Foreshadowing: Stalin

[Andrew2382]

you are so delusional

Stalin was a tyrant, yes 100% right. You won't get an arguement out of me on that.

He ran according to him what he wanted to be the role model for a communistic society. Sorry to break it to ya but the only difference between socialism and communism is a political ideaology.

When he talks about publin and private owned operations he is pinpointing Fannie and Freddie.

Now goverment will be expanding even more, into healthcare, possibly energy, and other industries.

Only a matter of time till ti comes full circle

 

[Andrew2382]

So GM paying their workers too many benefits is "socialism?" Please....

Read this article, it outlines quite well why GM is in trouble.

Why Bankruptcy Is the Best Option for GM - WSJ.com

GM is in trouble because of a few reasons

1- They pay their workers an average of $73 an hour, when Honda, Toyota, Hyundai pay an average of $42 an hour...Almost double

2- GM employee programs let them go around GMAC finance to save a half a point, my opinion is if you are getting employee pricing in your car you must go through GMAC...

 

[PubliusInfinitum]

Sorry man, but if I were to go around saying "When the capitalist system collapses I'm going to go around and murder every capitalist" I would hope people would laugh at me.

Of course we would... But you imply that someone has said that when the leftist system collapses that someone is going to go around and murder all the leftists... which has not happened. So the implication is absent a valid foundation and is thus absurd.

 

[Chris]

Consider the costs of tackling GM's problems with some kind of bailout plan. After 42 years of eroding U.S. market share (from 53% to 20%) and countless announcements of "change," GM still has eight U.S. brands (Cadillac, Saab, Buick, Pontiac, GMC, Saturn, Chevrolet and Hummer). As for its more successful competitors, Toyota (19% market share) has three, and Honda (11%) has two.

GM has about 7,000 dealers. Toyota has fewer than 1,500. Honda has about 1,000. These fewer and larger dealers are better able to advertise, stock and service the cars they sell. GM knows it needs fewer brands and dealers, but the dealers are protected from termination by state laws. This makes eliminating them and the brands they sell very expensive. It would cost GM billions of dollars and many years to reduce the number of dealers it has to a number near Toyota's.

Foreign-owned manufacturers who build cars with American workers pay wages similar to GM's. But their expenses for benefits are a fraction of GM's. GM is contractually required to support thousands of workers in the UAW's "Jobs Bank" program, which guarantees nearly full wages and benefits for workers who lose their jobs due to automation or plant closure. It supports more retirees than current workers. It owns or leases enormous amounts of property for facilities it's not using and probably will never use again, and is obliged to support revenue bonds for municipalities that issued them to build these facilities. It has other contractual obligations such as health coverage for union retirees. All of these commitments drain its cash every month. Moreover, GM supports myriad suppliers and supports a huge infrastructure of firms and localities that depend on it. Many of them have contractual claims; they all have moral claims. They all want GM to be more or less what it is.

And therein lies the problem: The cost of terminating dealers is only a fraction of what it would cost to rebuild GM to become a company sized and marketed appropriately for its market share. Contracts would have to be bought out. The company would have to shed many of its fixed obligations. Some obligations will be impossible to cut by voluntary agreement. GM will run out of cash and out of time.

Why Bankruptcy Is the Best Option for GM - WSJ.com

 

[Andrew2382]

GM needs to break some promises and tell these unions to piss off.

Either take a 30% pay cut or a 100% pay cut

 

[Chris]

GM needs to break some promises and tell these unions to piss off.

Either take a 30% pay cut or a 100% pay cut

It's more than that.

The Wall Street Journal article I posted shows that GM's structure is antiquated. 7,000 dealerships compared to 1,500 for Toyota. 8 brands for GM verses 3 for Toyota. GM needs to streamline their structure as well.

Also the lack of Universal Healthcare is hurting American competitiveness. Toyota just located a plant in Canada because healthcare costs there are paid for by the government and not employers.

 

[PubliusInfinitum]

GM needs to break some promises and tell these unions to piss off.

Either take a 30% pay cut or a 100% pay cut

Precisely... GM and Ford's costs are out of sight and this is 100% a function of collective bargaining.

If I were GM, I'd throw that company into Bankruptcy... shut down every labor contract going back to the beginning of time and re-open the bidding for labor on an individual basis ONLY... if Michigan didn't want to co-operate... HELLO KENTUCKY / TENNESSEE! Brand new facilities... brand new workers and brand new Z28 Camaro with LS/Supercharged Mustang killing powerplants... and for 18k NOT 38K... They'd sell a zillion of 'em...

