Trump: Set to declare 2024 presidential bid tonight; will indictments follow soon?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Bob Armstrong
    replied
    Hi Peter:

    Pretty well dead on!

    Additional weak comments:

    1. Human nature has both a "light" and a "dark" element. When born, we lean towards the light, like a flower. But the unjust traumas of life cause us to be more aware of the "dark side", and we retrench, and believe that self-interest is important (Which it is). But telling healthy self-interest and anti-social self-interest from each other, and deciding to do the right thing, becomes more difficult, the more wounded we become. Some wounded are just amazing at how they survived, and got back to their "light" side.

    2. I do believe some political systems inhibit the amount and extent of exploitation by the "elite" (Whomever they may be in any particular system; Capitalism excels at your a) and b)). The systems that do best are "local & small" and have direct democracy (Not representative government). So if the planet were to dissolve nations, and become a planet of "villages", with direct voting on substantial issues, then corruption would be less, and the consequences would be less (Likely hard for a small village to amass an arsenal of nuclear weapons).

    This is why I am a Democratic Marxist, though there is only one unregistered DM Party on the planet, and I am the only member of that party.

    My 2 cents!

    Bob A

    Leave a comment:


  • Peter McKillop
    replied
    Originally posted by Bob Armstrong View Post
    ........

    Bob A
    Bob, give me one example of a political governance structure that has not resulted in a) the creation of an elite group who wield the power and b) the exploitation, by the elite group, of the powerless and marginalized segments of society. Next year, China's elite will be celebrating 75 years of exploiting the country's weak and marginalized peoples. Canadian economist John Kenneth Galbraith said it best:

    "Under capitalism, man exploits man. Under communism, it's just the opposite."

    p.s. I'm making a comment here about human nature. Any beneficent form of government is bound to be ephemeral due to humankind's flawed nature.
    Last edited by Peter McKillop; Thursday, 31st August, 2023, 01:02 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • Bob Armstrong
    replied
    Capitalism vs Communism (Old-style USSR)

    Analyzing China's History

    Click image for larger version

Name:	Flag China.jpg
Views:	32
Size:	8.1 KB
ID:	228878

    Response to Sid Belzberg Post # 163 - 23/8/28

    1. Sid: "The idea that communism has been beneficial for the Chinese people is indeed a grotesque claim that glosses over enormous human suffering."

    My Response: See No. 3 below.

    2. Sid: "While it's true that China has seen significant economic development in recent years, crediting communism for these advancements while conveniently neglecting to mention this growth accelerated after the reforms enacted by Deng Xiaoping, which moved China away from pure communism towards a market-oriented economy. Hence, attributing economic growth solely to communism is misleading."

    Response: Agreed

    3. Sid: [Crediting Communism] "neglects the enormous human toll it has taken that is not only intellectually dishonest but it's also morally indefensible."

    Response: It is a question whether eternal poverty and suffering in the country on the globe with, at the time, the by far largest population, cannot be overcome, if it requires enormous human toll. My answer is that revolution against Exploitative Capitalism was justified, given the long-time intransigence of the Chinese government. The Revolution of Mao Zedong was justified; in revolutions, it is true that the collateral damage is unfortunate.

    4. Sid (# 1) : "The 'Better' Communism Hypothesis: The suggestion that communism would have worked better under different leadership overlooks the systemic issues inherent in the ideology. Issues such as centralized planning, suppression of individual rights, and lack of incentive for productivity are structural challenges that wouldn't be remedied by a change in leadership."

