1234. . .984985»
The above is only one example of how the west twists the truth and all out lies. I would be happy to post links to "Stalins crimes or DPRK even cuba...its amazing how many in the leftist movement buy into the lies of western historians...asking the capitalists what they think of socialism is like asking a VCR what it thinks of DVD's!!!
Do you really have anything to gain from their opinion?
No doubt its a good book to get the basics but its still chalk full of lies as well...I have the book beside me right now.
Yeah, the Gulag section is probably blown out of proportion, but you can hardly alter the history of the RSFSR in regards to the Civil War. General history can't be altered much...can it?
Redspqr, Axaa, and Karazarin
No your right....Trotsky is blown out of proportion a little...the Ukranian famine for sure but in general your correct its a good sourse for an "over all view" of soviet history....even if it has many small exagerations on "the horrors" at the time....of course the civil war was horribly violent(1918-1921) but the revolution was actually very peacefull(1917)
Axaa and Karazarin
If anyone's fluent in spanish, I suggest watching this short documentary: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QosF0b0i2f0&feature=player_embedded#
It talks about how things today are made to degenerate soon, so that the consumerist system in which we live on can feed it's hunger for money more quickly.
The Myth of Capitalist Democracy
Capitalist “democracies” always pride themselves on how democratic their systems are, being that despite any blatant differences in economic power or existing societal prejudices based around race, gender, sexuality or nationality, the system is fair and just because of its elections. “One man, one vote” is the democratic principle that ensures that “the will of the people” is what decides electoral outcomes. Yet, when we peel back capitalism’s star-spangled “fair and equal” wrapper, what we see is anything but fair and equal.
The Fabrication of Consent
Have you ever heard someone say, “If you don’t vote, don’t complain?” The idea behind this statement is that if you don’t participate in the electoral process, don’t cast your ballot for one politician or another, your opinion is rendered invalid because your failure to cast a vote implies that you are okay with whoever “the country” picks. However, even if you vote for the loser of an election, you still demonstrate consent for the process by legitimizing it enough to cast a ballot. Upon closer inspection, this would seem oddly anti-democratic, being that “consent of the governed” is interpreted whether the governed consent or not. The capitalists would argue that everyone who does or doesn’t vote in elections, even though there are millions who cannot vote due to incarceration, immigration status, age and even those who, for one bureaucratic reason or another, cannot prove their residency to vote. This “no means yes” mentality of the bourgeoisie concludes that the proletariat, voter or non-voter, consents to domination by the bourgeoisie and their lieutenants in government and at the heads of the leading capitalist parties. Is there even the slightest hint of “democracy” in a system where merely existing means that the powers which dominate your political and economic destiny need only be considered legitimate by their own absurd standard?
Communist Bratislavia, Empire of soviet socialist republics, Redspqr, Axaa, and 1 otherConference of japan
State Violence and its Limitations
The first and most obvious dimension of capitalist domination is violent repression. If a person takes action against the capitalist state, they risk being beaten down, locked in prison, tortured or murdered by the agents of state repression (the police and military forces) and otherwise risk being physically constrained or damaged. This overt exercise of power, while the most acute in defending the interests of the dominator over the dominated, has certain limitations. Michel Foucault, one-time communist turned postmodern critic, pointed out in his book “Discipline and Punish: The Birth of the Prison” how a modern system of incarceration had to emerge because constant violent reinforcement of state power, in the form of grisly tortures and public executions, would often backfire and lead to rebellion as sympathetic bystanders responded to state violence with violence of their own. The capitalist class, like the feudal lords and monarchic powers before them, had to learn the hard way that brute force alone wasn’t enough to keep them in power. In the era of Enlightenment ideas, those capitalists who professed their system to be the most democratic form of governance possible needed a means of not only enforcing their “legitimacy,” but by creating it in the minds of the proletariat.
Comrades, it is a glorious day! No longer must we scratch our heads and wonder exactly what we were talking about only a few hours before! No longer are our debates cut short by having ten messages upon the regional message board! Finally we can talk freely and at length about the important things!
"Peace is the common aspiration of humanity, and only when peace is ensured can the people create an independent new life. The wrong idea and policy of trampling upon the independence of other countries and other nations and of dominating others are the cause of the current threat to peace."-Kim Il-Sung.
North Korea,from a speech at the opening ceremony
85th Inter-parliamentary Conference April 29, 1991
To see the U.S. throgh the same prisim one could say
Civil War. Check
Class War. None
Imperialist wars of aggression. (deep breath...) Indian Wars (1865-1870), Spanish-American War (1898),Philippine-American War (1899-1913),Banana Wars (1898-1935), World War I, World War II , Korean War, Lebanon crisis of 1958,Vietnam War, Grenada, Beirut, Panama, Gulf War, Somalia, Yugoslavia, Afghanistan, Iraq
They will...and they basicly have...but now the imperialists are sending their warships so this has another dimension to it for sure.
The biggest differnce between the other Arab uprisings and Lybia is the media coverage...while we watch nonstop coverage of the western enemy Quadafi and his hired thugs kill people...In Bahrain the struggle is the same, but much like Egypt the U.S. turns its back hoping for "stability" which means " We dont care about democracy or human rights, your gov lets us in on cheap oil and build bases to support Isreal"
At first in Egypt and Tunisia the U.S. press releases were about "restoring calm" now we see war ships moveing on Lybia?
I really hope some of you out in NS land will look for what is going on in Bahrain, raise questions...demand answers, the murder by police shot gun and Army heavy machine gun go's on every day now for 18 days....no foreign involvement here. Gee I wonder why?
I dont like Quadaffi one bit but his points are good ones sometimes...his demand for the UN/G8 and G20 to include developing nations was spot on when he addressed the un in 2007 not to mention his long time stance against American involvement in the middle east
How bad was Lybia under Gaddafi?
How was Libya doing under the rule of Gaddafi? How bad did the people have it? Were they oppressed as we now commonly accept as fact? Let us look at the facts for a moment.
Before the chaos erupted, Libya had a lower incarceration rate than the Czech republic. It ranked 61st. (SA: 30th) Libya had the lowest infant mortality rate of all of Africa. (Libya 18 per thousand, SA 44 per thousand) Libya had the highest life expectancy of all of Africa. (74 years; SA 49 years) Less than 5% of the population was undernourished. In response to the rising food prices around the world, the government of Libya abolished ALL taxes on food. (On 12 Jan, 2011).
People in Libya were rich. Libya had the highest gross domestic product (GDP) at purchasing power parity (PPP) per capita of all of Africa. (About $15,000; SA about $10,000). The government took care to ensure that everyone in the country shared in the wealth. Libya had the highest Human Development Index of any country on the continent. The wealth was distributed equally. In Libya, a lower percentage of people lived below the poverty line than in the Netherlands. (About 7%; SA about 50%).
1234. . .984985»
Advertisement
