role in suppressing all efforts to put Unit 731 on trial in the Tokyo Trial and its subsequent cover-up. As a result, unlike hundreds of Nazi doctors who were duly tried and sentenced in accordance with the “crime against humanity,” Ishii and members of Unit 731 have not been brought to justice.
    This is an example of the united states hypocracy..if you do a google search on unit 731 it will show how america is in a lot of ways no better than russia.COMMUNISIM IS ALIVE AND WELL…

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  315. James () says:

    The moral is also the practical.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  316. James () says:

    Opps split post…

    “What I argue is that if you want to see a libertarian society you need to have a sturucture to make it work, the system we have now works as it does because of the contribution of past generations.”

    Yes but does the system we have now work as well as it could or should be? No….because there is a blantant blindness to objective reality and the facts it produces and the courses of action it judges as right or wrong by the results we get.

    “You would be foolish to think you can rely of the force of your moral convictions to make any social system work for long.”

    I don’t….just facts and and the lessons learned by applying our only means of acquiring knowledge…reason.”

    “The moral is also the practical.”

    “For intergenerational stability the structure (laws, customs etc) must be stronger than individual leaders.”

    So the structure must be objective and true despite the subjective beliefs of individuals…? Thanks for the concession. ;-)

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  317. phillipjohn () says:

    unaha: think irony

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  318. Andrew W () says:

    “Societal morals are objective, the combined product of the society which is itself the higher power than yourself.”

    If I understand you correctly, you are saying that if morals are the product of a society as a whole they are objective.

    If that is what you are saying, I can’t agree, “objective” means:
    1. having existence independent of the mind
    2. concerned with the actual features of the thing dealt with rather than the thoughts, feelings etc
    3. without bias or prejudice

    Simply because a belief is held by an entire society doesn’t make it any more objective than if it is held by one individual.

    In other threads I have argued that it is logical for a believer in God to believe in objective morality because a God could create objective morality as part of his universe, for an athiest who believes that life and intellegence is a not a devine product, but an accident of essentially random evolutionary processes it is more logical to believe morality is subjective ie NOT “having existence independent of the mind”

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  319. phillipjohn () says:

    “because there is a blantant blindness to objective reality”

    And how do you arrive at your understanding of objective reality? Through a materialist study of historical/economic phenomena or some crap like that I suppose. Be careful with that one sir, that particular brand of dogmatism has had some pretty horrible consequences in recent history.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  320. unaha-closp () says:

    Might does not make right…might may impose the will and wishes of the mighty on the weak but that does not make it right.A posse of rapists are not in the right because they overwhelm a women by superior numbers….no?

    James,

    The rapists are to be taken and punished as a demonstration to others, so might does make right by inflicting detention on these humans. The point of having a moral society is to have the society mighty enough to impose its power.

    If you are in a position where you are not able to impose or gain the power to act against the rapist are you still morally obligated to act in the same manner as if you were? If so then there are no moral nations, as killings on Tibet border are unlikely to punished at any time. Which to my mind suggests that the function of moral action is to create the might in the equation, which in turn reinforces the right which is defined as the moral action. Circular – unified theory.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  321. Andrew W () says:

    “So the structure must be objective and true despite the subjective beliefs of individuals…?”

    Ok, if a law exists making, for example, homosexuality illegal, and if that law is well written and not subject to multiple different interpretations, the intent of the law is objective – not subject to interpretation – a good thing. However, that does not make the morality of the belief or behaviour that the law intends to enforce or restrict objective.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  322. phillipjohn () says:

    Well, it must be said – this is about as academic a discussion as you’ll ever get.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  323. JohnPhillip () says:

    Coming from you Phillip John, “academic” is a bit rich. You plagiarised Wikipedia yesterday on Kiwiblog – and when you were challenged on it, tried to duck for cover. That’s just not good enough, I’m sorry. Now how about showing us the high academic standards that you would have us believe you’re capable of?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  324. Adolf Powell () says:

    Hi all

    Communism sucked, Hitler’s Germany was much better, the Germans could not realise how backward the Soviet Union was after they went for their 4 year holiday there from 1941 to 1945. the useless commy bastards did not have any decent roads for the Germans to drive their tanks down, unlike the modern French when my mate Adolf’s Panzers rolled down the Champs Du Lysses.