    I will continue to analyze Sid's position in future (Out of time):
    1. Lenin's Worries About Stalin: While Lenin did express reservations about Stalin, it's worth noting that Lenin himself was also responsible for acts of repression, such as the Red Terror, which involved mass killings, torture, and repression.
    2. Human Cost: The acknowledgment that tens of millions died under Mao and Stalin is not reconcilable with the softer language suggesting the systems made lives "better" for some. Human life should not be viewed as expendable in the pursuit of ideological goals.
    3. Selective Presentation of Allies' Role: While Frank mentions Western aid to the USSR during World War II, it doesn't highlight that the Soviet regime was also given the tacit allowance to subjugate Eastern Europe under its sphere of influence post-WWII, leading to decades of repressive regimes in those countries.
    4. Economic Improvement in China: While it is true that China has seen significant economic improvement, this growth accelerated after the reforms enacted by Deng Xiaoping, which moved China away from pure communism towards a market-oriented economy. Hence, attributing economic growth solely to communism is misleading.
    5. Chiang Kai-Shek and the Kuomintang: The depiction of Chiang Kai-Shek as a "venal fascist style of leader" oversimplifies a complex history. While Chiang's rule had significant issues, including corruption and authoritarianism, it is worth noting that Taiwan, where the Kuomintang retreated, is now a thriving democracy.
    6. Assumption of Western Help: While Frank suggests that Mao and Stalin received significant Western help, this point is somewhat overstated, particularly in the case of Mao, whose regime was at odds with the West for much of its early history.
    7. Human Cost Again: Lastly, the idea of attributing "better" outcomes to an ideology responsible for famines, purges, and re-education campaigns that resulted in millions of deaths is ethically reprehensible.

    Crediting communism for advancements that were post-Western-style market reforms while neglecting the enormous human toll it has taken is not only intellectually dishonest, but it's also morally bankrupt.
    1. The Great Leap Forward: One of the most catastrophic policies implemented under Mao Zedong was the Great Leap Forward, aimed at rapidly transforming China from an agrarian society into a socialist society through rapid industrialization and collectivization. The policy was a disaster, leading to the largest famine in human history, estimated to have killed between 15 to 45 million people.
    2. The Cultural Revolution: This was another disastrous campaign that wreaked havoc on Chinese society. Intellectuals, academics, and anyone deemed "counter-revolutionary" were publicly humiliated, beaten, and often killed. Millions were sent to labor camps, and countless historical and cultural artifacts were destroyed. Estimates suggest that as many as 90 million people died as a direct result.
    3. Tiananmen Square: While not as devastating in scale as the previous tragedies, the 1989 Tiananmen Square Massacre exemplified the repressive nature of the Communist regime. Hundreds, if not thousands, of protesters were killed when the government cracked down on demonstrations calling for democratic reforms.
    4. Ethnic and Religious Persecutions: The ongoing treatment of Uighurs in Xinjiang, repression in Tibet, and crackdowns on religious groups like Falun Gong are additional black marks against the claim that communism has been good for the Chinese people.
    5. Poland's Anti-Semitic Purges: Turning to Poland, the anti-Semitic campaigns in 1968, which affected my family, is another example of the tragedies perpetrated under communist regimes. The event led to the loss of jobs, expulsion from the country, and stripping of citizenship of Polish Jews. This occurred in the broader context of a system that curtailed freedoms, suppressed opposition, and fostered a culture of fear and distrust.
    6. Suppression in Eastern Europe: Beyond Poland, the suppression of the Hungarian Revolution in 1956, the invasion of Czechoslovakia in 1968, and countless other instances of repression in Eastern Europe further underscore the human costs of communism.
    One Source Given: https://nationalcitizensinquiry.ca/

    Bob A

    Leave a comment:


  • Bob Armstrong
    replied
    The Nature of Libertarianism

    Click image for larger version

Name:	Libertarianism.png
Views:	31
Size:	265.4 KB
ID:	228876

    Question: Is Libertarianism fundamentally Fascism? (See Pargat Perrer Post # 159 - 23/8/28)

    My Response

    CT has a thread on Human Self-Government (The problem: NWO/GR) which is very active.

    https://forum.chesstalk.com/forum/ch...e20#post228874

    One main focus recently has been to compile a set of 8 Statements generally accepted by Libertarians in that CT'er group.

