Politics & Stuff

[SinineUltra 1,170]

In Soviet Union at that time.

The most cruel era this world had ever known.

Killings, Gulags, all under the pretense of socialism. The biggest dog of all Stalin was getting rid of opposition at will.

That's right. Although most of the world only remembers Nazi Germany and their holocaust as the only pure evil. Truth is, when Estonia was occupied by Nazi Germany and Soviet Union, the people here weren't afraid of the Germans, though we ran to forests when the Red Army came. That's the difference between the two regimes.

[bushman 2,043]

That's right. Although most of the world only remembers Nazi Germany and their holocaust as the only pure evil. Truth is, when Estonia was occupied by Nazi Germany and Soviet Union, the people here weren't afraid of the Germans, though we ran to forests when the Red Army came. That's the difference between the two regimes.

Exactly. Many folks in Central Europe remember Nazis as gentlemen in comparison to Soviet dogs.

Any attempt to socialism or whatever one calls it does not work & never had.

We all know, capitalism might not be the ideal one but nobody came up with anything better, so far.

Therefore, you won´t see me shedding tears for Chavez. Corruptions, briberies were rampant in Venezuela.

[TorontoChelsea 4,064]

Regarding "Socialism" in the USSR, it was never truly socialism. It was a dictatorship like so many other regimes, claiming to be socialist.

Think about it. It is SO easy to abuse the ideals of socialism, the mere beautiful thought of equality and prosper for everyone, of course poor people would contribute to a revolution to end their sufferings.

"Since 1930 I had seen little evidence that the USSR was progressing towards anything that one could truly call Socialism. On the contrary, I was struck by clear signs of its transformation into a hierarchical society, in which the rulers have no more reason to give up their power than any other ruling class. Moreover, the workers and intelligentsia in a country like England cannot understand that the USSR of today is altogether different from what it was in 1917. It is partly that they do not want to understand (i.e. they want to believe that, somewhere, a really Socialist country does actually exist), and partly that, being accustomed to comparative freedom and moderation in public life, totalitarianism is completely incomprehensible to them."

"In my opinion, nothing has contributed so much to the corruption of the original idea of socialism as the belief that Russia is a socialist country and that every act of its rulers must be excused, if not imitated."

- George Orwell. Although being a self proclaimed socialist/communist he had some very interesting views regarding ideology. Granted, I'm a huge fan of his works, but I still find my self agreeing to most of his observations and specially the notion of social class structures.

But that's what any sort of extreme ideology will turn into. Countries that claim to be socialist almost always turn out to be repressive just like right wing countries. There is no perfect political system, but to me a social democracy with a free market and high taxes for the wealthy/lots of protection for the unfortunate is easily the best system available. The things is, people want their ideologies to be pure but it doesn't work. Chavez to me , like to a lot of people, is a controversial figure. He did a lot of good, raising a lot of poor into better living conditions, and he also stood up to the US interference which in Latin America is something to be proud of. However, he also tried to silence his critics by force and let the country's economy slip into shambles and the country become one of the most violent in the world. South American countries have often veered from Fascist military strongman to Socialist strongman..What can I say, they like their charismatic, strong leaders.

About Stalin versus Hitler. I hate this sort of thing. It's not a competition. Both were absolutely evil. Stalin had people killed indiscriminately. He was paranoid and mad. Hitler wanted to cleanse the world of all undesirables (Basically anyone who wasn't an able-bodied heterosexual Aryan)..

[Peppen 934]

But that's what any sort of extreme ideology will turn into. Countries that claim to be socialist almost always turn out to be repressive just like right wing countries. There is no perfect political system, but to me a social democracy with a free market and high taxes for the wealthy/lots of protection for the unfortunate is easily the best system available. The things is, people want their ideologies to be pure but it doesn't work. Chavez to me , like to a lot of people, is a controversial figure. He did a lot of good, raising a lot of poor into better living conditions, and he also stood up to the US interference which in Latin America is something to be proud of. However, he also tried to silence his critics by force and let the country's economy slip into shambles and the country become one of the most violent in the world. South American countries have often veered from Fascist military strongman to Socialist strongman..What can I say, they like their charismatic, strong leaders.