    Yours
    Adolf

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  325. Andrew W () says:

    There goes the neighbourhood

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  326. Eh? (Whoar.co.nz) () says:

    AndrewW: what the hell is that supposed to mean?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  327. Ben Wilson () says:

    “There goes the neighbourhood”

    It was so nice before too. The kind of place where no one would call me a communist apologist, or expect me to see their objective truth without reason. Now I’m expecting someone to call me a postmodernist, and I’ll have to “flame on”.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  328. unaha-closp () says:

    Scratch unified, that is stupid hubris.

    James,

    The society exists for the mutual benefit of its members. Society acts to maximise its power to act for the benefit of its members. Power (might) is practical to objectify, capitalism measures power with wealth. Power can manifest in the ability to conquer competitors or nature.

    Thus though the governing morals are the product of a multitude of subjective thoughts and conventional practices – they are measured to their effectiveness in obtaining power and are thus objective morals.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  329. Andrew W () says:

    Someone called me a postmodernist last week, I thought it was an architectural style, as far as I can tell it has no meaning other than as an insult.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  330. unaha-closp () says:

    The moral is the practical ;-)

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  331. unaha-closp () says:

    Go see the postmodernism generator.

    http://www.elsewhere.org/pomo

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  332. Andrew W () says:

    “Thus though the governing morals are the product of a multitude of subjective thoughts and conventional practices – they are measured to their effectiveness in obtaining power and are thus objective morals.”

    “The moral is the practical ;-)”

    But what is the best practical answer for one society is unlikely to be so for another, especially when you consider how technology can affect moral beliefs, the promiscuity of a society with little population pressure and good contraceptives would be disastrous for a society in a different situation, so morality varies from society to society, ie it is not universal, therefore it is subjective.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  333. Andrew W () says:

    “Definitions of postmodernism on the Web:

    if Descartes is seen as the father of modernism, then postmodernism is a variety of cultural positions which reject major features of Cartesian (or allegedly Cartesian) modern thought. Hence, views which, for example, stress the priority of the social to the individual; which reject the universalizing tendencies of philosophy; which prize irony over knowledge; and which give the irrational equal footing with the rational in our decision procedures all fall under the postmodern umbrella.”

    So I was right! It has no meaning other than as an insult.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  334. Ben Wilson () says:

    LOL, that pomo thing is great…It’s also classic to see how Google Ads still manages to pretty much target anyone who would might read that page.

    And it’s also so on the money too! I like:

    “A number of theories concerning a postcapitalist reality exist.”

    -Pretty much the theme of this thread

    “The premise of pretextual capitalist theory suggests that the collective is part of the futility of sexuality.”

    -A very perceptive remark for a machine

    “If one examines the postconceptual paradigm of context, one is faced with a choice: either reject subsemiotic discourse or conclude that culture is capable of truth.”

    -James, take note

    “But in Sex, Madonna examines the dialectic paradigm of discourse; in Material Girl, however, she denies the cultural paradigm of discourse.”

    -And in Like a Virgin Madonna examines the sexual paradigm of intercourse

    “If one examines the postsemantic paradigm of consensus, one is faced with a choice: either accept capitalist precultural theory or conclude that government is fundamentally unattainable. It could be said that several constructivisms concerning the postsemantic paradigm of consensus exist.”

    -In fact, didn’t someone say that earlier?

    ““Class is a legal fiction,” says Debord; however, according to Brophy[1] , it is not so much class that is a legal fiction, but rather the fatal flaw, and therefore the defining characteristic, of class.”