    So I have responded to this question there - Post # 292 - 23/8/31.

    Bob A

    Leave a comment:


  • Peter McKillop
    replied
    Originally posted by Sid Belzberg View Post

    Peter, please mask up tightly with triple masks and take your ninth jab.
    LOL. Okay, that's a good one!

    Leave a comment:


  • Sid Belzberg
    replied
    Originally posted by Peter McKillop View Post

    No reply. Just copying the above for the record in case Slippery Sid opts for another early morning editing job.
    Peter, please mask up tightly with triple masks and take your ninth jab.

    Leave a comment:


  • Peter McKillop
    replied
    Originally posted by Sid Belzberg View Post


    Such a big surprise
    No reply. Just copying the above for the record in case Slippery Sid opts for another early morning editing job.

    Leave a comment:


  • Sid Belzberg
    replied
    Originally posted by Peter McKillop View Post

    The above post looks a lot different than the one I read yesterday. Looks like Slippery Sid returned this morning and substantially altered his wording. I read through the post you linked to and didn't see any comment by Frank that could be construed as "Frank seems to think that trampling defenseless women with horses was a richly deserved fate." This weasel is guilty, every once in a while, of speaking without knowing. But this weasel also knows when he's dealing with a liar and a bully.
    Originally posted by Peter McKillop View Post
    and didn't see any comment by Frank that could be construed as "Frank seems to think that trampling defenseless women with horses was a richly deserved fate."
    Such a big surprise

    Leave a comment:


  • Peter McKillop
    replied
    Originally posted by Sid Belzberg View Post

    Skepticism—the last refuge of the ignorant. How delightful that you questioned my accuracy, allowing me to elucidate your stupidity. The link you so fervently demanded should now be gracing your screen. Weasel words? Even a weasel knows better than to speak without knowing."

    https://forum.chesstalk.com/forum/ch...884#post222884
    The above post looks a lot different than the one I read yesterday. Looks like Slippery Sid returned this morning and substantially altered his wording. I read through the post you linked to and didn't see any comment by Frank that could be construed as "Frank seems to think that trampling defenseless women with horses was a richly deserved fate." This weasel is guilty, every once in a while, of speaking without knowing. But this weasel also knows when he's dealing with a liar and a bully.

    Leave a comment:


  • Sid Belzberg
    replied
    Originally posted by Peter McKillop View Post

    Do you have a link to a quote by Frank that confirms he thinks this way? If you don't then what are you doing? You think it's a good idea to just make up crap about people and then throw it around as if it's the truth? The weasel word "seems" might save you in a court of law but it won't save you in the court of public opinion.

    p.s. If you're going to respond to this with one of your typical childish temper tantrums, try to keep it to 25 words or less.
    Skepticism—the last refuge of the ignorant. How delightful that you questioned my accuracy, allowing me to elucidate your stupidity. The link you so fervently demanded should now be gracing your screen. Weasel words? Even a weasel knows better than to speak without knowing."

    https://forum.chesstalk.com/forum/ch...884#post222884
    Last edited by Sid Belzberg; Wednesday, 30th August, 2023, 06:17 AM.

    Leave a comment:


  • Peter McKillop
    replied
    Originally posted by Sid Belzberg View Post
    ... Frank seems to think that trampling defenseless women with horses was a richly deserved fate. ....
    Do you have a link to a quote by Frank that confirms he thinks this way? If you don't then what are you doing? You think it's a good idea to just make up crap about people and then throw it around as if it's the truth? The weasel word "seems" might save you in a court of law but it won't save you in the court of public opinion.

    p.s. If you're going to respond to this with one of your typical childish temper tantrums, try to keep it to 25 words or less.

