Politics & Stuff

[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