|
not even robert conquest, a guy whose job it was to disseminate anti-soviet propaganda for the british government, calls the famine a genocide lol. the entire country was affected you don't have to look for communist sources on this, american scholars have come out and said it was not manmade here's a thing you won't read and another also re-litigating the soviet union is a great tactic for anti-communists to ignore capitalism's death toll. 11 million people starve to death in a year despite a world food surplus. that food doesn't get to those people because the system that allocates food isn't based on their need, but based on their ability to pay. that is an annual capitalist famine, more massive than anything that ever happened in the ussr. (which, by the way, never had a famine again after the war despite previously suffering famines every other year under the czar)
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2016 16:05
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 24, 2024 13:56 |
|
|
but have you read animal farm
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2016 17:47
|
|
|
Yudo posted:So you eagerly support an ideology that promulgated and eagerly justified (or simply covered up) tens of millions of deaths, slavery, unparalleled state terror, repression of personal rights, corruption, incompetence and imperialism but enough about capitalism
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2016 18:19
|
|
|
lol, someone is majorly overestimating the Riverines.
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2016 19:27
|
|
|
Homework Explainer posted:not even robert conquest, a guy whose job it was to disseminate anti-soviet propaganda for the british government, calls the famine a genocide lol. the entire country was affected The number is lower than 11 million, and there are capitalist countries where people aren't starving, so that can't be an inherent problem with capitalism.
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2016 19:28
|
|
|
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WS2Bsq5PDmU
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2016 19:33
|
|
|
Mayor Dave posted:not just eligible but eminently so: fade5 fucked around with this message at 19:48 on Jan 22, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2016 19:43
|
|
|
I don't have a particularly original post here but if you're going to compare your ideal communism ("it would've worked out this way if it weren't for Stalin") you should compare it to an ideal capitalist society, not capitalism as it's actually practiced. Same goes in reverse. You'll hear anarcho-capitalists compare their ideal libertarian system to communism as it was actually practiced. But you should compare like things to like things.
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2016 19:47
|
|
|
Jewel Repetition posted:The number is lower than 11 million, and there are capitalist countries where people aren't starving, so that can't be an inherent problem with capitalism. yeah, the point is that it's more profitable to provide enough food to those non-starving countries to produce an obesity epidemic than it is to provide starving people in the developing world enough food to live. Hell, even at the national level most countries with starving people have a food surplus, but it's not profitable to give food to dying impoverished people so, welp, sorry RIP
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2016 20:06
|
|
|
Bryter posted:yeah, the point is that it's more profitable to provide enough food to those non-starving countries to produce an obesity epidemic than it is to provide starving people in the developing world enough food to live. Hell, even at the national level most countries with starving people have a food surplus, but it's not profitable to give food to dying impoverished people so, welp, sorry RIP Right, and you need social programs like SNAP to fill that gap. That's what I'm advocating. Jewel Repetition fucked around with this message at 20:14 on Jan 22, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2016 20:12
|
|
|
Jewel Repetition posted:Right, and you need social programs like SNAP to fill that gap. That's what I'm advocating. yes tiny specks of imperial superprofits manage to land in the pockets of the american poor. that doesn't mean global privation is ok lol, or that the lot of the massive american proletariat wouldn't be infinitely better under socialism. there's also no reason to assume socialism in the 21st century needs to operate the same way as the soviet system, anyway, so ussr comparisons are a bit silly in the first place. venezuela's democratic socialism is under assault by the global imperial bourgeoisie and will probably crumble in due time, but their economic reforms massively increased quality of life indexes. we could nationalize wal-mart and in one step be well on our way to a better economic model R. Guyovich fucked around with this message at 20:18 on Jan 22, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2016 20:15
|
|
|
Homework Explainer posted:yes tiny specks of imperial superprofits manage to land in the pockets of the american poor. that doesn't mean global privation is ok lol, or that the lot of the massive american proletariat wouldn't be infinitely better under socialism. I do think the American proletariat are better now than they would be deprived of political freedom, economic freedom, and food. But also that they'd be better still with more unions, more leave (sick, vacation and child) and a higher minimum wage.
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2016 20:18
|
|
|
Jewel Repetition posted:I do think the American proletariat are better now than they would be deprived of political freedom, economic freedom, and food. But also that they'd be better still with mroe unions, more leave (sick, vacation and maternal) and a higher minimum wage. yes a democratic system of government where the working class is actually represented and participates directly in politics is so much worse than the one we have now, where finance capital picks their favored candidates or pays for their loyalty later. and an economic system that extracts surplus value is somehow way way better than one that doesn't
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2016 20:20
|
|
|
Homework Explainer posted:yes a democratic system of government where the working class is actually represented and participates directly in politics is so much worse than the one we have now, Socialism leads to governments that are less democratic, not more. And I'm all for making our current system more democratic through campaign finance reform and co-ops. I'm not for doing so by going "gently caress it." Edit: Also doing anything possible to improve voter participation and engagement. Homework Explainer posted:and an economic system that extracts surplus value is somehow way way better than one that doesn't Correct.
