If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.
Policy / Politique
The fee for tournament organizers advertising on ChessTalk is $20/event or $100/yearly unlimited for the year.
Les frais d'inscription des organisateurs de tournoi sur ChessTalk sont de 20 $/événement ou de 100 $/année illimitée.
You can etransfer to Henry Lam at chesstalkforum at gmail dot com
Transfér à Henry Lam à chesstalkforum@gmail.com
Dark Knight / Le Chevalier Noir
General Guidelines
---- Nous avons besoin d'un traduction français!
Some Basics
1. Under Board "Frequently Asked Questions" (FAQs) there are 3 sections dealing with General Forum Usage, User Profile Features, and Reading and Posting Messages. These deal with everything from Avatars to Your Notifications. Most general technical questions are covered there. Here is a link to the FAQs. https://forum.chesstalk.com/help
2. Consider using the SEARCH button if you are looking for information. You may find your question has already been answered in a previous thread.
3. If you've looked for an answer to a question, and not found one, then you should consider asking your question in a new thread. For example, there have already been questions and discussion regarding: how to do chess diagrams (FENs); crosstables that line up properly; and the numerous little “glitches” that every new site will have.
4. Read pinned or sticky threads, like this one, if they look important. This applies especially to newcomers.
5. Read the thread you're posting in before you post. There are a variety of ways to look at a thread. These are covered under “Display Modes”.
6. Thread titles: please provide some details in your thread title. This is useful for a number of reasons. It helps ChessTalk members to quickly skim the threads. It prevents duplication of threads. And so on.
7. Unnecessary thread proliferation (e.g., deliberately creating a new thread that duplicates existing discussion) is discouraged. Look to see if a thread on your topic may have already been started and, if so, consider adding your contribution to the pre-existing thread. However, starting new threads to explore side-issues that are not relevant to the original subject is strongly encouraged. A single thread on the Canadian Open, with hundreds of posts on multiple sub-topics, is no better than a dozen threads on the Open covering only a few topics. Use your good judgment when starting a new thread.
8. If and/or when sub-forums are created, please make sure to create threads in the proper place.
Debate
9. Give an opinion and back it up with a reason. Throwaway comments such as "Game X pwnz because my friend and I think so!" could be considered pointless at best, and inflammatory at worst.
10. Try to give your own opinions, not simply those copied and pasted from reviews or opinions of your friends.
Unacceptable behavior and warnings
11. In registering here at ChessTalk please note that the same or similar rules apply here as applied at the previous Boardhost message board. In particular, the following content is not permitted to appear in any messages:
* Racism
* Hatred
* Harassment
* Adult content
* Obscene material
* Nudity or pornography
* Material that infringes intellectual property or other proprietary rights of any party
* Material the posting of which is tortious or violates a contractual or fiduciary obligation you or we owe to another party
* Piracy, hacking, viruses, worms, or warez
* Spam
* Any illegal content
* unapproved Commercial banner advertisements or revenue-generating links
* Any link to or any images from a site containing any material outlined in these restrictions
* Any material deemed offensive or inappropriate by the Board staff
12. Users are welcome to challenge other points of view and opinions, but should do so respectfully. Personal attacks on others will not be tolerated. Posts and threads with unacceptable content can be closed or deleted altogether. Furthermore, a range of sanctions are possible - from a simple warning to a temporary or even a permanent banning from ChessTalk.
Helping to Moderate
13. 'Report' links (an exclamation mark inside a triangle) can be found in many places throughout the board. These links allow users to alert the board staff to anything which is offensive, objectionable or illegal. Please consider using this feature if the need arises.
Advice for free
14. You should exercise the same caution with Private Messages as you would with any public posting.
Allende was definitely opposed by the Chilean business community and the elite.
But they were totally unable to mobilize the masses to opposition, who fully supported Allende.
The USA CIA was also surrepititiously in there agitating against Allende with the ordinary people, and getting nowhere.
The only solution the opposition could implement to wrest control from Allende was.........an illegal coup against the popular, freely elected Allende, with the active surreptitious assistance of the USA. .
Bob A (DM'er)
Of course! Allende grabbed from the minority (the entrepreneurs) to give freebies to the majority (the workers)...
But when inflation was in triple figures, the majority too became uneasy, and fortunately for all of Chile, before the workers became entirely dependent on those freebies because of their deteriorating situation, thus making the disastrous DM entrenched, the system changed. Chile was saved by the uprising from turning into a Venezuela!
Allende was definitely opposed by the Chilean business community and the elite.
But they were totally unable to mobilize the masses to opposition, who fully supported Allende.
The USA CIA was also surrepititiously in there agitating against Allende with the ordinary people, and getting nowhere.
