Why not off the Kulaks?

[gmc]

Originally Posted by Scrat

I am not free. I live in a society that has to be the most tightly controled in the world. In the history of mankind. I recently met a coworkers wife who is from Belgium and she was shocked by all of the laws we have here. As we speak me and my wife pay rent, we could own a home easily but choose not to (when I say own I mean own, not paying a mortguage to the bank and having that hammer over our head) because we don't want the responsibility of one.

Even if we owned the home outright we would still be paying taxes on it. So am I supposed to believe that I do not have an "official" telling me what to do?

If I rent a place to live I pay someone, if I own a place to live I pay someone.

What is the difference between that and socialism? Why is socialism so much worse? With socialism you won't see families out on the street, you won't have kids dying of brain infections because of a bad tooth.

They say that in a socialist society choices are made for you. Officials here tell you where you can live and how to build your home, how to drive, where you can and cannot walk, where you are permitted to stand, where you can smoke, where you can drink, what color you can paint your home, what responsibility you can take for your property, how fast you can drive, what you can drive, when you can gamble, where you can gamble and with whom you can gamble. They tell you where to shop and where to sell goods, when to sell them and regulate how those goods are acquired and sold.

Need I go on?

What is the difference?

The debate in europe has kind of moved on since the 1920's socialism means something very different here than it does in the US -or so it seems. Most political parties in europe take on board some of the main tenets of socialist ideas and are essentially social democratic in nature-particularly in healthcare also that companies need to be controlled to stop the major abuses they would get away with if they could. The idea that in a capitalist economy you don't need that kind of a control and that social responsibility gets in the way of business and companies should be free to pursue their business as they want without is a myth perpetrated by people who do know better but just like having their own way. mercantilism and capitalism are not one and the same.

try http://www.adamsmith.org/smith/won-intro.htm although I suspect you already have. The sight of Alan Greenspan and Gordon Brown honouring his memory would probaly have him spinning in his grave.

Stalin and lenin are heavy going and like religious sects spend a lot of time worrying about the faults of others-what Lenin called the infantile disorder. Communism never worked and probably never will as inevitably the pigs will take over the farm. It's also why there was never a communist revolution in the rest of europe an educated workforce sees straight through to the fundamental problem-who rules and all ou do is swop one set of masters for another, Far better to control the bastards. In the UK things have always shifted just enough to keep the lid on but it would be mistake to think there was never any kind of social upheaval or that politicians don't get a good smacking every now and then. One of the main reasons our police force was never armed was so that it would not be viewed as an instrument of oppression. We have also traditionally had a very small army based at home. Not having a written constitution is a good idea as at least you don't get hung up on what was meant all those years ago. Even the french keep rewriting theirs.

to quote Winston Churchill

No one pretends that democracy is perfect or all-wise. Indeed, it has been said that democracy is the worst form of government except all those other forms that have been tried from time to time.

[gmc]

Originally Posted by Scrat

I am not free. I live in a society that has to be the most tightly controled in the world. In the history of mankind. I recently met a coworkers wife who is from Belgium and she was shocked by all of the laws we have here. As we speak me and my wife pay rent, we could own a home easily but choose not to (when I say own I mean own, not paying a mortguage to the bank and having that hammer over our head) because we don't want the responsibility of one.

Even if we owned the home outright we would still be paying taxes on it. So am I supposed to believe that I do not have an "official" telling me what to do?

If I rent a place to live I pay someone, if I own a place to live I pay someone.

What is the difference between that and socialism? Why is socialism so much worse? With socialism you won't see families out on the street, you won't have kids dying of brain infections because of a bad tooth.

They say that in a socialist society choices are made for you. Officials here tell you where you can live and how to build your home, how to drive, where you can and cannot walk, where you are permitted to stand, where you can smoke, where you can drink, what color you can paint your home, what responsibility you can take for your property, how fast you can drive, what you can drive, when you can gamble, where you can gamble and with whom you can gamble. They tell you where to shop and where to sell goods, when to sell them and regulate how those goods are acquired and sold.

Need I go on?

What is the difference?

The debate in europe has kind of moved on since the 1920's socialism means something very different here than it does in the US -or so it seems. Most political parties in europe take on board some of the main tenets of socialist ideas and are essentially social democratic in nature-particularly in healthcare also that companies need to be controlled to stop the major abuses they would get away with if they could. The idea that in a capitalist economy you don't need that kind of a control and that social responsibility gets in the way of business and companies should be free to pursue their business as they want without is a myth perpetrated by people who do know better but just like having their own way. mercantilism and capitalism are not one and the same.

try http://www.adamsmith.org/smith/won-intro.htm although I suspect you already have. The sight of Alan Greenspan and Gordon Brown honouring his memory would probaly have him spinning in his grave.