 

[PubliusInfinitum]

Oh fuck, I hadn't seen that. Stay tuned, I'll come back to this when I get back.

Oh, by the way, and what the fuck are you doing, man? Where's your reasoning? I see NO reasoning in your first post. Can you quote your own post next time and point at it? "SHE WILL SOON RUN WHEN SHE GETS KILLED BY ME, THE EVERLASTING PUNISHER OF THE LEFT". What's there to rebutt there, huh? It's a joke.

Your ideology is a joke... this delusion is merely symptomatic of that ideology.

"rhetorical smoldering heaps of these reactionaries than flaccid appeals to a percieved popularity"? Sorry, man, guess I just can't handle you "Harvard" types.

Harvard?... HAR-dly... But setting that tripe aside... what leftist can?


We can rest assured the Frat queen will return and amaze us with more pedestrian leftist drivel, of the baseless variety...

 

[PubliusInfinitum]

Publius, does calling everyone who disagrees with you she or her, make your manhood more better?

First, that's your own delusion sis. You being a feminized leftist male is not my problem... As I've told you before sis, if you don't like it, I suggest ya butch up.

You are an extremist of the extremes.

Am I?

Well tell me sis... what position of mine would ya like to point to and set in example of that which bespeaks: EXTREME?

Take your time Pogue and rest assured that as always, this is not going to go well for you...

 

[PubliusInfinitum]

Furthermore, ... Stalin was a brutal tyrant, who knew nothing about socialism...

ROFLMNAO... SWEET MOTHER ...

Once again a leftist comes to demand that the worlds most notorious SOCIALIST: 'wasn't really a socialist at all...'

LOL... Oh God, that's precious.

Man nothing demonstrates 'useful idiot' like the common independent, moderate, centrist, progressive entrenched dead center in the Western Left.

These idiots actually delude themselves into believing that the crap their 'taught' in the indoctrination centers, IS socialism... and that the HISTORY OF SOCIALISM is just a big lie designed to give the Left a bad name.

 

[midcan5]

"I am a man: I hold that nothing human is alien to me." I used to think that quotation applied to everyone, but I feel today, when it comes to prophesy and conspiracy, I haven't a clue how or why the mind of some go there. Obama isn't even president yet and they see diabolical workings already.

Evil used to confuse me now it is fantasy such as this that does. Why do some engage in this nonsense? Does anyone know? What part of man requires they see in all things motives that defy the imagination of the rational?

quote from Terence

 

[Epsilon Delta]

Publius, are you a troll?? Do you do it on purpose? Or are you naturally this incoherent??

Of course we would... But you imply that someone has said that when the leftist system collapses that someone is going to go around and murder all the leftists... which has not happened. So the implication is absent a valid foundation and is thus absurd.

"So the implication is absent a valid foundation and is thus absurd." Yeah, no wonder you're not Harvard type... Anyway...

Really?! Nobody has?!

I doubt she'll be laughing when she's running for her life and denying that she ever advocated for left-think, when the socialist machine collapses as it must; [nonsensical crap] where anything that ever sought to infringe upon the valid right of the individual will be hunted down and destroyed and given their position on the ownership of firearms... that is a war which shouldn't take much more than a cushy 96.

Translation: "[Because she's a left-thinker,] she will be running for her life when the socialist machine collapses. [She] will be hunted down and destroyed. [It] shouldn't take much more than a cushy .96." Oops, guess you forgot. = (

ROFLMNAO... SWEET MOTHER ...

Once again a leftist comes to demand that the worlds most notorious SOCIALIST: 'wasn't really a socialist at all...'

LOL... Oh God, that's precious.

Man nothing demonstrates 'useful idiot' like the common independent, moderate, centrist, progressive entrenched dead center in the Western Left.

These idiots actually delude themselves into believing that the crap their 'taught' in the indoctrination centers, IS socialism... and that the HISTORY OF SOCIALISM is just a big lie designed to give the Left a bad name.

you are so delusional

Stalin was a tyrant, yes 100% right. You won't get an arguement out of me on that.

He ran according to him what he wanted to be the role model for a communistic society. Sorry to break it to ya but the only difference between socialism and communism is a political ideaology.

