this is not the straw man you're looking for

How should society be organised, if at all?

Moderators: AMod, iMod

Advocate
Posts: 2560
Joined: Tue Sep 12, 2017 9:27 am
Contact:

this is not the straw man you're looking for

Post by Advocate »

Most of the deaths in early Russian and Chinese communism were due to famine and most of the famine was due to Trofím Denísovich Lysénko trying to merge political ideology with agricultural fact. This had nothing to do with communism/socialism per se and was only tangentially about central planning.
User avatar
Immanuel Can
Posts: 11638
Joined: Wed Sep 25, 2013 4:42 pm

Re: this is not the straw man you're looking for

Post by Immanuel Can »

So...you're blaming a Russian for China.

And I guess you'll make the same explanation for North Korea and Cambodia,and Albania, and East Germany, and Bulgaria, and Yugoslavia, and the Ukraine, Czechoslovakia, Romania, Lithuania... and Zimbabwe, Benin, Mozambique, Tanzania..., and Cuba, and Venezuela...and every other place in which Socialism has been tried.

Because the fact that they were all Socialist could not possibly have anything to do with their complete non-functionality economically, their disastrous human rights record, and their inevitable collapse into dictatorship... :roll:
Advocate
Posts: 2560
Joined: Tue Sep 12, 2017 9:27 am
Contact:

Re: this is not the straw man you're looking for

Post by Advocate »

[quote="Immanuel Can" post_id=506840 time=1618078534 user_id=9431]
things
[/quote]

"For my thoughts are not your thoughts, and your ways are not my ways,” sayth the Kaiser.
User avatar
Sculptor
Posts: 3171
Joined: Wed Jun 26, 2019 11:32 pm

Re: this is not the straw man you're looking for

Post by Sculptor »

Advocate wrote: Sat Apr 10, 2021 6:10 pm Most of the deaths in early Russian and Chinese communism were due to famine and most of the famine was due to Trofím Denísovich Lysénko trying to merge political ideology with agricultural fact. This had nothing to do with communism/socialism per se and was only tangentially about central planning.
The hard evidence for these things is dubious at best; concocted exaggerated stories by westerners which calls into question the real numbers of purges and mismanagement that in fact did happen.
The so-called "historians" are less keen on talking about the people that died and suffered hardships in the great crash of the 1930 in the US and across the western world.
User avatar
Immanuel Can
Posts: 11638
Joined: Wed Sep 25, 2013 4:42 pm

Re: this is not the straw man you're looking for

Post by Immanuel Can »

Sculptor wrote: Sat Apr 10, 2021 11:31 pm The hard evidence for these things is dubious at best...
100 million dead is a low estimate, involving not even all of the known cases. It's the BEST it gets. :shock:

It's almost certainly true that Socialism killed far more in the last century. We don't know precisely how many more, but more.
User avatar
vegetariantaxidermy
Posts: 9670
Joined: Thu Aug 09, 2012 6:45 am
Location: Narniabiznus

Re: this is not the straw man you're looking for

Post by vegetariantaxidermy »

Immanuel Can wrote: Sun Apr 11, 2021 12:15 am
Sculptor wrote: Sat Apr 10, 2021 11:31 pm The hard evidence for these things is dubious at best...
100 million dead is a low estimate, involving not even all of the known cases. It's the BEST it gets. :shock:

It's almost certainly true that Socialism killed far more in the last century. We don't know precisely how many more, but more.
Define 'socialism' you yank dipshit.
User avatar
Immanuel Can
Posts: 11638
Joined: Wed Sep 25, 2013 4:42 pm

Re: this is not the straw man you're looking for

Post by Immanuel Can »

vegetariantaxidermy wrote: Sun Apr 11, 2021 4:34 am Define 'socialism'
Heh. :D Is your Google broken?

You don't even know what it is? Do you want me to give you some lovely sections from Das Kapital? I have it right here...

Or do you just want to look at every country that has ever tried any brand of Socialism, and see where they are right now?

Or do you think that all the people in China, Russia, Cuba, etc. only THOUGHT they were Socialists, but were actually stupid, and couldn't get Socialism right...the way you think YOU would, if you were in charge?
User avatar
vegetariantaxidermy
Posts: 9670
Joined: Thu Aug 09, 2012 6:45 am
Location: Narniabiznus

Re: this is not the straw man you're looking for

Post by vegetariantaxidermy »

Immanuel Can wrote: Sun Apr 11, 2021 5:39 am
vegetariantaxidermy wrote: Sun Apr 11, 2021 4:34 am Define 'socialism'
Heh. :D Is your Google broken?