Stalin and lenin are heavy going and like religious sects spend a lot of time worrying about the faults of others-what Lenin called the infantile disorder. Communism never worked and probably never will as inevitably the pigs will take over the farm. It's also why there was never a communist revolution in the rest of europe an educated workforce sees straight through to the fundamental problem-who rules and all ou do is swop one set of masters for another, Far better to control the bastards. In the UK things have always shifted just enough to keep the lid on but it would be mistake to think there was never any kind of social upheaval or that politicians don't get a good smacking every now and then. One of the main reasons our police force was never armed was so that it would not be viewed as an instrument of oppression. We have also traditionally had a very small army based at home. Not having a written constitution is a good idea as at least you don't get hung up on what was meant all those years ago and no you don't have the right to tell your government to do that. Even the french keep rewriting theirs.

to quote Winston Churchill

No one pretends that democracy is perfect or all-wise. Indeed, it has been said that democracy is the worst form of government except all those other forms that have been tried from time to time.

[watermark]

[quote=gmc;707990]The debate in europe has kind of moved on since the 1920's socialism means something very different here than it does in the US -or so it seems. Most political parties in europe take on board some of the main tenets of socialist ideas

What are socialist ideas? In a nut shell


also that companies need to be controlled to stop the major abuses they would get away with if they could.

I agree with this. It's a shame that some people have to object to some other people based on something I consider an ethics point. I mean aren't we all of the same species? We have the same feelings about things don't we?


The idea that in a capitalist economy you don't need that kind of a control and that social responsibility gets in the way of business and companies should be free to pursue their business as they want without is a myth perpetrated by people who do know better but just like having their own way. mercantilism and capitalism are not one and the same.

Yes, this could be true in my view.

Communism never worked and probably never will as inevitably the pigs will take over the farm. It's also why there was never a communist revolution in the rest of europe an educated workforce sees straight through to the fundamental problem-who rules and all ou do is swop one set of masters for another, Far better to control the bastards.

How can the UK see through this 'to the problem' and other peoples cannot? Is this a difference in culture?

...every now and then. One of the main reasons our police force was never armed was so that it would not be viewed as an instrument of oppression.

This may be a reason England can have a less than effective appearance to some parts of the world. There's never a best tactic when it comes to controling over-the-edge type people IMO.

Not having a written constitution is a good idea as at least you don't get hung up on what was meant all those years ago and no you don't have the right to tell your government to do that.

Hmm... this might be what's wrong with the US?

Erin

[watermark]

Caveat: Erin not want to respond but feel compelled-yikes! Also remember I speak in terms of IMHO

Originally Posted by gmc

Ever look at what the communists did to the anarchists in spain? might put you off stalin.

Spain is an entirely different case from most European countries because this entity was overtaken many times not just by communists.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anarchism_in_Spain


Ever look at what was happening in the US about the same time? Social upheaval left and right wing politics are not a wholly european phenomenon. It's amazing how social events and upheaval in different countries have echoes all around the world

You state the obvious

You may walk free but only thanks to those who went before.

In some ways that is a sentimental statement. And I mean this without a hint intended of disrespect for soldiers who fought in wars. And I am a mother of three boys, er, men.


posted by watermark

Can't avoid politics, even (literally) affects the air you breathe-you'd think clean air wouldn't be a political issue but a simple question of is this pollution bad for us, yes or no (car exhausts) but it gets made in to one.

Yes I guess reluctantly I agree with this. But I will never like this facet of society. Some people thrive on politics. I do not. It does not fuel my pump.


who is anyone to decide that? The first time anyone asked that was probably back in the stone age a minute after people realised they could talk.

Yes, probably so. But it doesn't make it right. I'd like to know who decided which foods were the better? Then I could pinpoint the culprit of all this greed

E

[Scrat]

I've only read parts of Adam Smiths book, I'm busy this weekend so Ican't get a response together.

