Politics & Stuff

[Rmpr 8,977]

But that's the point. Intelligent people did agree with him. In fact half the world did. To say that all who supported Nazi Germany was unintelligent does not make sense because they included some of the best scientists, doctors, engineers..etc in the world.

Good and evil only exist in cartoons. No one puts evil plans to destroy the world and does an evil laugh. Countries and people act according to beliefs that suite them.

No, he got a massive support from the people, that is why he got where he did. He suffered 6 internal attacks from the generals that were aware of what he was doing...

People also support anyone else because of personal interests, and Hitler and Mussolini were fucking incredible at that!

One more thing, how can you agree with someone without reading their ideas? Does the Bibble ring a bell? It is all different ways to brainwash people. The ones who follow some line of thought without taking time to learn about it just dont deserve my respect.

Also, this is very naive to say the people who worked for him supported it. Most people (just like nowadays) just want to do their jobs and the only way to do it was/is to accept the terms of the one who has the resources. Do you think people who work at Cern, Nasa, Area 51, Room 39 and RAF trully know what is going on or agree with everything? However, how will they pursue their dream of following science careers if not there?

When I compare Hitler to Chavez, I was only refering to the love both get and how it doesnt translate into a good person. I have no intentions of breaking down Hitler's life or anything. We can do it, but it will just be another long boring discussion. All I want to make clear is that he is not only seen as a devil because he lost it, it does interfere, but it is not near as you explained. People do have their beliefs no matter who/what wins. Capitalism and Socialism is by far the biggest example I can find!

P.S: When I say good, I use the greek meaning of it. Not the new one... (sorry, didnt make it clear)

[SinineUltra 1,170]

History takes the side of the winner, it always does. It's easy to say how morally repugnant Hitler's philosophy is but at that time each side was convinced in his own philosophy that was naturally valid to him.

Exactly. How many actually still remember that Soviet Union switched sides during WW II? I know Nazi Germany attacked them but they also made peace with the allies.

[SinineUltra 1,170]

Have you read his book? Try...

I agree the winner gets more 'love', just look at what Hollywood did to the Holocaust (even though way more Russians died and suffered in WW2). However, I am pretty sure general neutral intelligent people will agree he was anything but good. Capitalism is the dominant force, but just because it won it doesnt mean people like and accept it, they still have the right to fight for something better. Socialists didnt change their mind because they lost!

All I am saying is that the love Chavez is getting means fuck all. Half of them go just for the sake of going and the other half give him credit for what he didnt do (since they are constantly brainwashed by TV). It happens everywhere really, just like Americans think they are free (this is the most hilarious really).

The reason why Soviet Union lost so many men during any war in their history is due to their tactics. A life of a human being cost/costs nothing in Soviet Union/Russia. They used to have commissars who shot anyone deserting so the soldiers had two choices: to die in the battle or get shot by the officers. One great example would be the battle of Stalingrad, the final assault by the Soviet Union was out of desperation, they only held a few strips of the city's territory near the river Volga and Stalin didn't want to lose a town with HIS name so he ordered a full scale assault on the last 200 000 Germans, who were left to die there by delusional Hitler.

[MetsajCFC 1,255]

I was like +2 on Y-axis and -2 on X-axis, in the upper left box (red) - I don't consider myself communist-minded person, far from it but that's what the test gave me, answered all questions accurately

[CHOULO19 24,332]

Both were crooks. Pablo was a drug dealer & Chavez appropriated companies. Nationalization is not something to be proud of.

Why?

[bushman 2,043]

Why?

Simple. You start some company & I come by & take it away from you.

[CHOULO19 24,332]

Simple. You start some company & I come by & take it away from you.

But that's not the whole story, and I'm not 100% with nationalization. But how is 5% of the population owning huge companies and tons of money they're never going to use while 20-30% of the people live in poverty better than the state owning all the companies and the wealth getting more evenly distributed?

[bushman 2,043]

But that's not the whole story, and I'm not 100% with nationalization. But how is 5% of the population owning huge companies and tons of money they're never going to use while 20-30% of the people live in poverty better than the state owning all the companies and the wealth getting more evenly distributed?

Socialism is long dead. it did not work anywhere. The fall of Soviet union was the great example.

Your theory of wealth evenly distributed just does not cut it.

If one invests, he wants to make profit. Regardless of 20-30 % of poor people being hungry. If he wishes to feed those, my admiration of him. It´s up to him.

State own companies, anywhere are not managed well. People working in these companies are squandering money.

[CHOULO19 24,332]

Socialism is long dead. it did not work anywhere. The fall of Soviet union was the great example.

Your theory of wealth evenly distributed just does not cut it.

If one invests, he wants to make profit. Regardless of 20-30 % of poor people being hungry. If he wishes to feed those, my admiration of him. It´s up to him.

State own companies, anywhere are not managed well. People working in these companies are squandering money.

Completely agree with the last sentence which is why I said I'm not 100% with it. But you need balance in a society. Everywhere in the world capitalism has had to make changes because you can't expect people to accept 95% of society to do all the work and the other 5% to own all the money. You''' certainly have a civil war on your hands. I think capitalism needs to make more changes and in some cases socialism still does seem to help societies more.

[SinineUltra 1,170]

Bushman is right, socialism doesn't work in practice. People will not work hard enough and the overall productivity will go down resulting in poverty for the government and eventually people.

[CHOULO19 24,332]

Bushman is right, socialism doesn't work in practice. People will not work hard enough and the overall productivity will go down resulting in poverty for the government and eventually people.

Completely agree, but that doesn't mean capitalism is working all that great either. The gap between the poor and the wealthy keeps getting bigger.

[Rmpr 8,977]

Both Capitalism and Socialism (this is so vague because there are so many forms, but I will guess we are talking about the scientific one discribed by Marx and Engels) can thrive, they just need the right conditions to do so!