About Stalin versus Hitler. I hate this sort of thing. It's not a competition. Both were absolutely evil. Stalin had people killed indiscriminately. He was paranoid and mad. Hitler wanted to cleanse the world of all undesirables (Basically anyone who wasn't an able-bodied heterosexual Aryan)..

Yes, you're absolutely right. When the lower and middle classes get fed up with the ruling body, and revolts, only to turn their state into yet another totalitarian regime, it is quite obvious that SOMETHING is wrong. To claim that the Soviet Union was indeed socialist though, is horribly wrong. It was a simple dictatorship, covered up with vague Stalinist elements.

To me, or at least in Denmark, ideologies seem to have played their role. Of course it is not the same around the globe, but these ideologies were invented in a whole different generation. Poverty was a much bigger issue (still is, but less), a much smaller - or non existent middle class and no social safety nets. In Denmark the citizens pay taxes according to their income. Granted, it still needs optimizing, but it's somewhat fair. Exploits of the systems still takes place, but to endorse ideals and thoughts which dates back to +100 years ago, would not do any good in my humble opinion.

The parties in Denmark have all gone towards the middle practicing a sort of consensus policy where either party, even divided by wing, color, ideals, can work out an agreement.

[Peppen 934]

Exactly. Many folks in Central Europe remember Nazis as gentlemen in comparison to Soviet dogs.

Any attempt to socialism or whatever one calls it does not work & never had.

We all know, capitalism might not be the ideal one but nobody came up with anything better, so far.

Therefore, you won´t see me shedding tears for Chavez. Corruptions, briberies were rampant in Venezuela.

One flaw with your arguments..

If you claim that rich people are deluded in terms of understanding the situation of the poor, how are you able to know whether or not Chavez did any good and your conclusions are the sole truth?

I'm not saying Chavez was a saint, but he did do better than so many others.

[bushman 2,043]

One flaw with your arguments..

If you claim that rich people are deluded in terms of understanding the situation of the poor, how are you able to know whether or not Chavez did any good and your conclusions are the sole truth?

I'm not saying Chavez was a saint, but he did do better than so many others.

http://www.cato.org/publications/commentary/four-hotbeds-corruption-venezuela

Read on.

[Peppen 934]

http://www.cato.org/publications/commentary/four-hotbeds-corruption-venezuela

Read on.

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

Read on.

[Rmpr 8,977]

Funny but now you´re posting here rich people in Europe might be dumb. How stupid is that ?

Meanwhile, you twisted everything I said.

There are those who do help. Some help because they need to reduce their taxes. Then, there are those who do not help poor folks at all. Take your pick.

You get agitated very fast and need to spit out something venomous, does it really have to be this way? Maybe there's a reason you might take this the way you are?

You two are so sensitive, gosh! Sarcasm is pretty comon in a debate, must learn how to grasp it. It is not the first time it has happened SineUltra...

Also, bushman just contradicted himself. If there are the ones who do help, how can you automaticaly disqualify Marx for being rich? There are all sorts of people and they can all be found in all classes. Mark was a fucking stupid intelligent dude that happened to be rich. From what I know, this why the whole argument started...

This cant be used as an argument in a smart debate, it has no value. I am not defending rich people in a broader sense, I am only defending their right to give their opinion about what they think is best for the workforce!

It is absolutely stupid to categorize people by their money. Specially to try to do it with Marx and Engels (who contributed in a lot of fields), if they were poor they would be more correct?

[SinineUltra 1,170]

You two are so sensitive, gosh! Sarcasm is pretty comon in a debate, must learn how to grasp it. It is not the first time it has happened SineUltra...

Also, bushman just contradict yourself. If there are the ones who do help, how can you automaticaly disqualify Marx for being rich? From what I know, this why the whole argument started.

It is absolutely stupid to categorize people by their money. Specially to try to do it with Marx and Engels (who contributed in a lot of fields), if they were poor they would be more correct?

