100 million deaths due to capitalism in the 20th century.

[Virus]

Why should anyone do that? It's a red herring.

 

[TubbaBlubba]

Why should anyone do that? It's a red herring.

Is this some kind of Australian slang, "Red herring" meaning "relevant piece of information"?

 

[Humes fork]

Hey, once you provide some examples of democratically elected Communist parties that turned into draconian totalitarian regimes I'll be all ears.

In pre-Soviet Russia there was an election, the Bolsheviks didn't do so good as they hoped in the democratic election. Go figure what they did instead...

Communism is a fundamentally anti-democratic ideology. Listen to communists who say they want to overthrow capitalism. Why overthrow? Because they don't do so good at the ballot box, their ideas don't enjoy widespread popular support.

Look at the former communist party in Sweden. Listen to the fiscal irresponsibility they want. No wonder they perform so poorly. Comrade 4%.

 

[Bill Thompson]

people here love to talk about the communist death toll.
here is the elephant in the room:

the black book of capitalism.

An appendix provides an incomplete list of 20th century death tolls which Perrault attributes to the capitalist system. The list, which includes both combatant and noncombatant dead, includes an estimated 58 million dead from the First and Second World Wars, plus death tolls from various colonial wars, anticommunist wars and repressions, ethnic conflicts, and some victims of famines or malnutrition,which brings the incomplete list to a combined total of about 100 million deaths attributed to capitalism in the 20th century.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Le_Livre_Noir_du_Capitalisme

Weren't the French the first to start the whole 9-11 conspiracy craze?

Rather, the book is composed of a series of independent essays commissioned from various writers who were given free rein to write on any aspect of capitalism they chose.[1] Topics covered range from the African slave trade to the era of financial globalization.

Are you saying that the African Slave Trade would not have happened if there was no capitalim?


Are you saying that the globalization would not have happened if there was no capitalim?

 

[TubbaBlubba]

In pre-Soviet Russia there was an election, the Bolsheviks didn't do so good as they hoped in the democratic election. Go figure what they did instead...

Communism is a fundamentally anti-democratic ideology. Listen to communists who say they want to overthrow capitalism. Why overthrow? Because they don't do so good at the ballot box, their ideas don't enjoy widespread popular support.

Look at the former communist party in Sweden. Listen to the fiscal irresponsibility they want. No wonder they perform so poorly. Comrade 4%.

Did you have a point, or did you only feel like going on an anti-communist rant? Seriously, your three sections have zero to do with each other, except they all contain the word "bolsjevik" or "communist".

(Spoilers: Tsarist Russia was not a democracy)

 

[Ziggurat]

Did you have a point, or did you only feel like going on an anti-communist rant?

I think his point is that the only communists who actually believe in democracy are communists who never come to power. You will never get the majority of people to willingly accept communism, so either you remain forever a fringe party, or you abandon democratic principles and resort to violence. Your defense of the non-violent fringe variety may be correct, but it's largely irrelevant. They aren't the ones who matter.

 

[TubbaBlubba]

I think his point is that the only communists who actually believe in democracy are communists who never come to power. You will never get the majority of people to willingly accept communism, so either you remain forever a fringe party, or you abandon democratic principles and resort to violence. Your defense of the non-violent fringe variety may be correct, but it's largely irrelevant. They aren't the ones who matter.

Yeah, I guess blanket statements are more exciting than qualified, accurate ones.

"All violent Communists are violent!"


No ****.

 

[trustbutverify]

Yeah, I guess blanket statements are more exciting than qualified, accurate ones.

"All violent Communists are violent!"


No ****.

The point is that history seems to confirm that for a system composed of a strictly nationalized economy to ascend to and maintain power requires an iron fist, and probably a brutal police state apparatus. The preceeding comments seem to make that point pretty well.

Of course, you can disagree with this conclusion and argue your view. Your last few posts seem muddled and irrelevent.

