[Jeb Stuart Thurmond]

Re: (Jews...) Now: Peter Kropotkin's introduction thread

Or this one under the capitalists:

The difference is that today nobody is demanding a bloody revolution to turn our nation into a command economy controlled by King Leopold II. Oh wait, that's exactly what the left is doing, except with themselves in the place of King Leopold II.

BTW the moment Belgium heard about what Leopold's command economy was doing, they annexed the Congo and turned it into a normal country. As for communist atrocities from 1917 onward, the left has still not been able to face up to it, after more than a century. Still either red holocaust deniers, or "whataboutist" subject changers like yourself.

As for the British response to the Irish famine, that was Malthusian thinking at work. The only people promoting Malthusian thinking these days are on the far left.

[Jeb Stuart Thurmond]

Re: Was communism a success? A debate with Peter Krackpot.

Well, Peter Krackpot has showed up but not replied. I guess the debate is over.

Every single time he gets a job as a babysitter, the children die. When we point this out, all he can say is that more than a century ago some babysitters also failed, among the many, many other babysitters that did just fine.

Oh, but we should still hire him. The kids always die when he babysits all because of a conspiracy from the rival babysitters. Yes, capitalists can't do anything right, but we're super-geniuses at meddling, even to the point of somehow sending CIA agents back to mess up the Anabaptists in the 1500's.

And the communists, despite being in constant witch-hunt mode, constantly catching and killing spies by the thousands, are still hopelessly weak against foreign meddling. Something even the crudest and most backward non-communist governments manage to handle.

Back to the metaphor, as a babysitter, your job is to keep the kids alive, even if invisible goblins are trying to poison them. Every other babysitter manages to stop the invisible goblins. Maybe we should keep hiring them.

[Basilissa]

Re: (Jews...) Now: Peter Kropotkin's introduction thread

No, I am saying the response to the potato famine was their fault. They did the same things the Russians did.

Really? They came and confiscated every seed the Irish had? Also, so the historical sources lie when they said the British began to import cornmeal from America to relieve the hunger? (The fact that this did not help as corn is an incredibly non-nutritious plant is beyond the point - they had no means of knowing that, then).

You certainly can call the British response to the famine "slow," "ineffective," even "uncompassionate" - but at least there was some response, rather than heartless continuation of the original plan of decreasing the number of Ukrainian farmers via man-made hunger that was implemented by Stalin.

[PeterCrackhead]

Re: (Jews...) Now: Peter Kropotkin's introduction thread

Really? They came and confiscated every seed the Irish had? Also, so the historical sources lie when they said the British began to import cornmeal from America to relieve the hunger? (The fact that this did not help as corn is an incredibly non-nutritious plant is beyond the point - they had no means of knowing that, then).

You certainly can call the British response to the famine "slow," "ineffective," even "uncompassionate" - but at least there was some response, rather than heartless continuation of the original plan of decreasing the number of Ukrainian farmers via man-made hunger that was implemented by Stalin.

I wonder why it was so ineffective?

[Basilissa]

Re: (Jews...) Now: Peter Kropotkin's introduction thread

I wonder why it was so ineffective?

Have you ever seen bureaucrats doing anything effectively? By the way, overgrown bureaucracy is another reason why Soviet Union failed - aside from the race to the Moon and multiple genocides.

[PeterCrackhead]

Re: (Jews...) Now: Peter Kropotkin's introduction thread

The difference is that today nobody is demanding a bloody revolution to turn our nation into a command economy controlled by King Leopold II. Oh wait, that's exactly what the left is doing, except with themselves in the place of King Leopold II.

BTW the moment Belgium heard about what Leopold's command economy was doing, they annexed the Congo and turned it into a normal country. As for communist atrocities from 1917 onward, the left has still not been able to face up to it, after more than a century. Still either red holocaust deniers, or "whataboutist" subject changers like yourself.

As for the British response to the Irish famine, that was Malthusian thinking at work. The only people promoting Malthusian thinking these days are on the far left.

Command economies work see the US in 1941-1945. See China 1979-present and the USSR 1945-1975. All grew faster and stronger than the US. The USSR didn’t collapse because any inherent flaw in the command economy that is fallacy. It failed because it mismanaged the economy. If the economy of the USSR didn’t fail to meet the populations needs over time in favor of the ruling class it would still be running the show. The big failure of the USSR was Glasnost ... openness allowed people to see the historical screwing they were getting.