[gmc]

Sorry didn't realise I had posted twice and I don't know how to remove it now.

posted by watermark
[quote]

Originally Posted by gmc

The debate in europe has kind of moved on since the 1920's socialism means something very different here than it does in the US -or so it seems. Most political parties in europe take on board some of the main tenets of socialist ideas

What are socialist ideas? In a nut shell

oxford english dictionary

socialism

• noun a political and economic theory of social organization which advocates that the means of production, distribution, and exchange should be owned or regulated by the community as a whole.

— DERIVATIVES socialist noun & adjective socialistic adjective.

state socialism

• noun a political system in which the state has control of industries and services

.

What i meant was that while you will still find those who want to nationalise everything they are gye few and far between. On the other hand there are some things that there is a consensus on that they should not be left to private companies. Health being the most obvious one. Things like utilties were denationalised under Maggie but there is outrage if they cut off power or gas to families with children or to old people for non payment. Whatever the reason letting someone freeze to death is rather frowned upon.

It's a political philosophy that didn't just appear out of nowhere there is along history of radicalism leading up to it and around it and beyond it.

Most political parties in europe are social democrat in nature so governments would be expected to intervene to help deprived areas or areas suffering due to a decline in industry as a matter of course rather than just ignoring the situation. The eec regional development fund was intended for just that purpose. The idea being the richer countries help the poorer economies and the resulting economic growth benefits all. Although it would be true to say there is a lot of argument about just how it should be done or even if it should. I happen to live in an area of the UK that has benefited considerably from it now the funds are going elsewhere.

posted by watermark

Communism never worked and probably never will as inevitably the pigs will take over the farm. It's also why there was never a communist revolution in the rest of europe an educated workforce sees straight through to the fundamental problem-who rules and all ou do is swop one set of masters for another, Far better to control the bastards.

How can the UK see through this 'to the problem' and other peoples cannot? Is this a difference in culture?

Nope. The principal communist revolutions took place in russia and china, two countries where theoretically there wasn't the proleteriat necessary to give the momentum. There wasn't a communist revolution in America either. Why not?

...every now and then. One of the main reasons our police force was never armed was so that it would not be viewed as an instrument of oppression.

This may be a reason England can have a less than effective appearance to some parts of the world. There's never a best tactic when it comes to controlling over-the-edge type people IMO.

Don't quite get what you mean here?

Not having a written constitution is a good idea as at least you don't get hung up on what was meant all those years ago and no you don't have the right to tell your government to do that.

Hmm... this might be what's wrong with the US?

Dunno that's up to you to decide. Just some of the forum posters have suggested in other discussions that you don't have the right to do something or demand something from your government because it's not in the constitution. Always seems a spurious argument to me. Government should do what it's told and be afraid of annoying the voters imo.

[Scrat]

Well GMC I can't get past the thought that we too live in a society ruled by others here in America. Not only that we oppress other peoples in ghastly ways to this day using terrorism, installing murderous dictators ect whom are little better than the worst there has ever been.

I fail to see that the American way of doing things is any better than the Soviet way of doing things, there are many reasons why the Soviet system failed (????) and there are many reasons the American way has succeeded. A lot of those reasons are due to geography and the fact that we keep a lot of people down in the dirt in order to live like we do.

I think that there are differences in character and mindset at work also. If you have been watching the upcoming Russian presidential fracas there is one thing that seems to stand out. The vast majority of Russians do not want Putin to leave. It seems they want a king, not a president. They have had a taste of western democracy and it left many of them scrabbling to survive and standing in soup lines. Democratic proponents get about as much respect from your average Russian as some PETA anti animal furr nutjob would get from your average Siberian on a cold winter day.

I can see what happened to the Kulaks as unjust, I can also see their actions in the same light.

[gmc]

posted by scrat

Well GMC I can't get past the thought that we too live in a society ruled by others here in America. Not only that we oppress other peoples in ghastly ways to this day using terrorism, installing murderous dictators ect whom are little better than the worst there has ever been.

.

Twas ever so. It's up to you to change it then. people only put up with so much crap then they take action to change things. Not being an american I don't feel qualified to really comment on america as I don't exactly have a balanced view on things. Besides it seems quite difficult to talk about politics-especially international politics without being accused of being anti american. By that light I am also anti British and anti european because I'm not too chuffed with what is done in our name either. Imperialism is dead (but economic imperialism is still a reality) but it never really stopped the European powers acting to keep control of resources throughout the world. The opposition here is immense and very vocal (calling them tree hugging anti-capitalist loonies doesn't stop them having a say) to the practices of some of the international companies and very effective in some cases, Though it's a moot point how effective they are. The third world as it were is also learning to fight back although I notice when an elected south american government like that in venezuela decides that all the benefit from selling off their natural resources shouldn't go abroad nor belong to foreigners they become a nasty left wing govt exploiting the people as opposed to the nice one that lets foreign companies do what they want and shoots anybody that complains.