 

[TubbaBlubba]

The point is that history seems to confirm that for a system composed of a strictly nationalized economy to ascend to and maintain power requires an iron fist, and probably a brutal police state apparatus. The preceeding comments seem to make that point pretty well.

Of course, you can disagree with this conclusion and argue your view. Your last few posts seem muddled and irrelevent.

Which I have not argued against. I have argued against this:

But "The Communists" include a multitude of countries, with different policies, and different factors.

That were all mass-murderers.

This clearly states that all Communists in all countries as mass murderers. No ifs or buts about it.

I'm sorry, but as someone who has many friends and family that self-identify as Communists, I do take offense at calling them mass-murderers.

 

[Virus]

There's people who call themselves National Socialists that haven't personally killed anyone. Big whoop. I meant that all communist states were mass-murderers.

 

[Humes fork]

Did you have a point, or did you only feel like going on an anti-communist rant? Seriously, your three sections have zero to do with each other, except they all contain the word "bolsjevik" or "communist".

(Spoilers: Tsarist Russia was not a democracy)

My point is that communism is a fundamentally anti-democratic ideology.

 

[bikerdruid]

Why point is that communism is a fundamentally anti-democratic ideology.

huh??

 

[Virus]

Communism not democratic.

 

[bikerdruid]

Communism not democratic.

gee, that is almost a coherent phrase....
you and hume's fork seem rather incoherent your last couple of posts.
actually, fundamentally, as an ideology, communism is very democratic.

 

[Bill Thompson]

gee, that is almost a coherent phrase....
you and hume's fork seem rather incoherent your last couple of posts.
actually, fundamentally, as an ideology, communism is very democratic.

In what communist country do people vote in secret ballot?

Also, did you answer these questions:
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=7899870&postcount=284

 

[Bill Thompson]

My point is that communism is a fundamentally anti-democratic ideology.

Communism is kind of like democracy taken to the extreme. Wouldn't you agree?

OK, I just like your avatar and want you to make more posts so that it appears often here.

 

[bikerdruid]

Are you saying that the African Slave Trade would not have happened if there was no capitalim?


Are you saying that the globalization would not have happened if there was no capitalim?

i think that seems quite clear.

 

[Bill Thompson]

i think that seems quite clear.

Oh, ok, you are saying that they would happen anyway.

The Catholic Church has been blamed for the brutality in colonial Brazil. Once someone understands human nature, you find that the brutal deaths would have happened to the natives.

Didn't the communists kill the intellectuals who were opposed to them in Vietnam?

Dude, you never ever ever ever elaborate or explain yourself. That is rude at best. Everyone wants to learn. Everyone wants a civil exchange of ideas. To just point your finger at someone and call them wrong and then never back it up, is immature and rude and annoying. Is this what you are going for here?

Doesn't the North Koreans currently have a kind of slavery now? Work camps? Death camps? For whole families for absurd accusations and suspicions? How can you say that that is caused by capitalism?

 

[bikerdruid]

Oh, ok, you are saying that they would happen anyway.

The Catholic Church has been blamed for the brutality in colonial Brazil. Once someone understands human nature, you find that the brutal deaths would have happened to the natives.

Didn't the communists kill the intellectuals who were opposed to them in Vietnam?

Dude, you never ever ever ever elaborate or explain yourself. That is rude at best. Everyone wants to learn. Everyone wants a civil exchange of ideas. To just point your finger at someone and call them wrong and then never back it up, is immature and rude and annoying. Is this what you are going for here?

Doesn't the North Koreans currently have a kind of slavery now? Work camps? Death camps? For whole families for absurd accusations and suspicions? How can you say that that is caused by capitalism?

...that's not what i meant at all.
globalization is a direct result of capitalism, so is slavery.

 

[trustbutverify]

gee, that is almost a coherent phrase....
you and hume's fork seem rather incoherent your last couple of posts.
actually, fundamentally, as an ideology, communism is very democratic.

And if the electorate in such a real communistic democracy chooses un-communistic candidates? Maybe even chooses market oriented leaders?