You don't even know what it is? Do you want me to give you some lovely sections from Das Kapital? I have it right here...

Or do you just want to look at every country that has ever tried any brand of Socialism, and see where they are right now?

Or do you think that all the people in China, Russia, Cuba, etc. only THOUGHT they were Socialists, but were actually stupid, and couldn't get Socialism right...the way you think YOU would, if you were in charge?
I asked for YOUR definition, not google's.
Advocate
Posts: 2560
Joined: Tue Sep 12, 2017 9:27 am
Contact:

Re: this is not the straw man you're looking for

Post by Advocate »

[quote=vegetariantaxidermy post_id=506864 time=1618117566 user_id=8006]
I asked for YOUR definition, not google's.
[/quote]

You don't want their definition, which considers anything they don't like to be socialism and vice versa, and is therefore useless.
User avatar
Immanuel Can
Posts: 11638
Joined: Wed Sep 25, 2013 4:42 pm

Re: this is not the straw man you're looking for

Post by Immanuel Can »

vegetariantaxidermy wrote: Sun Apr 11, 2021 6:06 am I asked for YOUR definition, not google's.
Then "Socialism" is a cluster of beliefs with the same central ideology: allegedly collective "ownership" of the means of production, usually through the agency of the centralized government. The definition can get more elaborate...for example, if we're speaking specifically of politics, social organization, education, economics, or whatever. But that will do to start. Some forms are also historicist or even utopian, and others are more focused on immediate outcomes, like a particular conception of justice or equity. There are quasi-religious versions, and Materialist Atheist versions...

But empirically, no version that has ever been tried so far in the real world, when allowed to run the economy and organize the political structure, has ever resulted in anything other than economic collapse, tyranny and murder, sot they've got that in common, too.
User avatar
henry quirk
Posts: 10681
Joined: Fri May 09, 2008 8:07 pm

Re: this is not the straw man you're looking for

Post by henry quirk »

vegetariantaxidermy wrote: Sun Apr 11, 2021 4:34 am
Immanuel Can wrote: Sun Apr 11, 2021 12:15 am
Sculptor wrote: Sat Apr 10, 2021 11:31 pm The hard evidence for these things is dubious at best...
100 million dead is a low estimate, involving not even all of the known cases. It's the BEST it gets. :shock:

It's almost certainly true that Socialism killed far more in the last century. We don't know precisely how many more, but more.
Define 'socialism' you yank dipshit.
Henry Quirk, Yank Dipshit, First Class, reporting in, sir!
henry quirk wrote: Wed Apr 07, 2021 5:51 pm Socialism:
a political and economic theory of social organization which advocates that the means of production, distribution, and exchange should be owned or regulated by the community as a whole

an economic theory of social organization. It states that the means of making, moving, and trading wealth should be owned or controlled by the workers

a system in which every person in the community has an equal share of the various elements of production, distribution, and exchange of resources

Democratic socialism: factors of production are under the management of an elected administration. Vital goods and services such as energy, housing, and transit are distributed through centralized planning, while a free market system is used to distribute consumer products

Revolutionary socialism: a socialistic system can’t emerge while capitalism is still in play. Revolutionaries believe that the road to a purely socialistic system requires a lot of struggle. In such a system, the factors of production are owned and run by workers through a well-developed and centralized structure.

Libertarian socialism: the assumption that people are always rational, self-determining, and autonomous. If capitalism is taken away, people naturally turn to a socialistic system because it is able to meet their needs.

Market socialism: the production process is under the control of ordinary workers. The workers decide how resources should be distributed. The workers sell off what is in excess or give it out to members of the society, who then distribute resources based on a free market system.
There you go, sir...the major variations of a theme.

-----

I asked for YOUR definition, not google's.

Oh, I see...the conventional, accepted definitions are out and, idiosyncratic, whatever the hell I want, definitions are in.

Okay.

Dogs have feathers, lay eggs, and fly.

Cats, live in water, have gills and scales.

And socialism? Nuthin' but tyranny, theft, and slavery.

-----

You don't want their definition, which considers anything they don't like to be socialism and vice versa, and is therefore useless.