    -Even computers aren’t above using circular definitions when they don’t know what they are talking about

    “Foucault uses the term ’semioticist subcapitalist theory’ to denote a textual paradox.”

    -Yes, Focault never used 2 words when 3 would do

    “Subsemanticist Deappropriations: The textual paradigm of context in the works of Gibson”

    -Google figures anyone reading this article will be interested in an escorted tour of the Ukraine

    “In the works of Tarantino, a predominant concept is the concept of postmodern sexuality.”

    -No wonder his films made me uncomfortable.

    “But the primary theme of the works of Tarantino is the bridge between sexual identity and consciousness.”

    -Or maybe it’s that

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  335. Write on Point () says:

    AndrewW – you are way, way off-topic and a bore at that. Can you please get back to your tributes to communism?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  336. Ben Wilson () says:

    “Therefore, Hamburger[7] implies that we have to choose between cultural materialism and neocapitalist libertarianism.”

    -Must be stink when even a computer makes jokes about your name.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  337. Andrew W () says:

    Write on Point, which of my “tributes to communism” would you like to address?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  338. Andrew W () says:

    Come on Write on Point, you are the one who wants to get back on topic, surely you can quote and refute some of my praise about communism?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  339. grim () says:

    The egocentric intellectualism on this comment thread just made me throw up. Thanks a lot. Last time I read kiwiblog’s comments. Later fools.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  340. Andrew W () says:

    Oh no! Grim’s miserable.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  341. John. F. Minto () says:

    Communism gave stability to the society. Look during the era of communisms, those communist countries had stable government, and that is what a society needs. After the collapsed of communism, civil wars sprung up in those former communist countries. It is better to have a stable government under totalitarians (Iraq under Saddam, Zimbabwe under Mugabe, Cuba under Fidel, North Korea under Kim Il Jong, etc) than chaos under democracy, such as happening right now in Irag.,

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  342. Andrew W () says:

    “It is better to have a stable government under totalitarians (Iraq under Saddam, Zimbabwe under Mugabe, Cuba under Fidel, North Korea under Kim Il Jong, etc) than chaos under democracy, such as happening right now in Irag.”

    The stability under a totalitarian government may well be better that civil war, but when, and it is when, not if, those governments fall over you are likely to end up with the civil war anyway.

    I’m in no way prepared to defend the stupidity of G W Bush in his invasion but one day Saddam was going to die, and a successful shiite revolt was certain at some stage, and a civil war likely.

    Zimbabwe is overdue for a change of government, if it is bloody when it occurs, I would blame Mugabe, his actions have caused many deaths, and he will be responsible for many more.

    So can were agree that open democracy is the best of the three options?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  343. unaha-closp () says:

    Andrew,

    But what is the best practical answer for one society is unlikely to be so for another,…morality varies from society to society, ie it is not universal, therefore it is subjective.

    It is possible to be objective without having universal actions. Go the bathroom sink with a spoonful of water, drop the spoonful on the eastern side it will run west to the plughole, drop the spoonful on the southern side it will run north.

    Societies are in competition with one another in power relationships that are universal. Like the water running down hill societies seek more power, so that the society can be more effective in serving the interests of its members.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  344. unaha-closp () says:

    After the collapsed of communism, civil wars sprung up in those former communist countries.

    Where? Can only think of Yugoslavia.

    And that is balanced by the cessation of the civil war in Angola & Cambodia & Nicuargua in which one side of each conflict found it impossible to continue in the absence of Soviet support.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  345. Andrew W () says:

    unaha, what you say is true, but I see no connection to the obectivity/subjectivity of morality debate.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  346. unaha-closp () says:

    That morals are objective because they work towards conferring greater power on their society. And yes there are different societal morals, but these result in differing relative powers. They are comparable.