    Leave a comment:


  • Sid Belzberg
    replied
    Originally posted by Frank Dixon View Post
    Communism could have potentially worked much better, had Stalin not gotten hold of its leadership in the USSR, following the death of Lenin in 1924. Lenin was very worried about Stalin becoming too powerful. The two had worked closely together for the previous 20 years. History has since proven Lenin correct in his estimation. Stalin pushed aside his main rival Trotsky (eventually having him murdered in Mexico in 1940), and worked to assume absolute power, with a series of murderous purges. Stalin survived World War II only with the help of massive military and food aid from the Allies, including Canada; this at a time when he was directing a colossal secret espionage program against the very nations which were helping him. Probably, more than 30 million Soviets lost their lives in that war. Stalin also received an enormous boost with the information from his spy Richard Sorge (a Russian-born German) in Tokyo, who conveyed the vital inside knowledge that Japan would NOT attack the USSR in its east, once the Germans had invaded the USSR in the west, starting on June 22, 1941. Sorge's information, from the very top of Japanese leadership (which he had infiltrated) may have been the single most important spying fact in history, insofar as it affected an outcome. It enabled Stalin to transfer his large eastern reserves in Siberia by rail to the west, where their arrival was perfectly timed to meet the German attack in early winter, 1941. The German invasion was stopped, and eventually rolled back, beginning in summer 1943, with the largest tank battle in history, at Kursk in the Ukraine, where Stalin received significant intelligence help from the West, which was reading the German signals traffic. Sorge was eventually caught by the Japanese, and paid with his life.

    I am certainly not defending communism as the best, or even, a good, system. But for the vast bulk of Chinese people, it has certainly made their lives better, after 1949, when the Communists won victory in the civil war. The standard of living of the average Chinese person is much certainly higher now than it ever was, under whichever imperial dynasty one could examine, through the long millennia of Chinese empire. Probably one quarter of China's immense population still lives in serious poverty in 2023. That said, Mao did arrange for the deaths of tens of millions of Chinese during his long rule, from 1949 -- 1976. There were centuries, long before our current time, when China was the most advanced civilization on the planet, and by a wide margin. The jump from emperor rule straight to democracy, in the earlier part of the 20th century, was much too large and too sudden for China to undertake smoothly. They had had no democratic tradition. Following the death of democratic leader Sun Yat Sen in 1925, China was not well served by the Kuomintang and its leader Chiang Kai Shek, which took control shortly afterwards. Chiang proved to be a venal fascist style of leader. Mao and his communist team were able to connect to the rural, poor Chinese people; they expanded their support base, and (with significant assistance from the West, which was also helping Chiang) eventually triumphed over both the invading Japanese and the Kuomintang, which fled to Taiwan in 1949.
    Originally posted by Frank Dixon
    But for the vast bulk of Chinese people, it has certainly made their lives better,
    Of course, what can I expect from someone who fully supported the greatest mass democide in Canadian history and labeled dissidents as far right-wing "dim bulbs." Frank seems to think that trampling defenseless women with horses was a richly deserved fate. Frank Listen and learn from your fellow Canadians if you have any doubt whatsoever that my statement is "over the top" https://nationalcitizensinquiry.ca/

    The idea that communism has been beneficial for the Chinese people is indeed a grotesque claim that glosses over enormous human suffering. While it's true that China has seen significant economic development in recent years, crediting communism for these advancements while conveniently neglecting to mention this growth accelerated after the reforms enacted by Deng Xiaoping, which moved China away from pure communism towards a market-oriented economy. Hence, attributing economic growth solely to communism is misleading. And neglects the enormous human toll it has taken that is not only intellectually dishonest but it's also morally indefensible.