What's yours, then?

Mind, there's a context, so don't be foistin' up manure about families and whatnot.
User avatar
Immanuel Can
Posts: 11638
Joined: Wed Sep 25, 2013 4:42 pm

Re: this is not the straw man you're looking for

Post by Immanuel Can »

henry quirk wrote: Sun Apr 11, 2021 3:19 pm Henry Quirk, Yank Dipshit, First Class, reporting in, sir!
At ease, Corporal Punishment! 8)

Submit your report.
User avatar
henry quirk
Posts: 10681
Joined: Fri May 09, 2008 8:07 pm

Re: this is not the straw man you're looking for

Post by henry quirk »

Immanuel Can wrote: Sun Apr 11, 2021 3:42 pm
henry quirk wrote: Sun Apr 11, 2021 3:19 pm Henry Quirk, Yank Dipshit, First Class, reporting in, sir!
At ease, Corporal Punishment! 8)

Submit your report.
That's Major Mayhem, sir, if you'll pardon the correction.

My report, the current iteration, is posted above.

It is, of course, an on-going affair, subject to revision.
User avatar
vegetariantaxidermy
Posts: 9670
Joined: Thu Aug 09, 2012 6:45 am
Location: Narniabiznus

Re: this is not the straw man you're looking for

Post by vegetariantaxidermy »

Immanuel Can wrote: Sun Apr 11, 2021 3:14 pm
But empirically, no version that has ever been tried so far in the real world, when allowed to run the economy and organize the political structure, has ever resulted in anything other than economic collapse, tyranny and murder, sot they've got that in common, too.
So presumably you are including your own country in that generalisation...
User avatar
vegetariantaxidermy
Posts: 9670
Joined: Thu Aug 09, 2012 6:45 am
Location: Narniabiznus

Re: this is not the straw man you're looking for

Post by vegetariantaxidermy »

henry quirk wrote: Sun Apr 11, 2021 3:19 pm
vegetariantaxidermy wrote: Sun Apr 11, 2021 4:34 am
Immanuel Can wrote: Sun Apr 11, 2021 12:15 am
100 million dead is a low estimate, involving not even all of the known cases. It's the BEST it gets. :shock:

It's almost certainly true that Socialism killed far more in the last century. We don't know precisely how many more, but more.
Define 'socialism' you yank dipshit.
Henry Quirk, Yank Dipshit, First Class, reporting in, sir!
henry quirk wrote: Wed Apr 07, 2021 5:51 pm Socialism:
a political and economic theory of social organization which advocates that the means of production, distribution, and exchange should be owned or regulated by the community as a whole

an economic theory of social organization. It states that the means of making, moving, and trading wealth should be owned or controlled by the workers

a system in which every person in the community has an equal share of the various elements of production, distribution, and exchange of resources

Democratic socialism: factors of production are under the management of an elected administration. Vital goods and services such as energy, housing, and transit are distributed through centralized planning, while a free market system is used to distribute consumer products

Revolutionary socialism: a socialistic system can’t emerge while capitalism is still in play. Revolutionaries believe that the road to a purely socialistic system requires a lot of struggle. In such a system, the factors of production are owned and run by workers through a well-developed and centralized structure.

Libertarian socialism: the assumption that people are always rational, self-determining, and autonomous. If capitalism is taken away, people naturally turn to a socialistic system because it is able to meet their needs.

Market socialism: the production process is under the control of ordinary workers. The workers decide how resources should be distributed. The workers sell off what is in excess or give it out to members of the society, who then distribute resources based on a free market system.
There you go, sir...the major variations of a theme.

-----

I asked for YOUR definition, not google's.

Oh, I see...the conventional, accepted definitions are out and, idiosyncratic, whatever the hell I want, definitions are in.

Okay.

Dogs have feathers, lay eggs, and fly.

Cats, live in water, have gills and scales.

And socialism? Nuthin' but tyranny, theft, and slavery.

-----

You don't want their definition, which considers anything they don't like to be socialism and vice versa, and is therefore useless.

What's yours, then?

Mind, there's a context, so don't be foistin' up manure about families and whatnot.
Yanks don't understand anything. It's like trying to argue with those morons who believe the universe is six thousand years old. You get sick of bashing your head on a rock after a while. And IC only says what he thinks you want to hear.
Post Reply