Soviet-Empire.com U.S.S.R. and communism historical discussion.
[ Active ]
[ Login ]
Log-in to remove these advertisements.

the NeXT new commy/socialist states?(besideVietnam,China,etc

POST REPLY
Soviet cogitations: 777
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 10 Jun 2004, 00:45
Komsomol
Post 24 Nov 2004, 21:33
Nepal
Image

ALL POWER BELONGS TO ME! And the Party of course!
Zajedno za Tita i našu budućnost!
Soviet cogitations: 575
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 13 Nov 2004, 00:40
Komsomol
Post 25 Nov 2004, 03:36
I think Palistine is pretty ripe for picking...cause since Arafat died, now people are running for office, maybe the communist party will win, but the Greedy US wouldnt let that happen...
Image
Soviet cogitations: 15
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 23 Nov 2004, 05:52
New Comrade (Say hi & be nice to me!)
Post 26 Nov 2004, 03:52
The middle east is not fertile grounds for godless communism my friends.

Islam will not take kindy to such concepts, and is more the enemy than a friend.

Communism for us is the main focus in life, religion can take a secondary role, but red comes first.. always !

This is something Muslims will not accept
User avatar
Soviet cogitations: 136
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 29 Jan 2004, 12:53
Pioneer
Post 26 Nov 2004, 07:19
Marxism has no defined morality or religious ethic. It is at base atheistic and its three main parts are historical materialism, class struggle, and the theory of value in labor. But being without a defined morality is an advantage since Marxism can adopt any morality (inclusive of a religious ethic) that helps the proletarian revolution and the building of a communist society.

Although it is unlikely, to say the least, that in the Muslim world, a Muslim communist morality will develop; it is not unthinkable that a Muslim can have his religious ethic and at the same time be a socialist and/or a communist. Such has happened in other parts of the world where Christianity holds sway and there is a viable Christian socialism and even a Liberation theology organization that uses the notions of Christianity to further the cause of communism in Latin America.
E.1: TWO STEPS FORWARD, ONE STEP BACK - V.I. Lenin
Soviet cogitations: 575
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 13 Nov 2004, 00:40
Komsomol
Post 26 Nov 2004, 23:02
I think your noth partly right, muslims wont take to kindly to it at first, but they definatly will adjust. It will just need some time, like any new government, no teveryone will like it at first, but the will accept it later in time.
Image
Mgz
[+-]
Soviet cogitations: 38
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 21 Oct 2004, 05:33
Pioneer
Post 27 Nov 2004, 06:50
Potemkin wrote:
Wu wrote:
communist should get together for the new soviet union!

Agreed. It doesn't even have to be a contiguous territory - there could be a single state system directing the building of socialism worldwide in a Union of Socialist States (USS), until the achievement of a communist society across the world leads to the withering away of the state itself.


nah... but in Vietnam we fight for nationalism... asking us to join a federation/conferderation/united states/union states/etc IHMO wouldn't make any sense --> would face strong resistance from the people...

remember that WE DID NOT JOIN The WARSAW PACT...
Vive le revolution!!!
User avatar
Soviet cogitations: 4177
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 18 Sep 2004, 16:21
Politburo
Post 27 Nov 2004, 13:26
Mgz wrote:
Potemkin wrote:
Wu wrote:
communist should get together for the new soviet union!

Agreed. It doesn't even have to be a contiguous territory - there could be a single state system directing the building of socialism worldwide in a Union of Socialist States (USS), until the achievement of a communist society across the world leads to the withering away of the state itself.


nah... but in Vietnam we fight for nationalism... asking us to join a federation/conferderation/united states/union states/etc IHMO wouldn't make any sense --> would face strong resistance from the people...

remember that WE DID NOT JOIN The WARSAW PACT...

I can perfectly understand why you did not join the Warsaw Pact. However, there is a fundamental principle of internationalism in Communism. Marx said, "Workers of the world unite!You have nothing to lose but your chains!" He did not say, "Workers of England unite!" or "Workers of Germany unite!" Either Communism is an internationist movement, or it is merely a few localised regime changes in a few Third World nations, important for them perhaps but of no wider world significance.