Can't say I have been sensitive any way but it is rather funny for me to listen to a teenager talking about different regimes when my country was occupied by an occupant practicing communism - a form of socialism. Or take a lecture from a person about poverty, who types through his iPhone/iPad and travels continents to see a football match. Said everything I've got to say, take care.

[Rmpr 8,977]

Though I must say, Rmpr don't take it so personally

LOOOL

It has indeed derailed, but I didnt take anything personally mate. I just cant stand someone trying to disqualify the ideas of two sociologists because they came from wealthy families or not. Rich people are not retarded assholes who know shit about life. Bushman talks exactly like he doesnt respect them because where they come from. Why not look solely into his work without biased opinion and decide for yourself with logical arguments why it is right or wrong?

Yes, their (the millionares) lives are fucking easy and they have zero worries, but how can you want to prove that the ideas of two important people in modern history are wrong by only saying they had money? How can you say that if they were poor they would have valid points? I seriously cant see how you dont get furious by it.

I am not talking about general wealthy people or whatevever. I am only arguying that something so simple as judging anyone for what their family were and not for what they did or wrote is complete bullshit. Many revolutions came from rich young students and they complete changed the world for the better, should we discredit them as well? This is all I am saying...

[Rmpr 8,977]

Can't say I have been sensitive any way but it is rather funny for me to listen to a teenager talking about different regimes when my country was occupied by an occupant practicing communism - a form of socialism. Or take a lecture from a person about poverty, who types through his iPhone/iPad and travels continents to see a football match. Said everything I've got to say, take care.

For starters, Comunism is an ideal free form of social system where there is no government, so this is already all wrong.

Second, you are very sensitive mate, serious. Cant you remeber the BF3 thread, where I did a joke and you got all offended? And what about the Roman Bear one?

Third, I have all the right to talk about things I have studied and know well. The fact your country was invades or if you are old (idk), does not make you smarter! Brazil was in some shit conditions at that time as well, for different reasons, but we had a super hard military dictatorship form 1964-1988. i may not have lived that period, but I had to study absolutely everything to pass my exams with good grades. I feel very low when people appeal for money or age, it trully makes me sad.

Lastly, did you just used irony to insinuate I am rich and that disqualify my arguments? One thing to be clear, I am not giving any lecture about poverty (re-read the posts), I am defending the stupid stereotype that people with money have no idea of what is going on and for that reason cant write a book about it!

P.S: iPad...

[CHOULO19 24,332]

Going to merge the whole thread with the Politics thread since almost all of it is off topic.

[Peppen 934]

Can't say I have been sensitive any way but it is rather funny for me to listen to a teenager talking about different regimes when my country was occupied by an occupant practicing communism - a form of socialism. Or take a lecture from a person about poverty, who types through his iPhone/iPad and travels continents to see a football match. Said everything I've got to say, take care.

Not meaning any harm, but I'm assuming you are talking about the Soviet Union invading Estonia? But the thing is, they weren't a communist, nor a socialist government or regime. They were Stalinist, and there's a huge difference.

And unless you were born, and lived under the occupation, your argument about Rmpr doesn't make much sense. Brazil has, as far as I know, suffered from poverty from ages due to Imperialism which has certain connections to capitalism.

Your economical status doesn't necessarily change your objectivity or tamper your knowledge. Goes for poor people too.

[Rmpr 8,977]

Not meaning any harm, but I'm assuming you are talking about the Soviet Union invading Estonia? But the thing is, they weren't a communist, nor a socialist government or regime. They were Stalinist, and there's a huge difference.

And unless you were born, and lived under the occupation, your argument about Rmpr doesn't make much sense. Brazil has, as far as I know, suffered from poverty from ages due to Imperialism which has certain connections to capitalism.

Your economical status doesn't necessarily change your objectivity or tamper your knowledge. Goes for poor people too.

Thank you man, really!

Sometimes I cant express myself right enough because my English isnt that great...

[SinineUltra 1,170]

Yes, you're absolutely right. When the lower and middle classes get fed up with the ruling body, and revolts, only to turn their state into yet another totalitarian regime, it is quite obvious that SOMETHING is wrong. To claim that the Soviet Union was indeed socialist though, is horribly wrong. It was a simple dictatorship, covered up with vague Stalinist elements.