The only solution the opposition could implement to wrest control from Allende was.........an illegal coup against the popular, freely elected Allende, with the active surreptitious assistance of the USA. .
Salvador Allende:
Immediately after coming to power, he forcibly grabbed away the prime businesses in Chile, without adequately compensating the true owners, thereby transiently being able to give away a lot of freebies to his voters. The true colors of Marxism soon showed themselves, and the Chilean economy was in shambles, with an inflation rate in triple digits, with misery and uprising amongst the citizens, which Pinochet took advantage of . That is when he committed suicide...
Salvador Guillermo Allende Gossens was a Chilean socialist politician who served as the 28th president of Chile from 1970 until his death in 1973. As a socialist committed to democracy, he has been described as the first Marxist to be elected president in a liberal democracy in Latin America. Wikipedia
Secondly, Allende was freely elected, and campaigned openly on these legal changes his party wished to make (It was a coalition of his socialist party with the traditional Chilean Communist Party). So the electors knew and accepted that these changes would be good for society.
In fact, Allende's government was so popular that he was removed from office by a USA-inspired coup by General Augusto Pinochet of the Chilean Military (The first time for Chile - it had the best democratic history of any Latin American country).
Allende knew he would be tortured if captured within the Presidential Palace (The soldiers were entering). So he gave his last Presidential speech, and then committed suicide in the Presidential palace.
So no......the history of Democratic Marxist governments is NOT authoritarianism.......it is full on democracy (And note: achieved under an electoral system within Capitalism).
1. "The [DM] government dictates to its citizens what they can do.....and what they cannot do"
Refutation: DM implements a democratic form of government, based on the rule of law - it does NOT dictate - as an elected government it will pass laws for the common good. If the citizens see it otherwise, they can throw the rascals out in the next multi-party election.
What you are saying is that the DM government will dictate by passing laws! Don't try to hide facts by playing with words, Bob...
1. "The [DM] government dictates to its citizens what they can do.....and what they cannot do"
Refutation: DM implements a democratic form of government, based on the rule of law - it does NOT dictate - as an elected government it will pass laws for the common good. If the citizens see it otherwise, they can throw the rascals out in the next multi-party election.
What you are saying is that the DM government will dictate by passing laws! Don't try to hide facts by playing with words, Bob...
2. "[workers must] work in [DM] government owned businesses"
Refutation: DM implements a society where there are government-owned businesses, privately-owned businesses, in the forms of private corporations, non-profit businesses, and cooperatives, and community-based non-profit organizations. Amazing!.......looks exactly like what we have now under Democratic Capitalism!
It is impossible to compete with government owned businesses, as the latter can accumulate huge losses in order to provide free or cheap goods. The net effect: In whichever field the government starts a business, the others just cannot. And Marxism does favor the government controlling many fields of business.
3. "[workers] cannot take home a big chunk of what they earn"
Refutation: Progressive taxation allows that the poorer you are, the smaller the chunk of the workers' monthly income becomes "tax". It is reasonable that those making the most, are benefiting the most from the economic system, mostly paid for by the average citizens, and therefore they should pay back into the system more (Yes, a bigger chunk as tax). Paying tax is the way citizens pay for the expenses associated with having a livable society. Taxation is not "theft", despite detractors constantly repeating such tripe.
Forcibly snatching money from someone in order to give freebies to someone else who would vote you to power, does sound like theft. Livable societies existed more happily and more progressively before the system of taxation was invented.
4. "The [DM] government is the owner of almost all businesses"
Refutation: See item # 2 above. The determination of whether a government should own a business is often decided by the fact that the service is a necessary one for society, but it is almost impossible to keep it afloat with profit in the competitive marketplace (Which, by the way, also exists in DM, just like in DC!).
Bob, if a service is necessary, customers prioritize paying for it, and is the most likely service to stay afloat, without the government bringing its inefficiency into running it. Marxism just loves having the government do most of the stuff that citizens can do for themselves...
5. "those who 'run' it [the DM government-owned businesses, whatever they may be], in order to keep their government given jobs, have as their priority the pleasing of their political masters"
Refutation: viability is not determined by the whims of politicians; government-owned businesses are to "deliver the goods" & if successful, then are kept alive to continue good service to the citizens.
If that were the case, why is the Health-care system in such a mess in Canada, spending humongous amounts for the very little it really achieves?
6. "[DM] government-owned businesses have always been politically correct but economically disastrous and extremely inefficient."
Refutation: this is true, sometimes, of capitalist government-owned businesses. A DM government will have to do better, if it is to get re-elected for more than a once-in-a-lifetime term.
When the government grabs from the minority to give freebies to the majority, the majority continues to vote for it despite the system being economically disastrous and extremely inefficient (Trump voters seem to be an exception to this general rule).
7. "lawyers keep on fighting with each other in the courts of law to establish what these [myriad of] laws actually imply..."