    So allow me to examine Frank's erudite but completely intellectually dishonest statements:

    The statement you posted is a nuanced take on the historical roles of communism in Russia and China.
    1. The 'Better' Communism Hypothesis: The suggestion that communism would have worked better under different leadership overlooks the systemic issues inherent in the ideology. Issues such as centralized planning, suppression of individual rights, and lack of incentive for productivity are structural challenges that wouldn't be remedied by a change in leadership.
    2. Lenin's Worries About Stalin: While Lenin did express reservations about Stalin, it's worth noting that Lenin himself was also responsible for acts of repression, such as the Red Terror, which involved mass killings, torture, and repression.
    3. Human Cost: The acknowledgment that tens of millions died under Mao and Stalin is not reconcilable with the softer language suggesting the systems made lives "better" for some. Human life should not be viewed as expendable in the pursuit of ideological goals.
    4. Selective Presentation of Allies' Role: While Frank mentions Western aid to the USSR during World War II, it doesn't highlight that the Soviet regime was also given the tacit allowance to subjugate Eastern Europe under its sphere of influence post-WWII, leading to decades of repressive regimes in those countries.
    5. Economic Improvement in China: While it is true that China has seen significant economic improvement, this growth accelerated after the reforms enacted by Deng Xiaoping, which moved China away from pure communism towards a market-oriented economy. Hence, attributing economic growth solely to communism is misleading.
    6. Chiang Kai-Shek and the Kuomintang: The depiction of Chiang Kai-Shek as a "venal fascist style of leader" oversimplifies a complex history. While Chiang's rule had significant issues, including corruption and authoritarianism, it is worth noting that Taiwan, where the Kuomintang retreated, is now a thriving democracy.
    7. Assumption of Western Help: While Frank suggests that Mao and Stalin received significant Western help, this point is somewhat overstated, particularly in the case of Mao, whose regime was at odds with the West for much of its early history.
    8. Human Cost Again: Lastly, the idea of attributing "better" outcomes to an ideology responsible for famines, purges, and re-education campaigns that resulted in millions of deaths is ethically reprehensible.

    Crediting communism for advancements that were post-Western-style market reforms while neglecting the enormous human toll it has taken is not only intellectually dishonest, but it's also morally bankrupt.
    1. The Great Leap Forward: One of the most catastrophic policies implemented under Mao Zedong was the Great Leap Forward, aimed at rapidly transforming China from an agrarian society into a socialist society through rapid industrialization and collectivization. The policy was a disaster, leading to the largest famine in human history, estimated to have killed between 15 to 45 million people.
    2. The Cultural Revolution: This was another disastrous campaign that wreaked havoc on Chinese society. Intellectuals, academics, and anyone deemed "counter-revolutionary" were publicly humiliated, beaten, and often killed. Millions were sent to labor camps, and countless historical and cultural artifacts were destroyed. Estimates suggest that as many as 90 million people died as a direct result.
    3. Tiananmen Square: While not as devastating in scale as the previous tragedies, the 1989 Tiananmen Square Massacre exemplified the repressive nature of the Communist regime. Hundreds, if not thousands, of protesters were killed when the government cracked down on demonstrations calling for democratic reforms.
    4. Ethnic and Religious Persecutions: The ongoing treatment of Uighurs in Xinjiang, repression in Tibet, and crackdowns on religious groups like Falun Gong are additional black marks against the claim that communism has been good for the Chinese people.
    5. Poland's Anti-Semitic Purges: Turning to Poland, the anti-Semitic campaigns in 1968, which affected my family, is another example of the tragedies perpetrated under communist regimes. The event led to the loss of jobs, expulsion from the country, and stripping of citizenship of Polish Jews. This occurred in the broader context of a system that curtailed freedoms, suppressed opposition, and fostered a culture of fear and distrust.
    6. Suppression in Eastern Europe: Beyond Poland, the suppression of the Hungarian Revolution in 1956, the invasion of Czechoslovakia in 1968, and countless other instances of repression in Eastern Europe further underscore the human costs of communism.
    Last edited by Sid Belzberg; Wednesday, 30th August, 2023, 01:00 AM.