But, I would advocate a economy where the worker cooperatives (truly worker owned and managed) would determine their own business model within each business sector. Then people could choose between the various products made in the economy between these worker cooperatives. The only things that would be totally publicly owned in the form of large cooperatives: telecommunications, energy, waste removal recycling, water, mass transportation. Schools from pre-k to college all nationalized no private schools.

Everyone would have democracy in education, the work place and political spheres.

[Basilissa]

Re: (Jews...) Now: Peter Kropotkin's introduction thread

Command economies work see the US in 1941-1945. See China 1979-present and the USSR 1945-1975. All grew faster and stronger than the US.

Sure, China keeps growing because it enslaves its workers - and it adopted key elements of capitalist system. Soviet Union was also growing on the back of slave labor, also known as gulags. Are you really sure that you want to advocate any of these two models? Worker exploitation, minimal to no wages, eternal threat of being sent to a gulag, complete disregard for the most basic human rights - that's your bright idea for a growing economy?

The USSR didn’t collapse because any inherent flaw in the command economy that is fallacy. It failed because it mismanaged the economy. If the economy of the USSR didn’t fail to meet the populations needs over time in favor of the ruling class it would still be running the show.

One, mismanagement of the economy kinda goes hand in hand with command economy. It just doesn't work, because if people are getting the same amount of money whether they work a lot or whether they spend the whole workday poking their fingers inside their noses, there is no incentive to increase production. You know what provides an incentive to increase production? Bonuses that workers get under a capitalist system, where greater production -> greater reward. (Yes it is not a just system because bosses receive astronomically higher rewards, but it's still better than the communist model). In the Soviet block, young idealists who were able to see simple ways to increase effectiveness/productivity, and brought these ideas to their bosses, were met with blank stares and the same question: "Why bother?"

Two, yes the USSR did collapse because of the inherent flaw in its command economy: that is concentrating on the arms race and space race and generally keeping up appearances (such as absurd all-marble train stations) instead of improving lives of people. And the lack of respect for human lives general. You know, people who were alive in 1986 in the Soviet block thank God that the wind from Ukraine went north first, reaching Finland, which promptly sounded the alarm. If it flew just eastwards, we might not know about Chernobyl even today.

I get that you are too young to remember what communism was like, but that's no excuse for ignorance. There are books, you know.

You know what: do not trust books nor me. You should move to North Korea and taste a true communist system for yourself.

The big failure of the USSR was Glasnost ... openness allowed people to see the historical screwing they were getting.

That was the Big Failure? Not the fact that the whole economy was failing, just the fact that the people were able to talk about it more-or-less openly?

But, I would advocate a economy where the worker cooperatives (truly worker owned and managed) would determine their own business model within each business sector. Then people could choose between the various products made in the economy between these worker cooperatives.

And thousands of small co-ops show that this system works quite well within the capitalist system. Please note that the reason why co-ops work under a capitalist system, is that co-op members voluntarily join co-ops, weighing their pros and cons, and always having the possibility to opt out and start a separate private venture. The Polish PGR's failed because the govt took peoples' lands and forced them to join the co-ops, and the PGR members resented that and basically stole anything that was possible to unscrew.

[Jeb Stuart Thurmond]

Re: (Jews...) Now: Peter Kropotkin's introduction thread

Command economies work see the US in 1941-1945.

A system built on capitalism, unusually unified by a conformist culture which pretended minorities didn't exist, and almost no immigration. Oh, also the unique incentive structure of "if we don't work together, we're all gonna die". Do you really advocate re-creating these conditions?

But, I would advocate a economy where the worker cooperatives (truly worker owned and managed) would determine their own business model within each business sector. Then people could choose between the various products made in the economy between these worker cooperatives.

Then why do you keep defending Stalin and company? You would serve your cause better by saying you have nothing in common with them.

mass transportation. Schools from pre-k to college all nationalized no private schools.

Why these sectors? Why should poor people be locked in place by crappy bus systems? Why ban jitneys, which are often worker-owned?

You know why the middleman state/government focuses on the poor? Because the poor are too powerless to fight back against the crappy monopolies that the middleman state forces upon them.

School is a form of imprisonment already, and now you want to take what few choices we have away? Even Canada has two school boards, and private schools.

How about we make a deal where government can have the breweries and sock manufacturing instead. Then we'll have terrible beer and socks that fall apart after a day, but at least the poor won't be chained to the land like peasants and have our children abducted by the state without even being able to choose which prison.

Everyone would have democracy in education

"Democracy" typically does not mean taking away choices and freedom.

[Red Army]

Re: Was communism a success? A debate with Peter Krackpot.

