|
|
Post by patrick on Dec 23, 2006 16:37:05 GMT -5
Hi, my name's Patrick, and I'm 17 years old. Please be nice to me, I don't have any qualms with you guys, and I'd like to discuss things indepth with maturity.
This site was posted as a joke on a Communist board, but I thought'd it be worth a shot to get a new perspective. You guys go a little bit overboard with the anti-communism, Converting me to your side would be a lot easier if you tried to explain things better and didn't attack us. Communists already here should follow the same advice.
I believe in a society run by the "Demand" part of the "Supply and Demand" theory. I feel that much scarcity in capitalism is artificial (because a businessman must pay his worker less than he produced).
I terms of freedom, I'd like to add even more rights to our constitutions. and I'm from Canada.
I don't believe in a Bureaucratic Communist party, and I don't want a 'people's government'.
|
|
|
|
Post by bostonmarxist on Dec 24, 2006 13:15:56 GMT -5
hello patrickio! its me nice to meet you again! i thought you were a communist but it seems your just another capitalist!
|
|
|
|
Post by betterdeadthanred on Dec 28, 2006 16:56:07 GMT -5
hello boston
why was it they kicked you of SE?
|
|
|
|
Post by bostonmarxist on Dec 28, 2006 18:15:26 GMT -5
well i made an account on pofo uk and i posted porn! haha not so funny after i got bbaneed on se.com now im sad!  |
|
|
|
Post by patrick on Dec 29, 2006 2:14:57 GMT -5
lol, I am a Communist. What are you talking about?
Why'd you do that Boston, as a joke? How many times did you do this?
|
|
|
|
Post by bostonmarxist on Dec 29, 2006 13:16:19 GMT -5
only like 3 times had fun tho now i wished i hadnt! but the funny thing is while i still had an account on se.com i went to regular pofo and got banned but i didnt get banned from se i think thats kinda odd!?
|
|
|
|
Post by hungarianuprising on Mar 13, 2007 17:44:37 GMT -5
Hi Patrick,
I don't want to shout you down. I would just like to ask, if you're going to use the name "Communist", perhaps you could tell me why more people in my old village in Hungary died from Communist labour camps after WWII than those who fought in it? Everywhere you go, you'll find memorials to the war dead, and usually a longer list to the "peacetime" dead?
Do you agree with this? Do you think it is right? If not, why call yourself a Communist?
Look forward to your reply,
Chris
|
|
|
|
Post by josephm on Aug 2, 2007 16:19:22 GMT -5
Rofl 'the fall of the capitalists and the rise of the proletariats are equally inevitable!' - karl marx.... is there any point in even mentioning karl marx's lame predictions now in 2007? After the abject failure of communism in the 20th century the quote for today is:
"The fall of any communist economy and the success of any free or near free market is inevitable"
|
|
pinball
New Member
Soviet painting a globe with blood
Posts: 23
|
Post by pinball on Aug 8, 2007 21:15:47 GMT -5
Rofl 'the fall of the capitalists and the rise of the proletariats are equally inevitable!' - karl marx.... is there any point in even mentioning karl marx's lame predictions now in 2007? After the abject failure of communism in the 20th century the quote for today is: "The fall of any communist economy and the success of any free or near free market is inevitable" Karl Marx was a moron, no doubt |
|
|
|
Post by jyjohn on Aug 25, 2007 15:48:39 GMT -5
I believe in a society run by the "Demand" part of the "Supply and Demand" theory. I feel that much scarcity in capitalism is artificial (because a businessman must pay his worker less than he produced). I terms of freedom, I'd like to add even more rights to our constitutions. and I'm from Canada. I don't believe in a Bureaucratic Communist party, and I don't want a 'people's government'. Hi, since you are pretty calm with us, I'm going to be calm with you. For the fact that businessmen earn more than his own men, it's very simple. They have more responsibility than, let's say, workers. What you're trying to say is, people who carry heavy stuff are supposed to be paid way more than company CEOs. It is definately not right. Surely people getting sweat burn more calories than a CEO, but the CEO has to control the huge budget (usually more than trillions of dollars in big manufacturers), distribute and take care of his salarymen, and has to micro-manage (I say micro-manage, not just manage) everything to earn more money, satisfy the customers, and make benefit to the country and take part of the nation's technological and economical evolution. In capitalism, everybody earns what he has done and how much he has helped the society. Of course, workers, farmers, etc are very important, but we have to agree that they require less skill and "intelligence" for their job. Today is a Give & Receive society. And most important of all, capitalism is NOT a political system. A lot of people screw this one. Capitalism is an ECONOMICAL SYSTEM. Therefore, it is always possible (and I really mean it. ALWAYS) to help the poverty. It just requires some people