JimW
支那暗杀团
Thought Bruce Cumings has shown fairly conclusively they're broadly right about that.
Is the Left Wing more truthful than the Right Wing, and if so, why?
- Thread starter Cloo
- Start date
All the evidence shows is that Kim Il Sung was tugging at Stalin's sleeve begging to be allowed to invade South Korea. Stalin relented and let him.
JimW
支那暗杀团
He wrote two long volumes on the origins, you can get a sense of his position in this interview:
krtek a houby
Merry Xmas!
some one claims it is saying ..."We have lots of food"
Last edited:
krtek a houby
Merry Xmas!
krtek a houby
Merry Xmas!
What is it they used to say?
Google is your friend -
noun
noun: left wing; plural noun: left wings; noun: leftwing; plural noun: leftwings
adjective: left-wing; adjective: left wing; adjective: leftwing
Google is your friend -
noun
noun: left wing; plural noun: left wings; noun: leftwing; plural noun: leftwings
- 1.
the section of a political party or system that advocates greater social and economic equality, and typically favours socially liberal ideas; the socialist or progressive group or section.
- 2.
the left side of a team on the field in soccer, rugby, and field hockey.
"his usual position on the left wing"- the left side of an army.
"the Allied left wing"
- the left side of an army.
adjective: left-wing; adjective: left wing; adjective: leftwing
- advocating or taking measures to promote greater social and economic equality, and typically favouring socially liberal ideas; socialist or progressive.
"left-wing activists"
krtek a houby
Merry Xmas!
Communism always ends up being like Stalin or North Korea.
You judge people by their actions - not their words!
already you hav two examples on this thread of Left-wingers not being able to accept the truth and trying to bend it to match their politics.
-
The world is shit, people are shit, but communism isn't the answer.
Even after the revolution nothing will changed:
you won't be any better looking than you are now, your Willy won't be any bigger than it is now, nothing will change, you will still have all the same medical problems that you have now, you won't become instantly popular and people will still be shit, don't try to find answers for your personal medical problems in left-wing politics.
You judge people by their actions - not their words!
already you hav two examples on this thread of Left-wingers not being able to accept the truth and trying to bend it to match their politics.
-
The world is shit, people are shit, but communism isn't the answer.
Even after the revolution nothing will changed:
you won't be any better looking than you are now, your Willy won't be any bigger than it is now, nothing will change, you will still have all the same medical problems that you have now, you won't become instantly popular and people will still be shit, don't try to find answers for your personal medical problems in left-wing politics.
Last edited:
planetgeli
There's no future in England's dreaming
Which personal medical problems of mine are you alluding to?
This looks like the definition was written by a left-winger, a daydreamer, A wishful thinker, delusional fantasist who can't cope with the real world. This definition was written by a left winger. “We are the Good Guys!!!!!”.
Last edited:
Don't worry, you are not one of the two.
PTK
Paul Kegan
That is interesting.He wrote two long volumes on the origins, you can get a sense of his position in this interview:
Also interesting is that there was an uprising in South Korea in 1948 that was brutally put down.
Many of the people that the USA put in power in South Korea had collaborated with the Japanese occupation of that country.
Where would you rather live North Korea or South Korea?
ElizabethofYork
Old Crone
ooh, ooh, I know this one.
JimW
支那暗杀团
The point of posting that was to show you repeating untruths about the origin of the Korean War because that's the story you heard and it fitted your prejudices.
pokazuka - Getting back to the subject of the thread russia used to take the signs off machine tools that it had bought from Finland and take off the trademark signs and replace it with "made in Russia" type signs there was nothing honest in the old Soviet Union, Everything was about lying to the populace, Deceiving them, and keeping them down.
Last edited:
krtek a houby
Merry Xmas!
You come across as dishonest. Or ill informed, at the very least.
Why are you posting on this site, out of curiosity?
Please tell me how long you would last if you had been born in North Korea or in Stalin's Russia?
Many people on this site struggled in the midsts of plenty. This site is a sanctuary for intelligent people with brain problems, mental problems, and I include myself in this group, in this category as I have quite bad brain damage. I joined this site when I was bedridden as I got a bit better and was able to start doing things I sort of lost interest. But my medical problems rule my life, I woke up just before I came on to this forum (my laptop is next to my bed), after having not a very enjoyable dream, when I woke up my the top of my head was hurting, it totally explained my crap dream. Every day for the last eight years I've woken up in pain I have to keep my head warm or I get a bit doodally or if I'm asleep I just have nightmares. None of my medical problems, life problems were caused by the Tories or by Margaret Thatcher or by the USA or by Americans or by Donald Trump, my problems, like everybody else's on this site are medical. yes, you're intelligent, some of you very intelligent, but our brains aren't working properly. if we've been born in North Korea virtually every single one of us would be dead because we don't know how to survive.
Last edited:
ElizabethofYork
Old Crone
Really sorry to hear about your problems. I wish you well.
And I wish you well, Elizabeth. I've read your bio on Danny the Rouge's thread and I have great sympathy for you. I am thinking of doing a similar bio, but will I be able to get around to doing it, I don't know. The people who have written on that thread have shown great honesty and courage I think it's the most important thread on this forum.. I want to say more, but I can't quite articulate it.