I fail to see that the American way of doing things is any better than the Soviet way of doing things, there are many reasons why the Soviet system failed (????) and there are many reasons the American way has succeeded. A lot of those reasons are due to geography and the fact that we keep a lot of people down in the dirt in order to live like we do.

I think that there are differences in character and mindset at work also. If you have been watching the upcoming Russian presidential fracas there is one thing that seems to stand out. The vast majority of Russians do not want Putin to leave. It seems they want a king, not a president. They have had a taste of western democracy and it left many of them scrabbling to survive and standing in soup lines. Democratic proponents get about as much respect from your average Russian as some PETA anti animal furr nutjob would get from your average Siberian on a cold winter day.

Social change is never easy. In some ways the US is in a time warp only now having discussions about welfare etc that most of Europe had post war with action being taken pretty much the way people wanted things to go. Fascism was never defeated in the US it went in to hiding for a while, showed itself for a while in the maccarthy era took a beating in the sixties and is still around. You never had the big debate about what kind of society did people want to live in and what was to be domne about it that we and western europe had. Any hint that some things should perhaps be run by govt for the benefit if all was communism-end of discussion. According to a 1949 State Department intelligence report, the term ‘Communists’ refers to those people who are committed to the belief that “the government has direct responsibility for the welfare of the people. (I keep coming across references to this but have not found the original source) Personally I think the government has responsibility for what it is told to do by those who elected it.

Well if I had to choose I would go for the american one. At least your government is still afraid of the voters that's why they have to fool them in to going to war. Hopefully they won't be fooled over Iran, looks like that might bring a response from russia. All wars have economics at their root in some way or another do they not? they want the oil as well. GW can't remain in power although it would be interesting to see if he would be elected again. Gordon Brown chickened out of an election here because labour would probably have lost it's majority in the house.

What do you reckon will happen if Turkey goes in after the Kurds on the iraq turkey border. Both sides want the oil but would the US stop the kurds getting their freedom from Iraqi domination and be prepared to fight Turkey? Pakistan is about to go fundamentalist it's just too bad they already have nuclear weapons.

I can see what happened to the Kulaks as unjust, I can also see their actions in the same light.

Events like the russian revolution are never black and white or simple cause and effect. Lenin after the october revolution said somewhere (can't find the reference just now ) that all it would have taken was one regiment to support the kerensky government for the revolution not to happen. He also tried to warn the party about Stalin having finally realised the nature of the man but he was too late to stop him.

I've always found history fascinating wondering what in would have done had I been faced with the same choices. In ww1 would I have gone over the trench with your comrades knowing you were going to die? Would you have opposed stalin and his slaughter knowing it would mean your death next? In 1776 would you have insisted that black people should be free as well or kept your mouth shut so as to still fit in with the rest of your mates?

[Scrat]

Personally I think the government has responsibility for what it is told to do by those who elected it.

To what degree? I read a book (Sci fi) awhile back about humans meeting another race. The government was obedient to the people who wanted to eradicate the "aliens". Both races ended up annihilating one another because it was what the people wanted.

People don't necessarily know what is good for them in the big picture. I can point to Belarus and the Ukraine. According to the west Belarus is a dictatorship filled with slaves starving and suffering under the whip of communism suffering horrible indignities no human should endure.

Ukraine is a capitalist paradise where everybody lives in bliss and opportunity abounds. Anyone can get a job at McDonalds for .50 cents an hour!! The mountain of garbage at the bins in the apartment complex is nothing to worry about and the apartment buildings blowing up are a temporary thing. Ukrainian trains are pigstys.

Belarus has a command socialist economy, the Ukraine has a capitalist economy. People of Belarus have adequate health care and all the basic necessities of life easily obtainable AND OF GOOD QUALITY, the streets are clean the garbage is picked up and the trains are immaculate. They want to build a nuclear reactor, the people will not vote on it. The engineers of Belarus will make the decisions and safety will be top priority regardless of cost. Unlike Chernobyl.

Ukraine is a free for all, the connected wealthy have all of the opportunity and all of the money, the people do not have adequate health care nor do they have safe housing. The cost of basic foodstuffs has recently reached the level of 50% OF THE AVERAGE PERSONS INCOME!!

You want to go into the state of the agriculture? Something which both countries rely heavily on? Both countries have had bumper crops of wheat (about even) this year but Belarus has beat them in every other catagory, meat dairy you name it per capita. Belarussians are making a killing selling the surplus to Europe and Russia.

The Ukraine can barely feed itself. Could it be because in Belarus farmers have access to horses or machinery whereas in the Ukraine most of the people in the country have to pull the plows themselves?

It seems the Kulaks are at it again. They have the ability to tell their government what to do in the Ukraine, and because of money and the fact that the politicians get rich also, the people suffer.

How is the freedom of capitalism/democracy so much better than Belarus's command socialist pinko commie economy?

What good does democracy do for the average Ukrainian?

Well if I had to choose I would go for the american one. At least your government is still afraid of the voters that's why they have to fool them in to going to war.

No our politcians are not afraid of us, they are afraid of each other. Remember the Battle of Seattle? If American ever really get tired of the bs they will send out the army and a lot of people will die. You can say "anything" you want in America but if you say "something" you will be punished.

What do you reckon will happen if Turkey goes in after the Kurds on the iraq turkey border.

Turkey will sit tight for awhile even then she won't do alot if she attacks. Just demolish the border region. What the Kurds will do is another question. Start blowing oil lines?

I do agree that Russia will act if we invade Iran, not just there either. Iraq also. We will see some much better armed insurgents.

[watermark]

Scrat: "People don't necessarily know what is good for them in the big picture. I can point to Belarus and the Ukraine. According to the west Belarus is a dictatorship filled with slaves starving and suffering under the whip of communism suffering horrible indignities no human should endure. "

How did the west come to this conclusion if it wasn't true? Actually I never had this opinion. All ll I know of the Ukraine and Belarus has come from the winter olympic games, and then I'm not even sure they participated much. It's not like I have a Belarusian penpal to keep me informed of things.


Scrat posted: "Ukraine is a capitalist paradise where everybody lives in bliss and opportunity abounds. Anyone can get a job at McDonalds for .50 cents an hour!! The mountain of garbage at the bins in the apartment complex is nothing to worry about and the apartment buildings blowing up are a temporary thing. Ukrainian trains are pigstys."

This is terrible! But it sounds like the inner city of some of US larger cities. Except for the apt buildings blowing up. Now if that happened here in US there would be a revolution I think.

Scrat: "Belarus has a command socialist economy, the Ukraine has a capitalist economy. People of Belarus have adequate health care and all the basic necessities of life easily obtainable AND OF GOOD QUALITY, the streets are clean the garbage is picked up and the trains are immaculate. They want to build a nuclear reactor, the people will not vote on it. The engineers of Belarus will make the decisions and safety will be top priority regardless of cost. Unlike Chernobyl."

Sounds like a civilized, nice place to live. So what's the catch??

Scrat: "Ukraine is a free for all, the connected wealthy have all of the opportunity and all of the money, the people do not have adequate health care nor do they have safe housing. The cost of basic foodstuffs has recently reached the level of 50% OF THE AVERAGE PERSONS INCOME!!"

If this happened in the US there would be an uprising. Not!


Scrat: "You want to go into the state of the agriculture? Something which both countries rely heavily on? Both countries have had bumper crops of wheat (about even) this year but Belarus has beat them in every other catagory, meat dairy you name it per capita. Belarussians are making a killing selling the surplus to Europe and Russia. The Ukraine can barely feed itself. Could it be because in Belarus farmers have access to horses or machinery whereas in the Ukraine most of the people in the country have to pull the plows themselves?"


My vote would to be like Belarus and not the Ukraine. Could I move there?

Scrat: "It seems the Kulaks are at it again. They have the ability to tell their government what to do in the Ukraine, and because of money and the fact that the politicians get rich also, the people suffer."

Who do those Kulaks think they are anyway??

Scrat: "How is the freedom of capitalism/democracy so much better than Belarus's command socialist pinko commie economy?"

Perhaps the name sounds better? "hello, my name is freebird and I'm from a command socialist pinko commie country, how 'bout yourself?"


Scrat: " What good does democracy do for the average Ukrainian?"

Nothing!

THANKS for the history lesson. I will look up all these places you speak of in the atlas. Most people don't know anything about the things that happen in the rest of the world. Or it could just be me.

Erin