To me, or at least in Denmark, ideologies seem to have played their role. Of course it is not the same around the globe, but these ideologies were invented in a whole different generation. Poverty was a much bigger issue (still is, but less), a much smaller - or non existent middle class and no social safety nets. In Denmark the citizens pay taxes according to their income. Granted, it still needs optimizing, but it's somewhat fair. Exploits of the systems still takes place, but to endorse ideals and thoughts which dates back to +100 years ago, would not do any good in my humble opinion.

The parties in Denmark have all gone towards the middle practicing a sort of consensus policy where either party, even divided by wing, color, ideals, can work out an agreement.

Peppen mate, can you tell me which world view party rules in Denmark atm? Because the policies you mentioned seem right and fair, something -in an ideal world- we could implement in Estonia.

[SinineUltra 1,170]

Not meaning any harm, but I'm assuming you are talking about the Soviet Union invading Estonia? But the thing is, they weren't a communist, nor a socialist government or regime. They were Stalinist, and there's a huge difference.

And unless you were born, and lived under the occupation, your argument about Rmpr doesn't make much sense. Brazil has, as far as I know, suffered from poverty from ages due to Imperialism which has certain connections to capitalism.

Your economical status doesn't necessarily change your objectivity or tamper your knowledge. Goes for poor people too.

Why are they called communists then? Please mate, you can define and twist this whichever way you want but it was communism taken to a new level - Stalinism. Did I had to be deported to Siberia for the rest of my life, beaten half deaf, shot by the soldiers to make sense? We have a very deep wound from that era as a nation, everyone has seen their loved ones being taken away from them or punished in a very cruel way for nothing, that's why I'm a bit sceptical about the knowledge some of us here are trying to spread, just because 'I read it from my history book'.

You don't see me trying to justify to a jew why Nazi Germany is better than Soviet Russia. It comes down to morals and respect. So in a sense, some things are best meant to be unsaid, even if you are about to explode from definitions and termins

[Rmpr 8,977]

Why are they called communists then? Please mate, you can define and twist this whichever way you want but it was communism taken to a new level - Stalinism. Did I had to be deported to Siberia for the rest of my life, beaten half deaf, shot by the soldiers to make sense? We have a very deep wound from that era as a nation, everyone has seen their loved ones being taken away from them or punished in a very cruel way for nothing, that's why I'm a bit sceptical about the knowledge some of us here are trying to spread, just because 'I read it from my history book'.

This must have been hard and dont think Brazil were in a better situation. My sincere condolences....

One thing really bothers me though, this is not Comunism, no matter what they say. Comunism is the last phase of Marxism, where all forms of governmemts become existinct. Comunism and anarquism are very much alike (weird that their followers have such rispid fights). So, if they were actually a dictatorship disguised into Socialism, clearly way too far from being Comunism, lol.

Onr question though, why wont you answer me? I did not insult you nor was I disrespectful. I trully hope we can continue the debate in a civilized way, one where sarcasm wont be used if you dont like it so much...

[Peppen 934]

Peppen mate, can you tell me which world view party rules in Denmark atm? Because the policies you mentioned seem right and fair, something -in an ideal world- we could implement in Estonia.

Actually, I am quite against the current government, but alright, here goes mate

Currently, the government consists of three parties: "The Social democrats", "The Socialist People's Party" and the "Central Left Party". In Denmark we have a one chamber system, in which you have to control a certain amount of mandates (91 or something). The three parties don't, so they are being supported by the ultra-left party, former DKP (Danish Communist Party). However, right now they are pushing towards the middle, implementing loads of right wing reforms and policies, such as lowering the SU (Education Governmental Support) and budget cuts. Many socialists are actually taking great offense because of this, and the former biggest party in Denmark (Social Democrats) are now below 15% in opinion polls compared to 30-40% 5-10 years ago. The ultra left wing party though has seen an immense increase in popularity. They have gone from about 3-4% to 12-13% of the total votes. That's mainly due to the other left wing parties moving towards the middle, and I can understand that. They continued the direction of the former liberal government and has decreased social benefits to "utilize" private companies and decrease the taxes.