who are kind enough to pay associates or charities to help starving people, not only in the country, but in the whole world. I have A LOT of very rich neighbors, and they ALL help people. They already spent several hundreds of thousands (I'm not kidding) of dollars to help orphans in Europe, people with AIDS in Africa, starving children in Africa, human rights in Tibet, etc. I think I said enough to convince you not to be communist. This is why I do not believe in communism (and history has proven it in throughout the 20th century) and I DO BELIEVE AND SUPPORT CAPITALISM. Have a great day and think about that, Jyjohn  P.S: Just one more. Capitalism is not a political system. So therefore, it is simply a nonsense to say that capitalism has killed millions of people (by create wars). It is the Bush Administration that is putting the world in danger and killing a lot of innocent people, not capitalism !!!  |
|
|
|
Post by ihatelennin on Jul 26, 2008 15:59:32 GMT -5
The rapid spread of the uprising in the streets of Budapest and the abrupt fall of the Gerő-Hegedűs government left the new national leadership surprised, and at first disorganized. Nagy, a loyal Party reformer described as possessing "only modest political skills",[62] initially appealed to the public for calm and a return to the old order. Yet Nagy, the only remaining Hungarian leader with credibility in both the eyes of the public and the Soviets, "at long last concluded that a popular uprising rather than a counter-revolution was taking place".[63] Calling the ongoing insurgency "a broad democratic mass movement" in a radio address on October 27, Nagy formed a government which included some non-communist ministers. This new National Government abolished both the ÁVH and the one-party system.[64][65]
Communist Party Headquarters in October, 1956
Communist Party Headquarters in October, 1956
Because it held office only ten days, the National Government had little chance to clarify its policies in detail. However, newspaper editorials at the time stressed that Hungary should be a neutral, multiparty social democracy.[66] Many political prisoners were released, most notably József Cardinal Mindszenty.[67] Political parties which were previously banned, such as the Independent Smallholders and the National Peasants' Party, reappeared to join the coalition.[68]
Local revolutionary councils formed throughout Hungary[69] , generally without involvement from the preoccupied National Government in Budapest, and assumed various responsibilities of local government from the defunct communist party.[70] By October 30, these councils had been officially sanctioned by the Hungarian Workers' (Communist) Party, and the Nagy government asked for their support as "autonomous, democratic local organs formed during the Revolution".[70] Likewise, workers' councils were established at industrial plants and mines, and many unpopular regulations such as production norms were eliminated. The workers' councils strove to manage the enterprise whilst protecting workers' interests; thus establishing a socialist economy free of rigid party control.[71] Local control by the councils was not always bloodless; in Debrecen, Győr, Sopron, Mosonmagyaróvár and other cities, crowds of demonstrators were fired upon by the ÁVH, with many lives lost. The ÁVH were disarmed, often by force, in many cases assisted by the local police.[70]
[edit] Soviet perspective
Nikita Khrushchev
Nikita Khrushchev
On October 24, the Presidium of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union (the Politburo) discussed the political upheavals in Poland and Hungary. A hard-line faction led by Molotov was pushing for intervention, but Khrushchev and Marshal Zhukov were initially opposed. A delegation in Budapest reported that the situation was not as dire as had been portrayed. Khrushchev stated that he believed that Party Secretary Ernő Gerő's request for intervention on October 23 indicated that the Hungarian Party still held the confidence of the Hungarian public. In addition, he saw the protests not as an ideological struggle, but as popular discontent over unresolved basic economic and social issues.[32]
After some debate,[72] [73] the Presidium on October 30 decided not to remove the new Hungarian government. Even Marshal Georgy Zhukov said: "We should withdraw troops from Budapest, and if necessary withdraw from Hungary as a whole. This is a lesson for us in the military-political sphere." They adopted a Declaration of the Government of the USSR on the Principles of Development and Further Strengthening of Friendship and Cooperation between the Soviet Union and other Socialist States, which was issued the next day. This document proclaimed: "The Soviet Government is prepared to enter into the appropriate negotiations with the government of the Hungarian People's Republic and other members of the Warsaw Treaty on the question of the presence of Soviet troops on the territory of Hungary."[74] Thus for a brief moment it looked like there could be a peaceful solution.
