|
Because I have a feeling that isn't actually true, comrades. Please advise me of the official position of the Party on this obvious reactionary propaganda. I am serious, what is the truth? Boomers never stop saying this poo poo.
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2020 22:34
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 9, 2024 04:41 |
|
|
communism killed millions of nazi soldiers and hitler, yes
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2020 22:40
|
|
|
Capitalism has a higher body count than communism could dream of
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2020 22:42
|
|
|
Mayor Dave posted:Capitalism has a higher body count than communism could dream of
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2020 22:43
|
|
|
My official position is just to go "half those counts loving include nazi soldiers that were actively invading the Soviet union and they should have killed even more."
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2020 22:49
|
|
|
The Great Leap Forward seems bad (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2020 22:50
|
|
|
no OP starvation did
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2020 22:51
|
|
|
“All great things must first wear terrifying and monstrous masks in order to inscribe themselves on the hearts of humanity.” -- Kurt Cobain
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2020 22:53
|
|
|
https://mronline.org/2019/01/15/britain-robbed-india-of-45-trillion-thence-1-8-billion-indians-died-from-deprivation/ capitalism has it beat
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2020 22:54
|
|
|
Western trade sanctions and general economic marginalization led by the LIEO instigated a lot of mass death
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2020 22:58
|
|
|
Communism saved a lot of peoplequote:The first, and probably the most important thing that China did well right from the start was its focus on human development. Even under Mao, China's emphasis on education for all and the healthcare facilities provided by its communes helped the country perform well on human development. While the human development index (HDI) was introduced in 1990, its long run calculations have been provided by Nicholas Crafts. The HDI numbers for China and India are, thus, available for 1950 and 1973. While both the countries had almost similar HDI scores in 1950 (0.163 and 0.160 respectively), China's score was markedly higher in 1973 (0.407 against India's 0.289). Capitalism killed a lot of people quote:A new Lancet study, "Mass privatisation and the post-communist mortality crisis," confirms what has been known but little discussed in the past eight to ten years: millions of people, mostly men of employment age, died as a result of the effects of the "shock therapy" transition from a collectivized to a privatized economy in Russia and other formerly "communist" states in East Europe. According to the Times article, by 2007 "the life expectancy of Russian men was less than 60 years, compared with 67 years in 1985." That's the economic systems, not going into war and imperialism, the destruction of the dirty wars in South and Latin America or the open wars in which the US killed 3,000,000 people in Korea, 4,000,000 people in Vietnam, 1,000,000 people in Iraq,
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2020 23:03
|
|
|
Animal-Mother posted:Because I have a feeling that isn't actually true, comrades. Please advise me of the official position of the Party on this obvious reactionary propaganda. The governments of Russia and China killed millions of their own citizens in the 20th century, but those governments aren't synonymous with "Communism." Even if one considers those governments to be actually, properly Communist (and there's a lot of debate there, of course), the deaths were the product of the USSR and the PRC speed-running the Industrial Revolution in the span of a couple decades, not Communism in and of itself. e: also this Mayor Dave posted:Capitalism has a higher body count than communism could dream of
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2020 23:06
|
|
|
Majorian posted:The governments of Russia and China killed millions of their own citizens in the 20th century,
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2020 23:12
|
|
|
Someone needs to write a Black Book of Capitalism & give me a nice, easy resource to quote the figures of people dead from capitalism because I am far too lazy to do the research myself. Something as shamelessly exaggerating the figures as the Black Book of Communism did, every famine death in a capitalist country counting against it and so on.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2020 23:13
|
|
|
i don't know
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2020 23:13
|
|
|
Fast Luck posted:I would not so casually describe unfortunate deaths due to famine as "KILLED THEIR OWN CITIZENS" Eh, if we're going to count deaths caused by famines made worse by capitalism, I think it's only fair that we do the same for purportedly communist countries as well. (e: to clarify, "communism" didn't make those famines worse, but there's a lot of evidence that some of Stalin's and Mao's policies certainly did) Plus, you know, poo poo like the Great Purge did happen. forkboy84 posted:Someone needs to write a Black Book of Capitalism & give me a nice, easy resource to quote the figures of people dead from capitalism because I am far too lazy to do the research myself. Something as shamelessly exaggerating the figures as the Black Book of Communism did, every famine death in a capitalist country counting against it and so on. That would be handy. We know that around 10 million died in the Congo alone under Belgian occupation. Some estimates say as many as 35 million died in India under British colonialism. So ultimately capitalism is always going to have more blood on its hands. Majorian has issued a correction as of 23:36 on Jan 31, 2020 |