I believe that one of the reasons for the recent defeats suffered by Communism is precisely this emphasis on nationalistic feelings, from Stalin's policy of "Socialism in one country" to your assertion that "in Vietnam we fight for nationalism". No, in Vietnam you fought for Communism. The Americans were not trying to bomb Vietnam "back into the Stone Age" as one of their generals put it because they were interested in colonising Vietnam as a nation - they couldn't have cared less about Vietnam as a nation - but because they were trying to stop the spread of international Communism. To see the Vietnam War only as a conflict between two hostile nations is to miss the whole point.
"Comrade Lenin left us a great legacy, and we fucкed it up." - Josef Stalin
Image
Soviet cogitations: 869
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 30 Sep 2004, 03:25
Komsomol
Post 27 Nov 2004, 14:27
Should we explain the dinimo effect?
Image
User avatar
Soviet cogitations: 4177
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 18 Sep 2004, 16:21
Politburo
Post 27 Nov 2004, 14:31
Crazy Ivan wrote:
Should we explain the dinimo effect?

If you mean the 'domino' effect, then please be my guest. Bear in mind, though, that the 'domino effect' turned out not to be valid - Vietnam 'fell' to Communism, yet this did not lead to the spread of Communism throughout South-East Asia.
"Comrade Lenin left us a great legacy, and we fucкed it up." - Josef Stalin
Image
User avatar
Soviet cogitations: 634
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 12 Aug 2004, 22:40
Komsomol
Post 27 Nov 2004, 15:53
Potemkin wrote:
Crazy Ivan wrote:
Should we explain the dinimo effect?

If you mean the 'domino' effect, then please be my guest. Bear in mind, though, that the 'domino effect' turned out not to be valid - Vietnam 'fell' to Communism, yet this did not lead to the spread of Communism throughout South-East Asia.


Beaucse of USA. USA destroy SE Asia.
Image
Soviet cogitations: 575
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 13 Nov 2004, 00:40
Komsomol
Post 27 Nov 2004, 23:22
Very True Comrade Thai, The US will not stand for other countries being communst, if they do, our economy goes with them, the US will try not to have any ties with communist nations, like cuba, the USSR, Vietnam, Laos... See if other countries go communist, we drop down, because we will not recieve their products, and the US will lose money. So, US Bashes communism. The US are afraid of communist powers i think... I think the US is afraid of their power, like with the USSR, they could have eaisly beat the US's ass if we went to war...
Image
Soviet cogitations: 869
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 30 Sep 2004, 03:25
Komsomol
Post 28 Nov 2004, 00:25
The United States fears a "domino effect" in Southeast Asia.

The domino theory was a United States political theory advanced by both liberal and conservative Americans during the Cold War, especially regarding Indochina. It made people believe that if one country was taken over by Communists, neighboring countries would fall like dominoes, in a form of imperialist expansion of the Soviet Union. This is a western point of view of course.
Image
Soviet cogitations: 575
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 13 Nov 2004, 00:40
Komsomol
Post 28 Nov 2004, 00:29
Yeah, i've read about the domino effect, they were afraid all of Europe and Asia would have went communist.
Image
[+-]
Soviet cogitations: 269
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 12 Aug 2004, 05:13
Komsomol
Post 28 Nov 2004, 02:45
Well its not that they have problems with commies its the problems with the commies that kill mass people and geneside happens
Image
[+-]
Soviet cogitations: 782
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 25 Nov 2004, 17:44
Unperson
Post 28 Nov 2004, 05:01
KMFDM wrote:
Well its not that they have problems with commies its the problems with the commies that kill mass people and geneside happens


Like every communist nation to this day?
[+-]
Soviet cogitations: 269
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 12 Aug 2004, 05:13
Komsomol
Post 28 Nov 2004, 06:08
know what I take that back...They hate communist...because in Africa theirs genecide but we dont do shit about it...UN even took out the mercanaries who actually helped...so now people are dieing and we are in IRAQ? not seirra leon or somewere in Africa
Image
Mgz
[+-]
Soviet cogitations: 38
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 21 Oct 2004, 05:33
Pioneer
Post 28 Nov 2004, 06:29
Socialism in one country" to your assertion that "in Vietnam we fight for nationalism". No, in Vietnam you fought for Communism.

actually we fought for BOTH.... and the combine of both is the key to our victory
...

But an United States of Socialism that combine Vietnam and China is un-thinkable... we Vietnamese might be never be in a same sky with the Chinese... we fought a bloody border war in 1979, and for 3900 years we fought to gain independence from CHINA...and the territorial dispute (Sparkly Islands and abcxyz islands ( I forgot the name in English)+ I believe they chop quite a bit of land from us in 2002 (Thien_Thai, can ya confirm this
- my source is from ***NDA*** ) , and now the rivalry in economy...