Refutation: welcome to the real working of society, even under Capitalism. It is not easy to draft perfect laws. When they are ambiguous, then courts must interpret them......good for lawyers (I happen to have been one in Ontario). It will be no different under a DM Government (Nor a Libertarian one, for example - in fact it will be worse, because the Natural Law is the vaguest of laws having to have one set of words apply to galaxies of different situations of dispute).
Everybody can understand the Natural Law very clearly (though lawyers don't like that :-)) .
8. "Only the [DM] government has real access to capital"
Refutation: A DM Government will establish "Capital for Workers Institutions" to lend money for all kinds of worker start-ups (It takes the same view as Libertarianism - capital is needed by workers to continue to provide goods and services for the society).
Good for DM!
9. "they [the DM government] cannot grab enough from those [workers] who actually earn it; the earners gradually become impoverished".
Refutation: The progressive tax law will be fair, and will have been chosen by free election of the citizens. No one will be pushed into bankruptcy through the payment of tax under a progressive system.
There will be many who decide that it is better to be the recipient of freebies, than be a provider of freebies to people you do not even know, leading to impoverishment of the entire society.
10. "they [the DM Government] have to keep on printing lots of it [money], resulting in the currency becoming valueless.....[example:] the Soviet Union and Venezuela (where the circulating money was not matched by growth in GDP)..."
Refutation: A DM government will have no desire to create a basket-case country.
They may not desire it, but their policies will inevitably lead to it, as history has repeatedly shown! You are again trying to defend the indefensible, Bob!
Bob A (DM'er)
Thanks Bob, for trying to explain DM. It will help readers realize, as per the comments in bold italics after each point above, that hardly any goodness can come out of DM (the exception being point no. 8 above). You now have the option of rooting for Libertarianism in a circles within circles system instead, wishing society lots of progress in the right direction...
Complete Refutation of Dilip's False Characterization of Democratic Marxism
See Dilip's post # 54 above. I will give Dilip's quote, and then the refutation.
1. "The [DM] government dictates to its citizens what they can do.....and what they cannot do"
Refutation: DM implements a democratic form of government, based on the rule of law - it does NOT dictate - as an elected government it will pass laws for the common good. If the citizens see it otherwise, they can throw the rascals out in the next multi-party election.
2. "[workers must] work in [DM] government owned businesses"
Refutation: DM implements a society where there are government-owned businesses, privately-owned businesses, in the forms of private corporations, non-profit businesses, and cooperatives, and community-based non-profit organizations. Amazing!.......looks exactly like what we have now under Democratic Capitalism!
3. "[workers] cannot take home a big chunk of what they earn"
Refutation: Progressive taxation allows that the poorer you are, the smaller the chunk of the workers' monthly income becomes "tax". It is reasonable that those making the most, are benefiting the most from the economic system, mostly paid for by the average citizens, and therefore they should pay back into the system more (Yes, a bigger chunk as tax). Paying tax is the way citizens pay for the expenses associated with having a livable society. Taxation is not "theft", despite Dilip & his ilk constantly repeating such tripe.
4. "The [DM] government is the owner of almost all businesses"
Refutation: See item # 2 above. The determination of whether a government should own a business is often decided by the fact that the service is a necessary one for society, but it is almost impossible to keep it afloat with profit in the competitive marketplace (Which, by the way, also exists in DM, just like in DC!).
5. "those who 'run' it [the DM government-owned businesses, whatever they may be], in order to keep their government given jobs, have as their priority the pleasing of their political masters"
Refutation: viability is not determined by the whims of politicians; government-owned businesses are to "deliver the goods" & if successful, then are kept alive to continue good service to the citizens.
6. "[DM] government-owned businesses have always been politically correct but economically disastrous and extremely inefficient."
Refutation: this is true, sometimes, of capitalist government-owned businesses. A DM government will have to do better, if it is to get re-elected for more than a once-in-a-lifetime term.
7. "lawyers keep on fighting with each other in the courts of law to establish what these [myriad of] laws actually imply..."
Refutation: welcome to the real working of society, even under Capitalism. It is not easy to draft perfect laws. When they are ambiguous, then courts must interpret them......good for lawyers (I happen to have been one in Ontario). It will be no different under a DM Government (Nor a Libertarian one - in fact it will be worse, because the Natural Law is the vaguest of laws having to have one set of words apply to galaxies of different situations of dispute).
8. "Only the [DM] government has real access to capital"
Refutation: A DM Government will establish "Capital for Workers Institutions" to lend money for all kinds of worker start-ups. It takes the same view as Libertarianism - capital is needed by workers to continue to provide goods and services for the society.
9. "they [the DM government] cannot grab enough from those [workers] who actually earn it; the earners gradually become impoverished".
