Re: [microsound] completely OT yet so on-topic

[frans@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx]

>> very interesting thought here, but after a century of communism,
>
>what century of communism?  the 20th century was a century of capitalism.

really?


>
>> can you
>> mention me an example of a place where the workers retained ownership of
>> wealth that worked and didn't lead to mass executions, starvation and
>> repression (China, Russia, Nothern Korea, Cuba, former eastern Europe)?
>>
>
>You fail to mention that, during the period in which they were struggling to
>convert their societies from feudalism to communism, those nations were
>under attack by rival hostile capitalist nations.  Intelligence agencies
>were sponsored by capitalist nations for the sole purpose of promoting
>insurgency within communist nations.  When a new government is struggling to
>govern a population, especially if they got the job by military coup, it is
>easy for capitalists (with money at their disposal) to sponsor insurgency.
>They can hire gangsters, turn political rivals into martyrs, and generally
>drive a communist state into the kind of chaos that predicates totalitarian
>rule.  But it is even easier and cheaper for capitalists to buy democracies
>which is why they try to instill an almost religious zeal over 'democracy'
>in the citizenry of the capitalist nations.

ah, sorry I failed to see that everything is the fault of capitalism. More
people died under communist regimes in the 20th century, then under fascist
ones (war victims included). Stalin's agraric five year plans were
perfectely executed, how many died? 30 million? But for you it's either the
fault of capitalism or the struggle from feudalism to communism, hurray for
death in order to progress. Just as I despise fascism, I despise communism,
both are small groups of ideologic fanatics controlling large masses,
taking their individually for the bigger sake, their own sake. Ever seen
the enormous wealth of Ceasuscu? Was that wealth spread over the workers?
or was he a secret capitalist?


>> Even when I dislike the man, Churchill said: democrazy is bad system, but
>> it's the least worse we have.
>
>Churchill was a booze-addled warmonger.   Indeed, democracy was the best
>system for him and his cronies to use to advance the capitalist agenda.

if democracy is the very same as capitalism, i rather submit to that, then
dying unfree in some gulag under a wealthy dictator, who is more equal then
the rest.

I am not sure if I have more time to devote to this discussion, but it's
partly because I feel uneasy talking to someone who I don't know. I know
nothing of your background, nor do you of mine, so it might not be the
wisest thing to continue our black/white, good/bad, communist vs
capitalism. However should you be in my neighbourhood, or I in yours, I'd
be happy to swap some more thoughts on this. We are to be lucky in a free
world... you can also contact me off list.

Frans