    Leave a comment:


  • Frank Dixon
    replied
    Communism could have potentially worked much better, had Stalin not gotten hold of its leadership in the USSR, following the death of Lenin in 1924. Lenin was very worried about Stalin becoming too powerful. The two had worked closely together for the previous 20 years. History has since proven Lenin correct in his estimation. Stalin pushed aside his main rival Trotsky (eventually having him murdered in Mexico in 1940), and worked to assume absolute power, with a series of murderous purges. Stalin survived World War II only with the help of massive military and food aid from the Allies, including Canada; this at a time when he was directing a colossal secret espionage program against the very nations which were helping him. Probably, more than 30 million Soviets lost their lives in that war. Stalin also received an enormous boost with the information from his spy Richard Sorge (a Russian-born German) in Tokyo, who conveyed the vital inside knowledge that Japan would NOT attack the USSR in its east, once the Germans had invaded the USSR in the west, starting on June 22, 1941. Sorge's information, from the very top of Japanese leadership (which he had infiltrated) may have been the single most important spying fact in history, insofar as it affected an outcome. It enabled Stalin to transfer his large eastern reserves in Siberia by rail to the west, where their arrival was perfectly timed to meet the German attack in early winter, 1941. The German invasion was stopped, and eventually rolled back, beginning in summer 1943, with the largest tank battle in history, at Kursk in the Ukraine, where Stalin received significant intelligence help from the West, which was reading the German signals traffic. Sorge was eventually caught by the Japanese, and paid with his life.

    I am certainly not defending communism as the best, or even, a good, system. But for the vast bulk of Chinese people, it has certainly made their lives better, after 1949, when the Communists won victory in the civil war. The standard of living of the average Chinese person is much certainly higher now than it ever was, under whichever imperial dynasty one could examine, through the long millennia of Chinese empire. Probably one quarter of China's immense population still lives in serious poverty in 2023. That said, Mao did arrange for the deaths of tens of millions of Chinese during his long rule, from 1949 -- 1976. There were centuries, long before our current time, when China was the most advanced civilization on the planet, and by a wide margin. The jump from emperor rule straight to democracy, in the earlier part of the 20th century, was much too large and too sudden for China to undertake smoothly. They had had no democratic tradition. Following the death of democratic leader Sun Yat Sen in 1925, China was not well served by the Kuomintang and its leader Chiang Kai Shek, which took control shortly afterwards. Chiang proved to be a venal fascist style of leader. Mao and his communist team were able to connect to the rural, poor Chinese people; they expanded their support base, and (with significant assistance from the West, which was also helping Chiang) eventually triumphed over both the invading Japanese and the Kuomintang, which fled to Taiwan in 1949.

    Leave a comment:


  • Dilip Panjwani
    replied
    Originally posted by Bob Armstrong View Post
    Types of Governing

    the world as it really is, and the immoral self-interest people are sometimes capable of.


    Bob A (Believer in Democracy, though "Direct" rather than "Representative".
    Your 'immoral and self-interested' people either mischievously or genuinely misinterpret laws in order to launch suits, and so the more the laws, the more the suits. Get it? And you are missing the point that a Libertarian government will not be doing much at all, except running a Judiciary, and hence there will be hardly anything for your 'immoral and self-interested' people to complain about...
    If people generally mind their own business (as in Libertarianism), rather than enjoy minding other people's business (as in Marxism), there is less for everyone to complain about...
    Last edited by Dilip Panjwani; Monday, 28th August, 2023, 09:23 AM.

    Leave a comment:


  • Dilip Panjwani
    replied
    Originally posted by Pargat Perrer View Post

    Labelling someone a troll when that someone has exposed your own position as illogical is a favorite tactic on CT. It doesn't bother me in the least, because it is a sign of pure weakness.

    "Ohhh... I've been proven wrong...." (typing furiously) .... "You Nasty Troll!"

    None of it matters, because Libertarianism is never going to become the political system of choice (although it could be attempted, I have shown it would break down within one or two terms into revolt and ousting from power).
    The fact remains, as quite a few on various posts on chesstalk have indicated just over the last couple of days, that you are a nasty troll!

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X