Regarding the communist label of Soviet Russia, you have to put things into perspective. If I call myself a goat, I'll still be a human, won't I? So if I proclaim that I am a socialist, and I go about liberal policies, and abandon my original ideology (communism/socialism), am I still a communist then? No. Stalin was a dictator. He was not a communist, because if a state is 100% communist, there would be no government, no dictators, no rulers, no oligarchy, nothing. The resources would be entirely managed by the workers, and the means of production would be in the control of the "people". Of course you can disagree with this, but that is essentially the basic factors of communism. There are loads of different variations though.

I agree with you, the Soviet Union was no better than fascism. But true communism has never been applied to any state in the world. Bolshevism, collectivism, Leninism are all variations of Marxism (socialism), but they have been only existed as a transitional ideology, while eventually turning into something else.

Regarding your nation, of course you can relate to the times of occupation. But my point was, if you can relate to a period in the past of your country, how can Rmpr not relate to the situation of people less fortunate than him? Of course he can, and of course you can, mate.

[SinineUltra 1,170]

This must have been hard and dont think Brazil were in a better situation. My sincere condolences (?)....

One thing really bothers me, this is not comunism, no matter what they say. Comunism is the last phase of Socialism, where all forms of governmemts become existinct. So, if they were actually a dictatorship disguised into Socialism, clearly way too far from being Comunism, lol.

Onr question though, why wont you answer me. I did not insult you nor was I disrespectful. I trully hope we can continue the debate in a civilized way, one where sarcasm wont be used if you dont like it so much...

Rmpr, I'm still a bit stunned how I always come off as arrogant or offended, because I'm not a person to hold a grudge or take offense that easily, must be that you cant show real emotions through a screen. So there is nothing to talk about here. For sure, if I still got to contribute to this thread alongside your posts then we can continue doing so in a grown up way as you suggested, cant say though that it got out of hand in any given time.

[MetsajCFC 1,255]

Not meaning any harm, but I'm assuming you are talking about the Soviet Union invading Estonia? But the thing is, they weren't a communist, nor a socialist government or regime. They were Stalinist, and there's a huge difference.

And unless you were born, and lived under the occupation, your argument about Rmpr doesn't make much sense. Brazil has, as far as I know, suffered from poverty from ages due to Imperialism which has certain connections to capitalism.

Your economical status doesn't necessarily change your objectivity or tamper your knowledge. Goes for poor people too.

It's hard to find a family in Estonia that hasn't been touched by the deportations and warfare of the World War II. God knows where we'd be now if it wasn't for Boriss Jeltsin who called back the troops (it got very intense here, I remember my father saying that he thinks it's about to get bloody - keep in mind there were already bloody consequences in neighbouring Baltic state Latvia, tanks on the streets, civilianz blocking the path to Tallinn's Broadcasting Tower to keep in touch with the people and the world, freeing the parliament building from russian demonstrants after Edgar Savisaar asked people to save the nation over live-radio) from Estonia during the Moscow's August Coup in 1991. So as Estonians, we take anything like that very personally as we've experienced it first hand. Till this day Estonia pretty much has the word "enemy" and "Russia" as synonyms and the feelings are still there. Just as little back as 2007 there was a major riot on the streets of Tallinn where russian speaking community used the removing of a statue (that was a memorial statue for Soviets from WW2) from downtown Tallinn (capital of Estonia) to a more quieter, less provocative place as an excuse to riot, burglar shops and trash the city. For more info: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bronze_Night

So the feelings run deep, as if the hate for russians (and I don't mean those russians who live in Estonia, learn the language, obey the law like a normal citizen. I mean thos russians who haven't learnt Estonian while living here for 20+ years, demand for russian to be second national language, more benefits for russians, waving Russian flags where they shouldn't etc, playing the CCCP anthem loudly etc, we're democratic and all that but there's a line.) runs in our DNA, whereas I've only heard good (well, good as in as good as they can be when your country is being invaded by foreign troops) things about the German soldiers from my family members or history class for that matter.