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2020 23:29
|
|
|
Fast Luck posted:I would not so casually describe unfortunate deaths due to famine as "KILLED THEIR OWN CITIZENS" It's also important to note that following WWII, China's biggest trade partner was the US. Then all of a sudden, all trade stopped and China couldn't even get it's immediate neighbors to do business due to intense pressure from the States. This was one of the triggers of the GLF, which was a forced initiative as a last ditch effort to keep the PRC from descending into the capitalst system that made it prey to imperialism.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2020 23:37
|
|
|
People who called themselves communists did do some really bad poo poo that is hard to avoid, like Stalin's purges / Holodromor / Great Leap Forward / the Cultural Revolution Not that capitalism hasn't done real bad poo poo too of course
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2020 23:39
|
|
|
okay but could you list some bad poo poo
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2020 23:41
|
|
|
Feldegast42 posted:People who called themselves communists did do some really bad poo poo that is hard to avoid, like Stalin's purges / Holodromor / Great Leap Forward / the Cultural Revolution Yeah, I think it's important to disaggregate between what some leaders did because they were committed Communists, and what they did because they were power-mad and paranoid.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2020 23:42
|
|
|
careful folks, this thread is verging on genocide denial
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2020 00:10
|
|
|
not that anyone familiar with cspam should be surprised by that 
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2020 00:11
|
|
|
Everyone that died in the USSR from 1917 - 1991 was because of communism. Everyone that died in capitalist countries from the 18th century to present day was because of statism and lack of personal motivation on the individual, and also because of communism.
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2020 00:14
|
|
|
Off the top of my head the Indonesian purge of communists, Pinochet , the entire history of Haiti post revolution, the Indian partition, Bengali famines, Ireland, post Soviet shock doctrine, banana republics, the Belgian Congo were all as bad or worse than the glf/holodomor at least in intention of not in scope, for crying out loud Americans have more prisoners now that the Soviets had in gulags
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2020 00:19
|
|
|
Hilario Baldness posted:Everyone that died in the USSR from 1917 - 1991 was because of communism. Everyone that died in capitalist countries from the 18th century to present day was because of statism and lack of personal motivation on the individual, and also because of communism. Well yeah, plus the Brits couldn’t let the RUSSIANS or FRENCH or PRUSSIANS kill all those people. Much better for them to do it themselves.
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2020 00:21
|
|
|
Feldegast42 posted:Holodromor Even Robert Conquest now doesn't think the Holodomor was genocide. "Stalin purposely inflicted the 1933 famine? No." If the Soviets wanted to do a genocide they'd have just done it.
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2020 00:22
|
|
|
I guess? Can you actually define what a death under communism is? Because thousands die every year because they can't afford healthcare. Millions have died under slavery and colonialism. Thousands still die as slaves today. We don't say those people died under capitalism. So if you can give a clear definition of what "killed by communism" means I can help answer the question.
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2020 00:34
|
|
|
Feldegast42 posted:People who called themselves communists did do some really bad poo poo that is hard to avoid, like Stalin's purges
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2020 00:55
|
|
|
The revolutions of the 20th century only ended up succeeding in peripheral, underdeveloped countries. This meant that in order to resist outside reactionary forces, they had to resort to both crash industrialization (which always causes lots of deaths) and harsh authoritarian measures. It's pure survivorship bias, and those dozens of coups orchestrated by the CIA to overthrow left wing democracies are proof of it. Liberals of course look at this from a purely moralist perspective: "Communist countries are bad because they repressed their own people and callously caused millions of famine deaths." But we have the benefit of being able to look at it from a rational, materialist perspective. If the Soviet Union, for instance, had industrialized more slowly in the 1930s and thus avoided the infamous famine, how do you think World War 2 would have turned out? This is why Marx understood that the revolution must occur in core capitalist countries. A revolution in the metropole means that the workers have control of the world's economic and military superpower, fully capable of defending itself from reactionary forces. That's why you have a duty to mankind: Bernie or Bust.
