Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
read mark levin's 'Unfreedom of Speech.' lots of examples of media elites sucking up to commies and hiding their atrocities.
Quote:
However, the Times’s long-time man in Moscow, Walter Duranty, a propagandist and apologist for
the 1917 communist revolution in Russia and later Stalin and his murderous regime, reported otherwise.
Indeed, the Times was proud of their man in Moscow. In 1932, Duranty was awarded a Pulitzer Prize
for a series of articles in the Times that covered up Stalinism’s atrocities. And from 1932 to 1933,
Duranty wrote news columns for the Times not only denying the fact of the catastrophic famine taking
place in Ukraine, but censoring Stalin’s role in the genocide of multiple millions of Ukrainians.
But Duranty knew the ugly truth. As Professor Lubomyr Luciuk of the Royal Military College of
Canada has written: “On September 26, 1933, at the British Embassy in Moscow, Duranty privately
confided to William Strang that as many as 10 million people had died directly or indirectly of famine
conditions in the USSR during the past year. Meanwhile, publicly, Duranty orchestrated a vicious
ostracizing of those journalists who risked much by reporting on the brutalities of forced collectivization
and the ensuing demographic catastrophe, Muggeridge among them. Even as the fertile Ukraine, once
the breadbasket of Europe, became a modern-day Golgotha, a place of skulls, Duranty plowed the truth
under. Occasionally pressed on the human costs of the Soviet experiment he did, however, evolve a
dismissive dodge, canting ‘you can’t make an omelet without breaking eggs.’ ”
I think the bold is wrong. Workers are more productive when they’re provided with new technology, and are therefore worth more. Employers are the ones who use their own resources to set up a facility with good equipment, and then the employees they hire make use of them. Without the employer, they don’t have any of that...unless they start their own business and be their own employer, which they’re always free to do in a capitalist society.
I think of how workers in Central America, Africa, or poor Asian countries are paid less because they’re inherently worse at their jobs...it’s that their economy is bad and they haven’t built up the same amount of wealth as advanced countries, so they (or the employer) can’t afford the new technology that makes them more valuable. A worker in the US is worth more because their employer has the money to buy equipment that makes them more productive.
So, I definitely wouldn’t say the employees don’t benefit. Everyone benefits.
I see where you're coming from but you are off. Let me see if I can make it clear.
Of course a country with more technology is better than a country with less. The overall benefit is the advantage employer/employee have over the counterpart in other countries. For the employees the increase in productivity results in less hours or less working people.
Think of this example. A worker sewing baseball in Haiti makes about 50 cents an hour. The job still requires some skill to get the stiches right and it's time consuming. Now think of a worker in the US making golf balls. His skills are different, he is manipulating a machine that creates thousands of balls. Therein comes the higher wages.
Poor countries can't even get loans to engage in more productice activities, just old fashion agriculture, making clothes, etc. They would get billions in loans for buildings roads, ports, security, etc. but not to improve their economy. It is a double standard. Keep exporting raw material and cheap labour, but that's a different topic.
The point of my comment was the relation capitalist-worker in all aspects not just technology. Whether it is in a developed or undeveloped country there is a sort of exploitation most people accept as normal. Although in poor countries less so.
Why did so many buy into the stupid ideology of Communism in the 20th century?
It's an ideology, a utopian dream.
One might as well call brand loyalty stupid, or religion, or supply side economics. People believe in the promise, the will to believe is strong. Sometimes the most appealing ideas turn out to be unworkable.
Marx and Engels were brilliant, but it goes too far for human nature.
Why did so many buy into the stupid ideology of Communism in the 20th century?
It's an ideology, a utopian dream.
One might as well call brand loyalty stupid, or religion, or supply side economics. People believe in the promise, the will to believe is strong. Sometimes the most appealing ideas turn out to be unworkable.
Marx and Engels were brilliant, but it goes too far for human nature.
The correct description for them is evil, not brilliant.
The biggest issues I have with communism (or similar concepts):
1. Individual people are valued less than the achievement of some societal goal, or common good.
2. The idea that it’s justified to aggress against your neighbor or take their belongings because you need it, or because they simply have more than you, is the antithesis of civilization itself.
It’s a recipe for disaster when the majority (or whoever is in power to “represent everyone”) view individuals as pawns in some scheme. Instead of allowing people free will and choice in their lives, a system is forced upon them, and dissent is criminalized.
If you refuse to go along with the scheme, even if you’re not initiating force against anyone else or their property, you’re viewed as “harming society” and that’s the justification to use force against you. It’s so twisted.
The very concept goes against the very nature of humans. We can't all be "equal", there are lots of smart and lots of stupid people, and the smart ones naturally will gain more, so why did so many in the 20th century actually think the concept of Communism was ever good or could even work? There's a reason every Communist country has ALWAYS been ruled by the worst dictators ever.
It is beyond my comprehension to see people debating and siding with Communism. Where did we as society go wrong for people in it to even think this ?!
It is beyond my comprehension to see people debating and siding with Communism. Where did we as society go wrong for people in it to even think this ?!
Public schools and the media. Most of the teachers and professors in public schools and most journalists are communists or sympathizers. They don’t care about the poor, but they surely hate the rich.
Last edited by lifeexplorer; 09-19-2019 at 12:37 PM..
Public schools and the media. Most of the teachers and professors in public schools and most journalists are communists or sympathizers. They don’t care about the poor, but they surely hate the rich.
The very concept goes against the very nature of humans. We can't all be "equal", there are lots of smart and lots of stupid people, and the smart ones naturally will gain more, so why did so many in the 20th century actually think the concept of Communism was ever good or could even work? There's a reason every Communist country has ALWAYS been ruled by the worst dictators ever.
The same way many Americans (especially the conservatives) have bought into Populism and elected Trump.
Communism is just a more extreme form of Populism - you have a group of people who feel like they are at the bottom or fear they are heading there, they see many people doing much better than they do, they feel like the system is against them, and they are told that all these educated rich elite are stealing from them. So they want to upend the system to create a more "equal" one and also to get revenge on those they felt wronged them.
A common theme with both Communism and Populism is that they label the rich educated class (usually those who live in urban cities) as elitist and out of touch; and claim that their riches is a result of stealing or denying the lower classes.
Crazy as it is but no need to worry. Once the communists get rid of (I mean exterminate) all the rich people, they will be the next on the chopping block.
The funny part is that they believe they will be immune to the wrath of communism. They don’t even know their own ideology that well.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