When he talks about publin and private owned operations he is pinpointing Fannie and Freddie.

Now goverment will be expanding even more, into healthcare, possibly energy, and other industries.

Only a matter of time till ti comes full circle

Stalin was an opportunist, anyone who has ever read anything about Stalin would know this. He became a revolutionary after being expelled from a seminar. After Lenin's death, he abandoned international revolution for the "Socialism in One Country" farce. Then, he united with the "centrist" Bolsheviks to oust Trotsky, then with the "right" Bolsheviks to oust the centrists, and then with Lenin's widow to oust the "rightists". And then he basically murdered all of them in the Purge. During the Spanish Civil War he hijacked the Workers Party and basically ordered them to murder all non Stalinists, effectively giving it over to Franco. Then WWII came along, and Stalin opened the Churches and invoked Peter the Great in his speeches and talked about the "Great Patriotic War". Uh, not to mention that he even ALLIED with Hitler before the War. And Stalin the great socialist theorist? Uh, his resume is pretty skimpy on that.

But all of that can be put aside. There is really a very simple explanation on why Stalin wasn't a communist or socialist or anything but a vile politician: The workers did not control the means of production. He did. That's pretty much the end of the story. Soviet "communism", in general, was a joke. The only way a socialist society can be legitimate if it is ruled from the bottom, that is what a "soviet" is supposed to be. This wasn't the case in the Soviet Union, because Stalin made the Soviets completely irrelevant, and turned them into a simple hand-picked bureaucracy.

What you fail to ignore, Andrew, is that government has always been a huge part of the US economy, as it has been in EVERY developed economy. The US has been one of the most protectionist markets in the world for a huge variety of products, a lot of its high tech industry is subsidized, it's agriculture is subsidized. You guys talk as though government intervention in the economy is something just radical and new. It's not.

Oh, and Publius, what was it that you said before?? Oh yeah:

Isn't it cool how the left comes to offer no argument which would otherwise offer a rational explanation... and instead advances what amounts to a flaccid denial through impotent laughter?

Notice how there is never any valid rebuttal; no argument, no basis in reasoning... [random shit].

And then the best thing you can come up with is calling me a "useful idiot". Hope you didn't break a mental sweat with that one.

----

Yeah... along with Columbia, Yale & Berkeley.

HEY! I've got an idea... why don't you post for the board those Harvard traits which truly bespeak the ideological Right.

For the record, FIRE (The Foundation for Individual Rights in Education) gives Harvard a "RED" rating... which FTR... Berkely is given a "Yellow." (Think traffic light... Green, Yellow, RED)

Harvard is located in Cambridge, Mass.

Have you ever been there?

It is refered to by the locals as the "People's Rebublic of Cambridge"

The place is full of ultra left wing, homos, hippies, and all sorts of weirdos.

Massachuteess is as blue as they come. And Harvard and Cambridge are the capital of the wacko liberal politics.

I actually have been to Cambridge, Sunni Man! Boston is a really nice place.

I should clarify myself: Yes, of course, compared to Texas A&M or King Saud University of course Harvard is "liberal". As I said before, too, Universities are probably the "reddest" places of most countries, so I'm sure there's lots of Leftists and "Liberals" at Harvard. In any case, what I have to back it up is purely anecdotal, so it's pretty irrelevant. In any case this is just a problem of definitions. If you take "Leftists"/"Liberals" to mean "like Democrats", then I guess Harvard is "Liberal", but to me the Democrats are pretty far to my right, so... well, there you go.

Anyway, this post was a huge waste of time. I'm not answering any more of this nonsense.

 

[PubliusInfinitum]

Publius, are you a troll?? Do you do it on purpose? Or are you naturally this incoherent??

Sweet conjecture advanced as the basis of a baseless projection!

Please find below: your ass ( ; ).

Of course we would... But you imply that someone has said that when the leftist system collapses that someone is going to go around and murder all the leftists... which has not happened. So the implication is absent a valid foundation and is thus absurd.

"So the implication is absent a valid foundation and is thus absurd." Yeah, no wonder you're not Harvard type... Anyway...

Really?! Nobody has?!

Really... Nobody has...

I doubt she'll be laughing when she's running for her life and denying that she ever advocated for left-think, when the socialist machine collapses as it must; [nonsensical crap] where anything that ever sought to infringe upon the valid right of the individual will be hunted down and destroyed and given their position on the ownership of firearms... that is a war which shouldn't take much more than a cushy 96.