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2020 00:55
|
|
|
Majorian posted:The governments of Russia and China killed millions of their own citizens in the 20th century, but those governments aren't synonymous with "Communism." Even if one considers those governments to be actually, properly Communist (and there's a lot of debate there, of course), the deaths were the product of the USSR and the PRC speed-running the Industrial Revolution in the span of a couple decades, not Communism in and of itself. I wanna try to flesh this point out a bit more because I think it's central to understanding the kind of mass death that capitalists attribute to the communist system. Long story short, the transition through a capitalist economy is full of fundamental changes to how resources are extracted and goods produced, so a certain degree of suffering and death is inevitable. Where capitalism developed organically (ie the UK, USA, Germany, etc.) that suffering was spread out over a century or two. Meanwhile in "communist" countries (I'll get to why I use scare quotes in a moment) that process is squeezed into like twenty years. Same disruption on a shorter time frame leads to a more abrupt and dramatic shift. The resulting suffering--which, remember, was inevitable--thus becomes easier to pin on the government. Of course, all this depends on what exactly your definition of communism is. In the traditional Marxist sense, communism is the stage that comes after capitalism collapses; the resource-extraction and goods-production is about as refined as it is going to get, so capitalism collapses under the weight of it's own contradictions since it has nowhere else to expand. Communism in this model assumes that economic growth has topped out and what's left is to distribute the resources in a way that guarantees everyone lives their lives free from poverty. Since governments like the USSR and the PRC made a point of modernizing their economies, I dont think it's fair to say they were communist states in the Marxist sense. Rather, they were trying to get to communism by cutting through capitalism ASAP. Whether they admit it or not is another story as well. Tl;dr: communism hasn't actually happened anywhere yet, the so-called communist States that are held up as murder machines were just going through a compressed version of capitalism that packed all the misery of capitalism into a shorter timeframe, in a bid to get to communism asap.
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2020 01:01
|
|
|
cool dance moves posted:I wanna try to flesh this point out a bit more because I think it's central to understanding the kind of mass death that capitalists attribute to the communist system. Long story short, the transition through a capitalist economy is full of fundamental changes to how resources are extracted and goods produced, so a certain degree of suffering and death is inevitable. Where capitalism developed organically (ie the UK, USA, Germany, etc.) that suffering was spread out over a century or two. Meanwhile in "communist" countries (I'll get to why I use scare quotes in a moment) that process is squeezed into like twenty years. Same disruption on a shorter time frame leads to a more abrupt and dramatic shift. The resulting suffering--which, remember, was inevitable--thus becomes easier to pin on the government. There is also a pretty big goalpost moved where slavery, native american genocide and land expropriation, and colonialism are not viewed as part of "Capitalism" even though that economic system would not exist without those "inventions". Those brutal acts of terror are the foundation of capitalism. Communist countries attempted to create an industrial base without those "inventions" and are somehow seen as more brutal than loving slavery.
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2020 01:11
|
|
|
Yeah, I'm rethinking my earlier post and saying no, because we've never seen a successful communist state. It's either been sabotaged by capitalist influences, which muddies the idea of which economic system did the killing, or mismanaged by state officials who tried to shortcut to communism while suffering from severe resource shortages, pretty much trying to speed run industrialization as someone said earlier. The important distinction is that communism doesn't require murder to function, capitalism does. There will always be things that are not worth the cost under capitalism. Capitalism requires human life to have a value because everything needs a value in the system and sometimes that human life isn't worth it.
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2020 01:13
|
|
|
For communism to kill people there has to be communism in the first place, which no nation has ever tried to honestly achieve.
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2020 01:14
|
|
|
Communism cannot fail, only be failed (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2020 01:14
|
|
|
It's funny when Liberals try to use their little pea brains and all they come up with is a tired cliche
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2020 01:21
|
|
|
I think in this and most social contexts you can just take "communist" to mean socialist states that called themselves communist and save a lot of time in doing so.
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2020 01:21
|
|
|
Areminder that probably as early as the mid-1400s the Genoese diaspora were intimately and inextricably tied to the expansion of the Spanish Empire. Spain wasn't a capitalist state or a nationalist state in the modern sense per se but conquest of the new world (400-500 million dead) was directly tied to the cycle of capital accumulation that it needed to foster to finance warfare across Europe Add in the Dutch, French, and English (all explicitly more capitalistic) and the body gets even more bigly
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2020 01:25
|
|
|
Yup. Plus one thing that's extremely key to understanding the USSR is particular is that Stalin didn't really behave all that unusually for a Russian ruler, particularly those that tended to be remembered as "successful" ones. Ivan III, Ivan IV, Peter I, Catherine II - they all dragged their empire into modernity, often kicking and screaming. None of them had clean hands. But they're remembered pretty fondly by Russians, even today, and so is Stalin.
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2020 01:31
|
|
|
*Sees one of those lovely 1800s proto airplanes fall off a cliff* Heavier than air flight can't fail, it can only be failed
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2020 01:34
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 9, 2024 04:41 |
|
|
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2020 01:46
|
|