On October 30, armed protestors attacked the ÁVH detachment guarding the Budapest Hungarian Workers Party headquarters on Köztársaság tér (Republic square), incited by rumors of prisoners held there, and the earlier shootings of demonstrators by the ÁVH in the city of Mosonmagyaróvár.[70][75][76] Over 20 AVH officers were killed, some of them lynched by the mob. Hungarian army tanks sent to rescue the party headquarters mistakenly bombarded the building.[76] The head of the Budapest party committee, Imre Mező, was wounded and later died.[77][78] Scenes from Republic Square were shown on Soviet newsreels a few hours later.[79] Revolutionary leaders in Hungary condemned the incident and appealed for calm, and the mob violence soon died down,[80] but images of the victims were nevertheless used as propaganda by various Communist organs.[78]
On October 31 the Soviet leaders decided to reverse their decision from the previous day. There is disagreement among historians whether Hungary's declaration to exit the Warsaw Pact caused the second Soviet intervention. Minutes of the October 31 meeting of the Presidium record that the decision to intervene militarily was taken one day before Hungary declared its neutrality and withdrawal from the Warsaw Pact.[81] However, some Russian historians who are not advocates of the Communist era maintain that the Hungarian declaration of neutrality caused the Kremlin to intervene a second time.[82] Two days earlier, on October 30, when Soviet Politburo representatives Anastas Mikoyan and Mikhail Suslov were in Budapest, Nagy had hinted that neutrality was a long-term objective for Hungary, and that he was hoping to discuss this matter with the leaders in the Kremlin. This information was passed on to Moscow by Mikoyan and Suslov.[83] [84] At that same time, Khrushchev was in Stalin's Dacha, considering his options regarding Hungary. One of his speechwriters later said that the declaration of neutrality was an important factor in his subsequent decision to support intervention.[85] In addition, some Hungarian leaders of the revolution as well as students had called for their country's withdrawal from the Warsaw Pact much earlier, and this may have influenced Soviet decision making.[86]
Several other key events alarmed the Presidium and cemented the interventionists' position:[87]
* Simultaneous movements towards multiparty parliamentary democracy, and a democratic national council of workers, which could "lead towards a capitalist state." Both movements challenged the pre-eminence of the Soviet Communist Party in Eastern Europe and perhaps Soviet hegemony itself. For the majority of the Presidium, the workers' direct control over their councils without Communist Party leadership was incompatible with their idea of socialism. At the time, these councils were, in the words of Hannah Arendt, "the only free and acting soviets (councils) in existence anywhere in the world".[88][89]
* The Presidium was concerned lest the West might perceive Soviet weakness if it did not deal firmly with Hungary. On 1956-10-29, Israeli, British and French forces invaded Egypt. Khrushchev reportedly remarked "We should reexamine our assessment and should not withdraw our troops from Hungary and Budapest. We should take the initiative in restoring order in Hungary. If we depart from Hungary, it will give a great boost to the Americans, English, and French--the imperialists. They will perceive it as weakness on our part and will go onto the offensive... To Egypt they will then add Hungary. We have no other choice."[81]
* Khrushchev stated that many in the communist party would not understand a failure to respond with force in Hungary. De-Stalinization had alienated the more conservative elements of the Party, who were alarmed at threats to Soviet influence in Eastern Europe. On June 17, 1953, workers in East Berlin had staged an uprising, demanding the resignation of the government of the German Democratic Republic. This was quickly and violently put down with the help of the Soviet military, with 84 killed and wounded and 700 arrested.[90] In June 1956, in Poznań, Poland, an anti-government workers' revolt had been suppressed by the Polish security forces with between 57[91] and 78[92][93] deaths and led to the installation of a less Soviet-controlled government. Additionally, by late October, unrest was noticed in some regional areas of the Soviet Union: while this unrest was minor, it was intolerable.