How dare you, son of Kronstadt, to talk about our glorious USSR?

Anarchist were the cause of stress of the first years of the revolution. the seed you planted grow as venom in our youth, making everything difficult. In the name of anarchism you sabotaged everything the revolution was doing. Luckily our fearless leader Trotsky did not have any emotional attachments with you and did the massacre you deserved.


You belong to the lowest of the lowest of the society. Anarchist are scum, and they were treated as such in communist countries. THEY ARE treated as such in communist countries. Only in capitalist countries is where you are treated with respect and what they call "freedom of speech", the capitalist enemy is who gives you a Constitution protecting your right to think and say the bullshit you usually say.


Shut up and talk about what you know, smoking drugs and living in your mom's basement. Let the revolution to the revolutionaries.

[Jeb Stuart Thurmond]

Re: Was communism a success? A debate with Peter Krackpot.

son of Kronstadt

Finally, a real tankie to liven things up.

living in your mom's basement

If his family is rich enough to have a basement, doesn't that make him a kulak also? In proper communist countries, it's normal to have 3 generations living in an apartment that most Westerners would call a closet. To promote togetherness, I assume?

[handmaiden]

Re: Was communism a success? A debate with Peter Krackpot.

I'm just going to pop my head in here to say that I would rather not debate communism or anything else.

These conversations rarely include the Word of God and that is what I came to to hear.


Proverbs 14:23

In all labor there is profit: but the talk of the lips tendth only to penury.




Do you suppose that is why communism always fails? Because they spend all their time talking about communism and don't do any actual work?

[Basilissa]

Re: Was communism a success? A debate with Peter Krackpot.

If his family is rich enough to have a basement, doesn't that make him a kulak also? In proper communist countries, it's normal to have 3 generations living in an apartment that most Westerners would call a closet. To promote togetherness, I assume?

Indeed, Brother!

Do you suppose that is why communism always fails? Because they spend all their time talking about communism and don't do any actual work?

That is a very keen observation, Sister Handmaiden!

However, seeing this poor soul's line of argumentation so far, I'm waiting for him to argue next, that the best model for a rapidly growing economy, which should be emulated to achieve similar results, is the German model ca. 1933-1945.

[Jeb Stuart Thurmond]

Re: Was communism a success? A debate with Peter Krackpot.

Speaking of dinosaur-adjacent creatures, I'm bumping this because Bernie Sanders still thinks millions of non-voters are going to suddenly appear and vote for him. Leftists still refusing to draw the obvious conclusions from yet another failed experiment.

[Jeb Stuart Thurmond]

Re: (Jews...) Now: Peter Kropotkin's introduction thread

You have a brain stuck in the stone age - the same brain God crafted for Adam - and the modern world makes no sense to a stone age brain.

This is why so many people love sports, riots, sports riots, criminal gangs, gang warfare, cliques, mobs, jocks, cheerleaders, and general stupidity.

...In the stone age technology barely ever advanced at all. Stuff like rope took forever to be invented, and forever to spread. Nerds who invented stuff got no respect. You had to be a jock or a cheerleader...

I'm not the only one saying this:

50,000 BC might be a little more like a high school than anything else....like the infamous lunch table scene from the movie Mean Girls (I encourage you to watch), with some minor surface alterations, like clothes (picture beads and furs instead).

[MitzaLizalor]

Re: Was communism a success? A debate with Peter Krackpot.

Communists always want to superimpose their deficient ideology onto everything. Especially history. Once they get back to so-called "prehistory" they can make up anything they want to.

The little model of everything proposed by Marx ignores reality in two ways. First, the problems he identified were already solved by the time he was writing and second, allowing the concept of a prehistoric society we know nothing about, his value system was anathema to anyone who actually had to live in it. Their greatest hope was to leave it. His hope was to cement it in place permanently. "Work for everyone!" (except Marx) in a world where everyone had been trying to get away from work altogether.

The commie future was a frozen commie present. The ancient past existed with everything we have now, hopes, fears, hunger, those sorts of things but without machines their means of satisfaction would be altogether different. Incomprehensible. Perhaps some aspects linger in the form of mores and superstitions and unspoken subtexts. The social order could have been completely inverted, especially after the advent of language. But, no, they can't see the implications of their own model.

Christians know that language has always existed, even when there was only one human Genesis 2:16-20 so there's no room for history before Adam and language together with music thrived in those first generations Genesis 4:20-25 as history records pretty much from the year dot.

Prehistory? What prehistory?