    Bushmen scavenging in the desert have differing morals than American investment bankers on Wall Street, but they both societies seek to improve themselves in terms of power and America is well ahead. The Bushmen need to change and all indications are they need to change to follow American values or European or Japanese or Chinese – the jury is still out.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  347. Andrew W () says:

    You are referring to instincts, Human instincts are universal – amongst Humans, many of our moral beliefs are based on our instincts and these morals are essentially identical across humanity, but other intellegent species in to universe will have different instincts through different evolution. When I use the term “objective”, I use it with its strictest meaning :)

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  348. Sleep Time () says:

    Can someone give AndrewW some sleeping tablets – he is clearly getting off big time on this thread

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  349. Andrew () says:

    Sleep Time: I rather suspect AndrewW is whacking off – but we probably don’t want to know.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  350. Andrew W () says:

    I guess if you’re not bright enough to take part in the discussion (on any thread) you have to settle for firing off insults.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  351. unaha-closp () says:

    Nope. Instincts are irrelevent.

    Pointing out the inherent usefulness of power. As we encounter other species with differing instincts, we overpower them or not.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  352. Andrew () says:

    AndrewW: people can freely participate in any discusison, of which this is one example, without coming across as arrogant, pompous gits – which is an apt description for a borish type like you. Comments like “When I use the term “objective”, I use it with its strictest meaning :)” with your smiley face to dumb it down are laughable contributions to this thread.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  353. Andrew W () says:

    One of our most basic instincts is the survival instinct, how do you maximise your and your families chances of survival in the environment in which that instinct developed? Maximise security, minimise the strength of any threat. How is that irrelevent?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  354. Socialist Detector () says:

    I guess if you’re not bright enough to take part in the discussion

    Here we have it – AndrewW betrays himself as having all the characteristic traits of a socialist cretin. How else to explain his eugenics-type approach to intelligence?

    Well I’ve got news for you Andrew: those of us who wish to take part in the discussion will do so, even if it hurts your brain to read text written by someone else. As someone has already implied, you clearly whack off to the sight of your own text.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  355. Andrew W () says:

    You’re the one preaching what you think is correct and proper, I think that makes you the pompous git. If you want to take part in the discussion, great take part, if you just want to throw insults, fuck off.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  356. Andrew () says:

    AndrewW: if you’re as bright as you say, can’t you come up with a better despatch notice than that? Something witty even?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  357. Tina Turner () says:

    I think AndrewW makes some interesting points, but he does wave his “I’m an intellectual” placard a bit too much, me thinks :)

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  358. Andrew W () says:

    Just found this, it’s very much the argument I’ve been trying to put together.

    http://hem.passagen.se/nicb/morality.htm

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  359. Max () says:

    Andrew W: an interesting thread, thanks. But just to ask, are you sure you weren’t plagiarising like Phillip John did on another thread? :)

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  360. unaha-closp () says:

    Maximise security, minimise the strength of any threat. How is that irrelevent?

    2 points:

    First your own – you that stated our instincts are irrelevent to what an objective moral is, that “other intellegent species in [the] universe will have different instincts”. Pointing out that by squaring morals to the higher cause of obtaining power means when ourselves and other intelligences interact it benefits us – a contest of relative power. Their instincts shall be different from ours yet the interaction dynamic is anticipated to be one of relative power, even if our instincts do ask us to create safety it is the moral good to do so anyway.

    Second – moral behaviour may run counter to instinctual behaviour. Soldiering is required profession and yet runs directly counter to the survival instincts of those joining.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  361. Andrew W () says:

    Cheers Max.

    unaha-closp, point 1, “you that stated our instincts are irrelevent to what an objective moral is” I asked how are instincts irrelevent to human morality, I’m arguing that much of human morality is a product of our instincts.

    Are you arguing “might is right”? The most successful at expansion and elimination of the competition is the most moral? That success is the automatic product of a higher morality? There is a quote, “the good guys always win, because the winners write the history”.