Refutation: The progressive tax law will be fair, and will have been chosen by free election of the citizens. No one will be pushed into bankruptcy through the payment of tax under a progressive system.
10. "they [the DM Government] have to keep on printing lots of it [money], resulting in the currency becoming valueless.....[example:] the Soviet Union and Venezuela (where the circulating money was not matched by growth in GDP)..."
Refutation: A DM government will have no desire to create a basket-case country.
Communism & Democratic Marxism do have some commonalities, both being different forms of "socialism".
But there are two dramatic differences:
1. Marx was a democrat (Plurality in Democracy); you must win fairly at the ballot box. Communism is not democratic; one - party system - you get to chose Black X or White X.
2. Marx trusted the worker (Not only to vote for worker policies); he respected "workers' rights". Communism, under Lenin, after the worker revolution, turned the revolutionary guns back against the worker to keep them in line, advised them that they would be ruled by "The Vanguard of the Proletariat" (Definitely not in Marx), and breached normal worker rights.
So you are correct.........you do NOT know the difference between Democratic Marxism & old-style USSR Communism (Now China, North Korea, Vietnam, Cuba, etc.). But you are also not alone ........that is why Democratic Marxists are spending a lot of lead time at the moment on "education" rather than in organizing.
Also, there are opponents of all socialism's who DO know the difference between the different types. They deliberately and dishonestly lie that various socialism's are all Communist or Lead to Communism (Obfuscate, confuse, send up smoke screens, smear, etc.).
I will deal with some of your specifics the next time I'm back here.
Bob A (DM'er)
Let us not worry about the nomenclature, Bob. The fact remains that despite being democratic (and being against the 49% is not something to be proud of anyway), DM is Marxism with all the characteristics that I listed and to which you are yet to respond...
Communism & Democratic Marxism do have some commonalities, both being different forms of "socialism".
But there are two dramatic differences:
1. Marx was a democrat (Plurality in Democracy); you must win fairly at the ballot box. Communism is not democratic; one - party system - you get to chose Black X or White X.
2. Marx trusted the worker (Not only to vote for worker policies); he respected "workers' rights". Communism, under Lenin, after the worker revolution, turned the revolutionary guns back against the worker to keep them in line, advised them that they would be ruled by "The Vanguard of the Proletariat" (Definitely not in Marx), and breached normal worker rights.
So you are correct.........you do NOT know the difference between Democratic Marxism & old-style USSR Communism (Now China, North Korea, Vietnam, Cuba, etc.). But you are also not alone ........that is why Democratic Marxists are spending a lot of lead time at the moment on "education" rather than in organizing.
Also, there are opponents of all socialism's who DO know the difference between the different types. They deliberately and dishonestly lie that various socialism's are all Communist or Lead to Communism (Obfuscate, confuse, send up smoke screens, smear, etc.).
I will deal with some of your specifics the next time I'm back here.
Bob A (DM'er)
Last edited by Bob Armstrong; Sunday, 23rd February, 2025, 10:30 AM.
Hi Bob A,
Please correct me if I have misunderstood Democratic Marxism:
The government dictates to its citizens what they can do (work in government owned businesses) and what they cannot do (cannot take home a big chunk of what they earn)...
The government is the owner of almost all businesses, and hence those who 'run' it, in order to keep their government given jobs, have as their priority the pleasing of their political masters, which is why government-owned businesses have always been politically correct but economically disastrous and extremely inefficient...
The citizens are expected to comply with the myriads of laws passed by successive governments, even as lawyers keep on fighting with each other in the courts of law to establish what these laws actually imply...
Only the government has real access to capital, and when they cannot grab enough from those who actually earn it (as the earners gradually become impoverished), they have to keep on printing lots of it, resulting in the currency becoming valueless as in the Soviet Union and Venezuela (where the circulating money was not matched by growth in GDP)...
In contrast, Libertarianism:
The government tells its citizens: Live your lives the way you want to, either on your own or in co-operation with others, so long as you do not violate the perfect and simple Natural Law!!
And everyone has access to capital, with the only condition being that they pay it back with interest!!
"Socialism/Marxism: .....bad......it unjustly discourages hard and smart work while foolishly encouraging pleasure-prioritization and laziness in society."
Question:
Do you ChessTalkers agree with Dilip's definition?........is this what is true, or, is this just a platitudinous smear used by all who want DM equated with Communism?
The speaker rightly implies that oligarchy/rule by billionaires is bad, as the oligarchs/billionaires use government to unjustly exploit and unjustly suppress the common man...
What he does not say is that Socialism/Marxism is equally bad, as it unjustly discourages hard and smart work while foolishly encouraging pleasure-prioritization and laziness in society. The only fair for all government system is Libertarianism!
Leave a comment: