I have no idea what you're talking about.
But nothing better has been offered.
And Marxism when tried always employed slavery in addition to mass murder & other oppression.
So it's pretty evil.
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Nice statue of a Marxist.
- Thread starter Twilight Hue
- Start date
And Marxism when tried always employed slavery in addition to mass murder & other oppression.
So it's pretty evil.
epronovost
Well-Known Member
The woman who was used as a model for the statue discussed is an hair stylist. What evil hath she wrought compared to the slave trader she replaced?
Capitalism when tried always employed slavery and mass murder too and still does or do you think oil wars, to name just one style of mass murder, only hurt the feelings of people? We could talk about opium wars, tea wars, banana wars, sugar cane wars, blood diamond, blood gold, etc. There are so many we are spoiled for choice.
PS: marxism doesn't always required slavery or mass murder either.
None that I know of.
Did you notice that I questioned whether she's a marxist at all?
Did you think that I'd somehow demonized here?
Unless you're thinking of my joking with @Shadow Wolf.
She started the joke!
The biggest famines in history have been in the USSR & PRC.
That's marxism for you.
But capitalism....that includes the vaunted Scandinavian countries.
We might have to agree to disagree about marxism being worse than slavery.
epronovost
Well-Known Member
Nope, Bengal, China (pre PRC) and Bangladesh all under the careful watching eye of capitalist policies were just as bad or worst than the infamous holomodor in the URSS. Note that while the PRC Great Leap Forward does hold the record for worst famine by raw number of victims in terms of proportion it looks like a fart next to the atomic bomb that was the first famine of Bengal of 1770 which killed 30% of the population under the nice leadership of the East Indian Trading Company. The great Qing famine of 1907 killed nearly as many people as the Great Leap Forward famine even though the population of China was about 50% lower in 1907 than in the 60's.
Last edited:
You're missing the fact that marxism always results in such failure
But capitalism has many records of success.
Face it....marxism is evil.
Actually, the biggest famines in history did occur in China, but predated the PRC.
List of famines - Wikipedia
There were some significant famines in the USSR and PRC, but not the biggest famines in history. Most of the famines on the list occurred in capitalist countries.
epronovost
Well-Known Member
Except that's fairly incorrect. Even if you look at the world right now, the second greatest economy on the planet is the PRC itself. It's a bit strange that there are three marxist countries still in existence and they all sit at very different place in the world economy. One is one of the richest country on Earth and with a steady and important growth, Cuba is fairly middle of the road with an economy that's recovering from its crisis of the early 90's and North Korea is one of the poorest and in a situation of regression or stagnation since the 70's when it reached it's greatest level of developement. That doesn't seem like the story of failure. It seems like a story of very varying results at the mercy of many circumstances. If China, as many predict, becomes the next economical powerhouse despite being a communist country, what song will you sing then? Can you call the greatest economical power in the world and economical failure?
On another note I doubt that there is a single country on the planet that wasn't faced with famine, war or other disasters due to bad policies and or poor administration. Saying that marxism always results in failure and in crime against humanity is very facile and very disingenuous for the same thing could be said of other economical policies and other political ideologies.
Just as capitalism is evil. In fact one could easily make the argument that the only thing that makes capitalism work and not be a savage dystopia today is the marxist stuff that was added to the system while the opposite could also said to be true. China has become an economical powerhouse thanks to sprinkling a generous dose of capitalism into it's marxism. Systems are systems. Capitalism isn't more virtuous than any other system. The only thing that matters is it's implementation and its objectives.
Last edited:
It has gone as expected, but might be replaced after an official vote - or something similar being placed there:
Black Lives Matter protester statue removed
Black Lives Matter protester statue removed
Secret Chief
nirvana is samsara
Are you sure about your "correction" ?
(Towards the end of his life, apparently Hitler did follow a vegetarian diet).
"The fact that it is possible the speaker is describing reality makes this an indicative sentence, not a subjunctive one. Therefore, we use was instead of were."
- Was vs. Were?
oldbadger
Skanky Old Mongrel!
This is nonsense.
What makes you think that communists particularly support racial equality?
Are you saying that all conservatives are racial bigots?
How about just seeing it as triumph over slavery - the salute, that is?
Last edited:
Because we are not so accepting of slavery as we once were?
Should be nice and toasty since it was made of resin apparently (quick job).
^ ignorant hate speech run amok
The biggest on the list is the one in China (under the PRC) from 1959
to 1961, with estimates ranging from 15,000,000 to 43,000,000 dead.
But we have more than famine to pin on marxism...there is also mass
murder. Mao sets the record, with the USSR playing catch up.
Mao's Great Leap Forward 'killed 45 million in four years'
Other marxist countries, eg, N Korea, Cuba, & Cambodia also show
that marxism is oppressive & deadly.
Complain about capitalism, but at least it has success stories.
No better economic system has yet been proposed.
(No, the Star Trek economy doesn't count.)
It became that way only after embracing capitalism with great passion.
This addresses your questions (excised from the quote for brevity).
I didn't address war, because that is largely independent of economic systems.
When political ideologies are part & parcel of the economic
system, it becomes significant. Marxism & centralized
authoritarianism go hand in hand.
Capitalism allows for (no guarantee) decentralization &
more liberty. (The PRC is an example of authoritarianism
under both its communist & capitalist phases.)
You're welcome to believe that capitalism & free economic
association are evil. People here have different values &
preferences.
I believe marxism & slavery are evil based upon how
they both have played out in history. Marxism requires
an authoritarian state to prohibit & punish all free economic
association. Slavery is the ultimate in oppression.
I don't claim that capitalism is "virtuous". It's a system
which exhibits far better outcomes for prosperity & liberty.
Sure, there are examples where capitalist countries are
terrible, but remember there are so many where it turned
out well. Marxist countries have no good examples.
Just to be sure.....I'm only going along with the joke to burn the statue.
I still dislike defacing & destroying statues....even if she's a marxist.
Actually, if you sort the list by death toll, the 1959-61 famine shows up in fourth place, behind three other larger famines. And one might have reason to doubt the accuracy of the numbers. With a range between 15m and 43m, that's quite a variance.
Either way, it seems clear that most of the famines on the list were capitalist famines.
Again, with numbers that large, who can say if they're accurate? Every government and every political system has killed people at one point or another. It can be said that George Floyd was murdered by our own government under a capitalist system. How many other George Floyds have lost their lives to the government?
We've also had our own history of mass murder, slavery, as well as interfering in the political affairs of other nations which led to mass murders all over the world, from Iran to Chile to South Vietnam - all in the name of anti-communism. We've talked about this before.
The only thing you really have to support your position here is that the PRC and USSR had a higher body count - tens of millions - but are the numbers really that accurate? It's like, it doesn't matter that our own government and other capitalist governments (and private organizations) are also murderous, oppressive, and deadly. It's just that "the other side killed more," and that makes all the difference in the world, right? But maybe the numbers are skewed.
And if the body count is all that matters, then one can look at some of the worst offenders in history, and find that most of them are/were capitalist societies, such as the Roman Empire, the Mongol Empire, and other such greedy capitalistic enterprises.
Socialist societies have had some success stories, too. They were the first humans in space. Many great mathematicians, scientists, chess players, athletes come from that country. Great music and literature. They're a great nation and a great people.
I won't deny that capitalism has had some success stories, but at what cost? When you look at the capitalist world, you see a few powerful economies (such as the U.S., EU, Japan, etc.) doing relatively well (although still with a significant degree of poverty and economic angst) - yet most of the rest of the world is impoverished. Or as some people call them, "****hole countries." And they are capitalist.
And even in our "first world" economy, there's still quite a large underclass, so when you speak of "success stories," you're really only talking about an overall small percentage of the population in the non-communist, capitalist world. In other words, you're looking at the exceptions which prove the rule.
Your method eliminates the high range of the later PRC famine.
Given the propensity of that government to sanitize data, I'd
wager the higher figure is more accurate.
Minor quibble...
I don't believe that Floyd was "murdered" in then sense of intentional death.
Moreover, you've no argument that it relates to capitalism.
Famines relate to the both the economic & political systems. Centralization
of marxism makes countries particularly vulnerable because individual initiative
& the lack of solution diversity put all their eggs in one (deplorable) basket.
Ref....
Great Chinese Famine - Wikipedia
Excerpted....
The Great Chinese Famine is widely regarded as the deadliest famine and one of the greatest man-made disasters in human history, with an estimated death toll due to starvation that ranges in the tens of millions.[3][4][5][10][11][12][13][14][15]
The major contributing factors in the famine were the policies of the Great Leap Forward (1958 to 1962) and People's commune, in addition to some natural disasters such as droughts which took place during the period.[3][5][7][12][14][16] During the Seven Thousand Cadres Conference in early 1962, Liu Shaoqi, the 2nd Chairman of PRC formally attributed the famine 30% to natural disasters and 70% to man-made policies ("三分天灾, 七分人祸").[7][17][18] After the launch of Reforms and Opening Up, the Communist Party of China (CPC) officially stated in 1981 that the famine was mainly due to the mistakes of the Great Leap Forward as well as the Anti-Rightist Campaign, in addition to some natural disasters and the Sino-Soviet split.[2][19]
As I've said, capitalism doesn't prevent ills such as famine, pogroms, etc.
But systems have emergent properties, ie, tendencies.
Marxism has the greater tendency to express authoritarianism & mass
murder of its own populace, eg, PRC, USSR, N Korea.
To cite "every system has abuses" would ignore differences.
To call the Romans & Mongols "capitalist" is a misnomer,
their having limited market freedom notwithstanding.
What were these socialist societies, ie, where the people
(as a unified group) owned the means of production?
As I've said, having capitalism is no guarantee of success
(in social & economic liberty & well being). It simply offers
the best opportunity. Marxism has a perfect record of dismal
failure by that measure.
Another way to see this.....
If you had a choice to live in any of the best capitalist countries today
or any of the best marxist countries today....which would you pick?
You can have multiple ranked answers.
So....as I see marxism expressed in actual trials, I consider evil.
It has the potential to be even worse than systems of slavery.