    If that is what you are saying, my reply is that in some situations competition laeds to success, in other situations cooperation leads to success, if the Japanese are economically successful, thats our gain, totally eliminating them at the end of WW2 wouldn’t have been to our gain, elimintaing them as a military threat was.
    Also consider that in any conflict size rather than moral codes is the main determinant, if the axis powers had been more powerful than the allies, history would have been different, would that have in made them somehow more moral?

    Point 2. Soldiers don’t go to war intending to die for their countries, they go with the intention of making the other side die for theirs, what they dream of is coming home as heros, women like heros.

    If soldiers believe they are going to war to die, or if there is little chance of post conflict dividends, their government will need to force them to go to war.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  362. Duh! () says:

    “f soldiers believe they are going to war to die, or if there is little chance of post conflict dividends, their government will need to force them to go to war.”

    What a crock of shit from the sugarmeister (Andrew W). Heard of SUICIDE BOMBERS? The foot soldiers of Islam? Keep up the good work, Andrew W, as there is a career for you in academia.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  363. Andrew W () says:

    I was refering to soldiers Duh! do you think suicide bombers are soldiers?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  364. Ben Wilson () says:

    Andrew W

    “Human instincts are universal”

    That’s a controversial point. It would be more accurate to say that there are some instincts that most humans have. Vomiting when you’re sick, for instance. But not everyone even has such a basic one, due to genetic differences.

    And the ‘higher order’ instincts, like sexual reproduction, are not necessarily shared by all. Gays may simply not have that instinct. Fighting for survival? Seems that there is a huge variation in this, some humans give up life much easier than others do.

    So trying to define universal objective morality from human instinct is totally flawed. In some cases extreme aggression might be a survival trait, in others it will just end up getting you locked in prison or executed. No real generalizations can be made from evolution to morality *even if* you accept that evolution and instincts lead to ‘objective’ morality (which I don’t).

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  365. Andrew W () says:

    I actually said “Human instincts are universal – amongst Humans”

    But yep, I accept the correction.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  366. unaha-closp () says:

    if the axis powers had been more powerful than the allies, history would have been different, would that have in made them somehow more moral?

    Yes, because to be bigger and more powerful they would have had to be more cooperative with potential allies. More conciliatory and less supremacist, so yes to win they would have had to be more moral.

    I argue might makes right makes might.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  367. unaha-closp () says:

    So trying to define universal objective morality from human instinct is totally flawed.

    Agreed.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  368. Andrew W () says:

    unaha, does that mean that Hitlers morality was objective morality in Germany 1936-45, communist morality was objective morality in the USSR, etc? or do we have to wait till the end of time to determine what the true objective morality is?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  369. Andrew W () says:

    Sorry if that last comes across badly, I’m being my most obnoxious on another thread and it may have flowed over to that comment, anyway my question remains. How do we know when we have a morality we can consider objective? Empires come and go, if morality is objective surely it should be definable at any point in time.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  370. unaha-closp () says:

    If we are capitalists I’ll say it is the moral codex that makes the highest growth.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  371. unaha-closp () says:

    Make that the society that makes the highest growth.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  372. Greg Bourke () says:

    What a great thread!
    Gosh i love the math of moral equivalence:
    Bush=Hitler=Stalin=Pol Pot.
    Guantanemo=Sobibor=Vorkuta=Killing Fields.
    2007 Chicago= 1941 Berlin= 1933 Mosocw= 1975 Kampuchea.

    Real logical!

    Anyways, in the real world Dow is up today as is NASDAQ. McDonalds up, MSFT up, and Boeing up.
    Death to the revolution, long live the counter-revolutionary wreckers and capitalist running dogs!

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  373. Andrew W () says:

    “If we are capitalists I’ll say it is the moral codex that makes the highest growth.”

    But the little green men might be less individualistic and have instincts that make their society function better under a monachy.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  374. cbqxte aril () says:

    pwyzbja aufrehpyb iovzhcd uhsxnvrfd gkjtyman kvyzxa tpawxso

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.