U.S.S.R. and communism historical discussion.
[ Login ] [ Active ]

Communist Dictators

Log-in to remove advertisement.
Post 17 Sep 2009, 02:00
I would fight for mankind's right to self-determination. If utopia(meaning total perfection) was forced on an unwilling populace, it means that there is a flaw. The flaw is that of the people's powerlessness and, hence, imperfection, meaning it is not a utopia. Therefore, utopia cannot be forced, meaning your question is self-contradictory.
Post 17 Sep 2009, 02:19
Onliners are bad. Posting just one word is worse. Please don't do that. sp
Post 17 Sep 2009, 08:42
Therefore, utopia cannot be forced, meaning your question is self-contradictory.

I would have agree with you. The recent question is self-contradictory. The idea of a forced Utopia, for want of a better description, sounds more like Nazi Germany than any Marxist Society.
Post 13 Oct 2009, 09:25
The inclusion of the five Communist leaders of the list as "dictators" is clearly a bourgeois ideological mystification. They are all elected leaders that do not have absolute powers and act in democratic (because of the possibility by the people to chose) dictatorships (because of the lack of the electoral possibility to chose to overthrow Socialism) of the proletariat. The worst side of the mystification is that many people, without even the critical spirit to wonder why, fideistically adhere to what bourgeois propaganda says.
Post 13 Oct 2009, 09:32
These are violations to human rights

Dear comrade Fontis, I think I agree with what you mean, but I would word that in a different way. Human rights are utmostly important, and Socialism is a human right. Capitalism, on the contrary, is a violation of human rights per se.
Post 15 Oct 2009, 10:42
Human rights are a hopelessly stupid idealist concept nobody should actually care about.

You can treat other people nice without resorting to such bullshit.
Post 15 Oct 2009, 16:08
Human rights are a hopelessly stupid idealist concept nobody should actually care about.

This coming from a vegetarian.. doesn't suprise me much. Save the poor, innocent animals.. but screw the poor, innocent people.
Post 15 Oct 2009, 16:20
1. I was telling you I'm nearing the conclusion that vegetarianism is bullshit.

2. I never said "screw the people", I just said that the concept of human rights is stupid. I've already explained this somewhere.
Post 17 Oct 2009, 14:45
Human rights are a hopelessly stupid idealist concept nobody should actually care about.

Dear comrade, well, I think I used ambiguous language. I am the native speaker of a Romance language and, in the use of Romance languages, the word "human rights" does not have particular connotations, "human" is usually devoided of any connotation and is just intended to convey the idea of "of man (and woman)", being most clearly derived from a common root of with the word "man", ex.: Italian "uomo" 'man' ~ "umano" 'human'.
I did not mean the bourgeois version of "human rights", or of the "rights of man", rooted in the French Revolutionaries' idea that one man would be a limitation, rather than a realization, to the full development of another man's freedom, and often used to legitimize the exploitation of man by man. I meant the civil, political and social rights of every human (and here we could open an off topic thread about the rights of non-human beings...) living being: man, and woman, both as citizens of a law-enforcing State and as members of a Communist post-State society. For ex. one of the rights I consider inalienable to every human being is the right to have nobody earning by stealing the fruit of your labour, the plusvalue created by you.
Specified as I have now did, I think it is clear that I was not talking about bourgeois rights, for example as exemplified by the "rights" to own what has been stolen from the workers, or to organize countre-revolution (as bourgeois "human rights" supporters advocate regarding Socialist countries).
Post 01 Nov 2009, 19:24
Here's the 2009 list for Parade's Communist dictators.

3: Kim Jong-Il, North Korea, Age 67, In power since 1994

6: Hu Jintao, China, Age: 66, In power since 2002

13. Raul Castro, Cuba, Age 77, In power since: 2006

Kim dropped a place in three years and that's probably due to the fact that Robert Mugabe was the flavour of the year for the media because of the Zimbabwe economic crisis. From what I have read about Parade magazine, I can tell you that it is grade A bullshit and wouldn't take their publications with a pinch of salt.
Post 02 Nov 2009, 00:21
Mugabe is a communist.
Post 02 Nov 2009, 11:48
No. No, he's not.
Post 02 Nov 2009, 12:08
Red_Son wrote:
Mugabe is a communist.

AFAIK, he has never said or done anything to suggest that he is a communist.
Post 02 Nov 2009, 16:37
See I said that Fidel wasn't really a dictator, but Raul is defiantly not a dictator.
Post 04 Nov 2009, 13:05
Taken from The Last Days of White Rhodesia by Denis Hills

Despite Mugabe's reasurring tone - he has asked not to be addressed as "Comrade" in news items - there is ambivalence in his utterances. He has frankly admitted, for instance that his ultimate goal is socialism, which he conceives as "a humanitarian as well as a Marxist principle
Post 04 Nov 2009, 14:16
Mugabe is a communist.

Post 26 Jan 2010, 22:14
Lol.Mugabe a communist.
Those "journalists" really abuse their power to slander communism 20 year after it's main force of potential collapsed.
But then,Americans would probably suck it all up,through crappy tv-show,newspapers,"documentaries" etc
And Hu Jintao isn't a communist either.
More Forums: The History Forum. The UK Politics Forum.
© 2000- Privacy.
[ Top ]