Last edited:
seventh bullet
sovietwave
Why is the violence of the oppressed against their oppressors always condemned?
What is genuine freedom?
seventh bullet
sovietwave
This is regularly wheeled out and it's so tedious. Those words mean wildy different things to different people. And so it is with Marxism-Leninism, with the above specifying a particular form of government within M-L doctrine, identifying a country on the socialist road (as understood by M-Ls specifically and not everyone else you don't like) but necessarily behind the socialist (again as understood by M-Ls) development of Soviet society. The criteria for it involving pre-revolutionary class basis of said society, type of economy, depth of capitalist development, position within the world system etc, relationship to the USSR etc... Now this is going to blow your mind, but the convergence of Marxism-Leninism with a deeply patriarchal national culture, and influence from Japanese colonialism, created a society that according to other M-Ls moved beyond the acceptable bounds of what it reasonably means to be 'Marxist-Leninist.'
littlebabyjesus
one of Maxwell's demons
Not being arrested for saying stuff like what I just posted.
There do exist freedoms of expression in places like the UK that do not exist in Cuba.
This stuff matters.
seventh bullet
sovietwave
I'm not a Cuba fan but it's authoritarian government can't be removed from the context of its relationship with the US. I'm a communist and believe all basic human needs should be met for free with or without 'earning' them, as a baseline for a healthy society. There are people who want to kill me for holding such views. The UK government aided Chile during the civil-military dictatorship, where members of the left were raped by dogs in its torture chambers. This stuff matters, indeed.
littlebabyjesus
one of Maxwell's demons
Yes. It did. It's aiding Israel commit genocide right now. But that doesn't change ideas about basic freedom to dissent. Anywhere where that has been lost is in a bad place, including Cuba.
seventh bullet
sovietwave
These ideas, as vaguely as we're both talking about them now, or the modern understanding of them, were expressed when other human beings were chattel. Cuba pre-revolution was essentially a brothel and safe place for US organised crime to launder money. It had to gradually adopt Soviet political practices as a condition for outside support during blockade and attempts to destabilise it. Like I said, I'm no fan of its authoritarianism. I'm no fan of equating all communist politics with a crude caricature of M-L, either. Which I acknowledge you're not doing.
Philosophers, sociologists and economists have talked about many forms of “freedom” down the years, of course. You have the ultimate neoliberal’s version of freedom in Hayek. Hayek defined it only as “the condition of men in which coercion of some by others is reduced as much as possible”. He carefully distinguished this freedom from broader notions, excluding political freedoms like the right to vote, saying that a benevolent despot might respect individual freedom while a democratic majority might violate the protected space of minorities. It also did not include psychological or “inner freedom.” Poverty did not threaten Hayek’s version of freedom, But he rejected any unqualified laissez-faire that might allow people to invade each other’s’ personal space. So, minimization of coercion was equivalent to maximization of a protected personal space.
Then you have the pragmatists like John Dewey. His freedom was about being a free moral agent who, facing conflicts between habitual ways of acting and pressures from duties, impulses, and fears, could mentally rehearse possible actions, and decide what to do based on anticipated consequences. These consequences must include consequences for other people and for the kinds of persons that the moral agents want to become. Although free moral agents make ethical decisions as individuals, their ability to do so depends on “deep communities” in which they are born, learn, and develop habits. And these “deep communities” depend, in turn, on the capabilities of free moral agents who become parents, live in neighborhoods, work in schools and libraries, and join voluntary organizations. So, for Dewey, freedom was inseparable from the social development of capabilities.
Or you have your more collectivist-economists definitions of freedom, like those given by John Commons. Freedom for Commons was the power of citizens to call on officials of the state to protect their “privileges, immunities, and rights.” For Commons, a right for one person implied duties for others, an immunity for one person implied liabilities for others, and so forth. He thus feared that the rise of corporations rendered an abolitionist notion of “free” labor irrelevant for the landless working classes of the factory age. For Commons, there were thus three kinds of coercion that prevented freedom: political, economic, and moral.
Then you have the pragmatists like John Dewey. His freedom was about being a free moral agent who, facing conflicts between habitual ways of acting and pressures from duties, impulses, and fears, could mentally rehearse possible actions, and decide what to do based on anticipated consequences. These consequences must include consequences for other people and for the kinds of persons that the moral agents want to become. Although free moral agents make ethical decisions as individuals, their ability to do so depends on “deep communities” in which they are born, learn, and develop habits. And these “deep communities” depend, in turn, on the capabilities of free moral agents who become parents, live in neighborhoods, work in schools and libraries, and join voluntary organizations. So, for Dewey, freedom was inseparable from the social development of capabilities.
Or you have your more collectivist-economists definitions of freedom, like those given by John Commons. Freedom for Commons was the power of citizens to call on officials of the state to protect their “privileges, immunities, and rights.” For Commons, a right for one person implied duties for others, an immunity for one person implied liabilities for others, and so forth. He thus feared that the rise of corporations rendered an abolitionist notion of “free” labor irrelevant for the landless working classes of the factory age. For Commons, there were thus three kinds of coercion that prevented freedom: political, economic, and moral.
Last edited:
seventh bullet
sovietwave
Oxbridge?
Similar threads