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2016 20:23
|
|
|
Horseshoe theory riddle of the day: they want to literally kill an entire group of people just for who they are, even if they haven't done anything wrong. Am I talking about fascists and blacks/jews or socialists and the bourgeoisie?
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2016 20:29
|
|
|
Jewel Repetition posted:Horseshoe theory riddle of the day: they want to literally kill an entire group of people just for who they are, even if they haven't done anything wrong. Am I talking about fascists and blacks/jews or socialists and the bourgeoisie? by definition the bourgeoisie have done something wrong
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2016 20:31
|
|
|
Mayor Dave posted:by definition the bourgeoisie have done something wrong So a business owner who worked her way there from the bottom, and treats and pays all of her employees well, did something so wrong she deserves to die?
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2016 20:34
|
|
|
Something I've wondered: do executives in a cooperative still count as capitally punishable bourgeoisie?
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2016 20:36
|
|
|
Jewel Repetition posted:Horseshoe theory riddle of the day: they want to literally kill an entire group of people just for who they are, even if they haven't done anything wrong. Am I talking about fascists and blacks/jews or socialists and the bourgeoisie? make u think
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2016 20:40
|
|
|
Jewel Repetition posted:So a business owner who worked her way there from the bottom, and treats and pays all of her employees well, did something so wrong she deserves to die? may these riddles entertain your barracksmates in the reeducation camp, comrade
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2016 20:41
|
|
|
Jewel Repetition posted:Something I've wondered: do executives in a cooperative still count as capitally punishable bourgeoisie? Maybe since they only partially own the means of production you only partially decapitate them, like Nearly Headless Nick? Mods? Central committee members?
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2016 20:45
|
|
|
to be honest i'd rather re-educate your strawman bougie than kill them, but w/e
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2016 20:46
|
|
|
Homework Explainer posted:not even robert conquest, a guy whose job it was to disseminate anti-soviet propaganda for the british government, calls the famine a genocide lol. the entire country was affected I forgot to say this earlier, but the scholarly consensus is in fact that it was manmade and only worsened by natural factors.
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2016 20:54
|
|
|
Jewel Repetition posted:Horseshoe theory riddle of the day: they want to literally kill an entire group of people just for who they are, even if they haven't done anything wrong. Am I talking about fascists and blacks/jews or socialists and the bourgeoisie? communists the same as fascists, and other chestnuts from the Nazi Rehabilitation Handbook
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2016 21:00
|
|
|
Homework Explainer posted:communists the same as fascists, and other chestnuts from the Nazi Rehabilitation Handbook The similarity is because communists are bad, not because fascists are good.
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2016 21:01
|
|
|
the 19th century indian famines among farmers who were driven into debt only payable with cotton and other cash crops and so could neither afford to grow nor buy food, where the famine was more intense the closer you got to railroads and infrastructure and where iirc the previous government's granaries had been appropriated and sold for profit, are pretty straightforward cases of capitalists and a government protecting their interests intentionally creating food insecurity and choosing not to prevent resultant famine i think they were exporting more than 1% of the total harvest in 1840's ireland too in both cases the state both introduces food insecurity where none previously existed then exerts physical and legal force to perpetuate food insecurity in the face of famine seems fair to ascribe such a famine to capitalist government, doesn't actually have much to do with this thread but gently caress it. buttfuck it
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2016 21:02
|
|
|
oystertoadfish posted:the 19th century indian famines among farmers who were driven into debt only payable with cotton and other cash crops and so could neither afford to grow nor buy food, where the famine was more intense the closer you got to railroads and infrastructure and where iirc the previous government's granaries had been appropriated and sold for profit, are pretty straightforward cases of capitalists and a government protecting their interests intentionally creating food insecurity and choosing not to prevent resultant famine correct. late victorian holocausts is a sick and heavily-sourced book and all anticom dorks should read it
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2016 21:03
|
|
|
also pretty incredible to pretend the bourgeoisie are this poor, unrepresented class with no power as if they're the same as black americans lol. yes, the weak bourgeoisie who literally hold an iron grip on the government and economic system of the united states
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2016 21:07
|
|
|
Basically it's like Shin Megami Tensei IV, unregulated capitalism is the chaos ending, socialism is the law ending, and social democracy is the neutral/human ending.
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2016 21:31
|
|
|
Jewel Repetition posted:The similarity is because communists are bad, not because fascists are good. A talking point invented by the John Birch Society in the 50's along with other reactionary propaganda.