Translation: "[Because she's a left-thinker,] she will be running for her life when the socialist machine collapses. [She] will be hunted down and destroyed. [It] shouldn't take much more than a cushy .96." Oops, guess you forgot. = (

Ahh... well THERE'S your problem... you're working from a predictably faulty 'translation'...

Ya see you erroneously conclude that a war which results from the collapse of one's national government, due to the absurd policy of one ideology; policies which were historically proven to result in certain failure and that such policy was advocated despite that certain history and vociferous warnings of such by the political opposition... And given that such a war was a direct result of that failed ideology taking ot the streets, DEMANDING entitlements from a failed government, rioting against the nation's producers... where those producers were forced to defend their rights against those false entitlement seekers... seekers whose very existence is predicated upon the means of the producers to subsidize that existence... there is no potential for 'murder.'

As is nearly always the case, you, again erroneously conclude that 'kill' is synonymous with "murder"... There are several wonderful, perfectly moral and more often than not legal justifications for killing a human being. Perhaps you should familiarize yourself with those justifications, as it would go along way towards curing this chronic ignorance which you're clearly suffering.

ROFLMNAO... SWEET MOTHER ...

Once again a leftist comes to demand that the world’s most notorious SOCIALIST: 'wasn't really a socialist at all...'

LOL... Oh God, that's precious.

Man nothing demonstrates 'useful idiot' like the common independent, moderate, centrist, progressive entrenched dead center in the Western Left.

These idiots actually delude themselves into believing that the crap their 'taught' in the indoctrination centers, IS socialism... and that the HISTORY OF SOCIALISM is just a big lie designed to give the Left a bad name.

Stalin was an opportunist, anyone who has ever read anything about Stalin would know this. He became a revolutionary after being expelled from a seminar. After Lenin's death, he abandoned international revolution for the "Socialism in One Country" farce. Then, he united with the "centrist" Bolsheviks to oust Trotsky, then with the "right" Bolsheviks to oust the centrists, and then with Lenin's widow to oust the "rightists". And then he basically murdered all of them in the Purge. During the Spanish Civil War he hijacked the Workers Party and basically ordered them to murder all non Stalinists, effectively giving it over to Franco. Then WWII came along, and Stalin opened the Churches and invoked Peter the Great in his speeches and talked about the "Great Patriotic War". Uh, not to mention that he even ALLIED with Hitler before the War. And Stalin the great socialist theorist? Uh, his resume is pretty skimpy on that.

But all of that can be put aside. There is really a very simple explanation on why Stalin wasn't a communist or socialist or anything but a vile politician: The workers did not control the means of production. He did. That's pretty much the end of the story. Soviet "communism", in general, was a joke. The only way a socialist society can be legitimate if it is ruled from the bottom, that is what a "soviet" is supposed to be. This wasn't the case in the Soviet Union, because Stalin made the Soviets completely irrelevant, and turned them into a simple hand-picked bureaucracy.

What you fail to ignore, Andrew, is that government has always been a huge part of the US economy, as it has been in EVERY developed economy. The US has been one of the most protectionist markets in the world for a huge variety of products, a lot of its high tech industry is subsidized, it's agriculture is subsidized. You guys talk as though government intervention in the economy is something just radical and new. It's not.

CONGRATS! It's OFFICIAL! You are a certified USEFUL IDIOT!

Ya see you believe that it's possible for 'The People' to remain in control of the means of production... You reject human nature and as such set aside the certainty that it is essential to communism that the individuals who are not imbeciles within the general population will rise to their natural levels of leadership wherein they will capitalize upon whatever production is within their sphere of influence and use that production to benefit themselves... thus, depleting 'the people's production;' which requires stringent social controls... which requires enormous power being given to those responsible for those controls, which necessarily will result in that / those individual(s) inevitable misuse of that power and rising to their natural level of leadership and using the production of the people to benefit themselves...

Thus you look at the theory and say "Golly... what a swell system..." and when exposed to the historical practical applications of that theory, you conclude that those humans must not be as familiar with the theory as YOU ARE... and were thus something besides a Socialist.