FYI I have ZERO problem with Chinese , I have tonnes of great friends who are chinese :_)
Vive le revolution!!!
User avatar
Soviet cogitations: 4177
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 18 Sep 2004, 16:21
Politburo
Post 28 Nov 2004, 13:49
Mgz wrote:
Socialism in one country" to your assertion that "in Vietnam we fight for nationalism". No, in Vietnam you fought for Communism.

actually we fought for BOTH.... and the combine of both is the key to our victory
...

But an United States of Socialism that combine Vietnam and China is un-thinkable... we Vietnamese might be never be in a same sky with the Chinese... we fought a bloody border war in 1979, and for 3900 years we fought to gain independence from CHINA...and the territorial dispute (Sparkly Islands and abcxyz islands ( I forgot the name in English)+ I believe they chop quite a bit of land from us in 2002 (Thien_Thai, can ya confirm this
- my source is from ***NDA*** ) , and now the rivalry in economy...

FYI I have ZERO problem with Chinese , I have tonnes of great friends who are chinese :_)

The combination of 'Nationalism' and 'Socialism'. Now where have I heard that before?.... National Socialism..... It sounds familiar, but I can't quite place it....


But seriously, Socialism, especially in its Marxist formulation, is an internationalist creed. Marx believed that the nation state would wither away under socialism, just as the state itself would wither away. This should be any true Communist's ultimate aim - the dissolution of all national borders and the end of all nationalist hostilities and disputes as the proletariat of all nations unite in a world communist society. The current hostility between China and Vietnam is an indication of the failure of that aim, and a sign of how far we are from actually achieving Communism, either in China or in Vietnam.

But I for one would not describe China under its current leadership as a Communist nation. Not all states would be eligible to join the United Socialist States - China would certainly not qualify, and I seriously doubt whether Vietnam would either.
"Comrade Lenin left us a great legacy, and we fucкed it up." - Josef Stalin
Image
User avatar
Soviet cogitations: 634
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 12 Aug 2004, 22:40
Komsomol
Post 28 Nov 2004, 15:42
Mgz wrote:
Socialism in one country" to your assertion that "in Vietnam we fight for nationalism". No, in Vietnam you fought for Communism.

actually we fought for BOTH.... and the combine of both is the key to our victory
...

But an United States of Socialism that combine Vietnam and China is un-thinkable... we Vietnamese might be never be in a same sky with the Chinese... we fought a bloody border war in 1979, and for 3900 years we fought to gain independence from CHINA...and the territorial dispute (Sparkly Islands and abcxyz islands ( I forgot the name in English)+ I believe they chop quite a bit of land from us in 2002 (Thien_Thai, can ya confirm this
- my source is from ***NDA*** ) , and now the rivalry in economy...

FYI I have ZERO problem with Chinese , I have tonnes of great friends who are chinese :_)


Yes, Spratly islands and Paracel islands. I think China still have full control over the whole Paracel islands, but it is NOT their islands. These island is rich of oil and natural gas etc. China think they have exclusive right to this islands.

During the time when Mao Tse Tung ruled China, i think there was no conflicts between our countries, first after his death the problems with China began again. I also think we have kind of stable relations with China today, but these islands is really big problem for our friendship.

To potemkin:

Vietnamese are nationalists, and many are socialists, and foreigner is welcomed in our country and respected, no discrimination. I think people of Soviet union was nationalists AND socialists, so is Chinese. We still believe in the international movement but are proud of our countries fight against imperialism and i also think those wars and the wars with China during thousands of years have created nationalism.
Our current president is from Tai-minority, and this also prove we have respect for every nationality and race. How many countries have presidents which is from minorities? Our nationalism is not destructive!
Image
User avatar
Soviet cogitations: 4177
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 18 Sep 2004, 16:21
Politburo
Post 29 Nov 2004, 02:04
I don't deny that under certain historical circumstances, nationalism can be a progressive force. This was the case in Europe in the 18th and early 19th centuries and it was true in South-East Asia in the 1950s and 1960s. However, it remains true that it must ultimately be superceded by internationalism, which is the true ideology of mature Socialism. Nationalism became a reactionary force in Europe in the 20th century, and I think it is also becoming a reactionary force in South-East Asia now. The true loyalty of a worker is not to his nation, but to the international proletariat.
"Comrade Lenin left us a great legacy, and we fucкed it up." - Josef Stalin
Image
Alternative Display:
Mobile view
More Forums: The History Forum. The UK Politics Forum.
© 2000- Soviet-Empire.com. Privacy.