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2016 21:44
|
|
|
Jewel Repetition posted:there are capitalist countries where people aren't starving, so that can't be an inherent problem with capitalism. Capitalism is a global system where local prices are easily impacted by global trends. First World hedge funds speculating on the future prices of wheat can cause prices to spike in countries where food insecurity are highest, like in Africa or Latin America. http://www.theguardian.com/business/2010/jul/19/speculators-commodities-food-price-rises If we were judging individual countries as opposed to the economic systems they operate upon, we could just as easily say that Cuba and Vietnam have never experienced famines under Communist administration. So that can't be an inherent problem with communism.  Also while people may not be literally starving to death unless by neglect from their guardians, millions of people in the United States are good insecure. http://www.feedingamerica.org/hunger-in-america/impact-of-hunger/hunger-and-poverty/hunger-and-poverty-fact-sheet.html 48.1 million Americans live in food insecure households, 15.3 million of which are children, and of those tens of millions only 61 percent are taking advantage of assistance programs like SNAP. The most serious issue with being food insecure is the developmental impact, because children who grow up without proper nutrition are at severe risk of development mental or physical disorders which can impair them into adulthood. Hell you don't even have to live in poverty to grow up with a lovely diet, because the food markets are geared towards making nutritionally empty foods the cheapest and most addicting available. http://www.nytimes.com/2013/02/24/magazine/the-extraordinary-science-of-junk-food.html Americans living in poverty would be astronomically benefited by a socialized food system, which would not need to make its foods chemically addictive for profit, and which would deliver a better range of nutritious foods to all Americans.
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2016 21:50
|
|
|
Pener Kropoopkin posted:Americans living in poverty would be astronomically benefited by a socialized food system, which would not need to make its foods chemically addictive for profit, and which would deliver a better range of nutritious foods to all Americans. lmao yes, this proposal sounds like a winner I look forward to my socialized pâté that is literally inferior to American dog food in flavor and composition
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2016 21:55
|
|
|
So in your mind socialized agriculture is like The Matrix?
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2016 22:01
|
|
|
Pener Kropoopkin posted:So in your mind socialized agriculture is like The Matrix? In my mind socialized agriculture (and a socialized food production system) is what it has been like historically- i.e. absolutely dire. That wasn't a made up example, that was something Viktor Belenko (a Mig Pilot who defected in 1976) actually experienced. He was convinced the U.S. grocery stores he visited were Potemkin villages the CIA set up specifically for his benefit rather than entirely typical examples of things the citizenry had access to because the quality and variety of foods available was so high/large. He also accidentally bought canned dog food and happily consumed it before someone informed him of what he was doing. He deemed it superior to the canned food available to the populace of the Soviet Union. see also: Yeltsin's 1989 trip to a Houston grocery store LGD fucked around with this message at 22:12 on Jan 22, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2016 22:07
|
|
|
Pener Kropoopkin posted:So in your mind socialized agriculture is like The Matrix? No, there's enough of the Matrix nutrient slurry for all the humans.
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2016 22:15
|
|
|
DOCTOR ZIMBARDO posted:A talking point invented by the John Birch Society in the 50's along with other reactionary propaganda. Actually it was invented by a liberal French philosopher named Jean-Pierre Faye.
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2016 22:20
|
|
|
food selection for the petit bourgeois in the most economically advanced country on the planet was superior to that of a developing economy that still managed to go toe-to-toe with said country for much of the 20th century color me surprised
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2016 22:24
|
|
|
Homework Explainer posted:not even robert conquest, a guy whose job it was to disseminate anti-soviet propaganda for the british government, calls the famine a genocide lol. the entire country was affected Robert Conquest argued with historical evidence that millions of people were intentionally starved to death (with the immense failures of collectivization and Soviet incompetence compounding the damage), so I'm not sure what you are trying to say here. I guess what you call the murder of millions is more important than the murder of millions?
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2016 22:26
|
|
|
"It is regrettable that many of the advocates of the genocide thesis continue to claim Conquest to justify their position, despite his clearly expressed views on this matter. See the Harvard Ukrainian Research Institute Conference on Holodomor on November 18, 2008. At the conference Nicolas Werth was asked by a participant in the conference, who had attended a lecture given by Wheatcroft, whether Conquest accepted the view that the famine was genocide. Werth strangely replied that ‘we all know in scientific circles the very complicated relations between Conquest and Wheatcroft’; he repeated this several times, but declined to reply to the question. Kul’chitskii more straightforwardly has explained that in June 2006 a Ukrainian delegation of experts on the Holocaust and the Holodomor met Robert Conquest in Stanford University and enquired about his views, and were told directly by him that he preferred not to use the term genocide (Kul’chitskii (2007), 176)." long-rear end complicated link
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2016 22:31
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 24, 2024 13:56 |
|
|
Homework Explainer posted:food selection for the petit bourgeois in the most economically advanced country on the planet was superior to that of a developing economy that still managed to go toe-to-toe with said country for much of the 20th century Interesting that its "developing" economy was so bad while it was so powerful otherwise. Maybe there was something wrong with its economic system. Btw not everyone who shops at a grocery store is "petit bourgeois."
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2016 22:31
|
|