* Hungarian neutrality and withdrawal from the Warsaw Pact represented a breach in the Soviet defensive buffer zone of satellite nations.[94] Soviet fear of invasion from the West made a defensive buffer of allied states in Eastern Europe an essential security objective.
The Presidium decided to break the de facto ceasefire and crush the Hungarian revolution.[95] The plan was to declare a "Provisional Revolutionary Government" under János Kádár, who would appeal for Soviet assistance to restore order. According to witnesses, Kádár was in Moscow in early November,[96] and he was in contact with the Soviet embassy while still a member of the Nagy government.[97] Delegations were sent to other Communist governments in Eastern Europe and China, seeking to avoid a regional conflict, and propaganda messages prepared for broadcast as soon as the second Soviet intervention had begun. To disguise these intentions, Soviet diplomats were to engage the Nagy government in talks discussing the withdrawal of Soviet forces.[81]
According to some sources, the Chinese leader Mao Zedong played an important role in Khrushchev's decision to suppress the Hungarian uprising. Chinese Communist Party Deputy Chairman Liu Shaoqi put pressure on Khrushchev to send in troops to put down the revolt by force.[98] [99] Although the relations between China and the Soviet Union had deteriorated during the recent years, Mao's words still carried great weight in Kremlin, and they were frequently in contact during the crisis. Initially Mao opposed a second intervention and this information was passed on to Khrushchev on October 30, before the Presidium met and decided against intervention.[100] Mao then changed his mind in favor of intervention, but according to William Taubman it remains unclear when and how Khrushchev learned of this and thus if it influenced his decision on October 31.[101]
On November 1 to November 3, Khrushchev left Moscow to meet with his East-European allies and inform them of the decision to intervene. At the first such meeting, he met with Władysław Gomułka in Brest. Then he had talks with the Romanian, Czechoslovak, and Bulgarian leaders in Bucharest. Finally Khrushchev flew with Malenkov to Yugoslavia, where they met with Tito, who was vacationing on his island Brioni in the Adriatic. The Yugoslavs also persuaded Khrushchev to choose János Kádár instead of Ferenc Münnich as the new leader of Hungary
THE ONLY REGRET NOT ENOUGH HUNGARIANS DEAD
SOVIET SOVIET WORKERS OF THE WORLD UNITE LONG LIVE COMMUNISIM THERE A MORE COMMUNIST ON EARTH THEN FACIST,CAPITOLIST ALIKE
|
|
|
|
Post by joe on Jul 26, 2008 17:32:27 GMT -5
Hi Patrick, I don't want to shout you down. I would just like to ask, if you're going to use the name "Communist", perhaps you could tell me why more people in my old village in Hungary died from Communist labour camps after WWII than those who fought in it? Everywhere you go, you'll find memorials to the war dead, and usually a longer list to the "peacetime" dead? Do you agree with this? Do you think it is right? If not, why call yourself a Communist? Look forward to your reply, Chris No i dont agree with stailin. I call myself a communist because i want to achieve communism a stateless classes socitey. |
|
|
|
Post by joe on Jul 26, 2008 17:35:09 GMT -5
|
|