There's a reason you people were referred to as "Useful Idiots" by that moderate Bolshevik, one Vlad' Lenin... (ROFLMNAO... I pee'd a little when I read that... HYSTERICAL! ... in two contexts and on several levels) And that reason is that you imbeciles have absolutely NO EARTHLY IDEA WHAT IT TAKES TO ESTABLISH INTERNATIONAL SOCIALISM... and here's a clue... It's not rocking the vote...

Now Mao murdered 75 million people to cleanse his culture of capitalist or Capitalist sympathizers... AKA: Independent, moderate, centrist, progressives... Stalin another 25 million, Pol pot another estimated 2 million, Fidel upwards of a million... and another 7-10 million 'cleansed' in the various 'socialist experiments' on the Dark Continent... Yet you idiots never seem to recognize that such is an essential element of the process and that YOU MORONS ARE AT THE TOP OF THE LIST; understand that ME AND MY PEOPLE will already be dead... or have fled the scene. YOU people that think you're about to become 'party leaders' and live Le vida Loca – Communist style, in harmony with nature and with all of your needs met by 'the people;' YOU PEOPLE ARE THE FIRST TO GO... BECAUSE YOU'LL BE THE FIRST TO START TALKING SHIT WHEN THE WORK STARTS AND THERE'S NO ROOM IN THE PLAN FOR ANY MORE TALK OF REVOLUTION...

And then the best thing you can come up with is calling me a "useful idiot". Hope you didn't break a mental sweat with that one.

I didn't 'call' you a useful idiot, that's what that ‘moderate - Bolshevik,’ Lenin, called you; I just pointed it out.

 

[Diuretic]

Anyone got the full speech Stalin apparently gave?

 

[Andrew2382]

that was from an interview to a newspaper

 

[Octoldit]

Campaign For Liberty — Blog

Found this quote from Stalin, seems pretty relevant of what is going on today.


"American people would never accept socialism or communism and the only hope of imposing a red regime in the United States was a consistent but gradual increase in local and federal public-ownership projects. Publicly owned operations pay little if any taxes in the end, and in the end the result would be a final acceptance of complete government ownership and their operation.

Every new local or federal public-ownership project is added nail in the coffin that would finally contain capitalism. The tax burdens will become greater every year for the American people, and each government owned operation will throw an added burden in the private taxpayers. It is obvious the camel's back of capitalism will finally break under an unbearable burden.

We must reach to the average left-wing American liberal. While he will be insulted at being called a socialist or a communist, he would enthusiastically use his influence to bring about more and more public-private ownership operations in the fields of natural resources, transportation, and all other commercial lines. This is why we must enlist the left-wing liberals in all walks of life, not only in the United States, but in all of Latin America as well."

Also,

The Veritas Foundation released this paper on the policies of Harvard University, the institution that president-elect Obama both graduated from and taught at.

Indoctrination of undergraduates in socialism usually proceeded in three phases.

-Socialists lectures conditioned the young minds to hate capitalism as an outmoded and cruel system.
-Despise and distrust individual capitalists as exploiters and reactionaries who oppose social improvements.
-The fledgling radical is hooked by clever scientific examples and formuli which prove to him that the current social order is predestined to collapse and socialism is preordained to take its place.



Good read the website,

I heard it on Glenn Beck, and have been trying to find the text and just found it. Scary stuff

You have things totally backward and it seems your purpose is to make confusion were no confusion exist. First of all the international bankers that financed Stalin and Lenin are at the core of the so-called Federal Reserve system. They have plans to treat the U.S and the world the same way they treated Russia with the Bolshevik revolution.

It's NWO COMMUNISM that should be the focus. The Soviet Union was COMMUNIST, and it was privatization that was employed in Russia just as it is in American as the method of stealing, and taking over Governments.

Usury and taxes from the bogus federal Reserve which is communist is the real enemy, and republicians have embraced the wicked leninist methods, and 9-11 is part of their take-over scheme.

 

[Diuretic]

that was from an interview to a newspaper

Stalin gave an interview???

 

[rayboyusmc]

The right is so afraid that Obama will be successfull in his presidency that they have already begin to lay the ground of sabotaging what he tries to do.

Hopefully, we will get the 60 votes and he can implement a leftist/liberal/ progressive agenda to try and heal the sickness that the NeoCons created in our society.

Yes, Pogo, liberalism is a valid philosophy and long term will always win over the conservative entropy the seeks solace in the status quo and the past.

Scream all you want, but a liberal progressive philosophy is the future.

 

[editec]

The game has changed and yet many of us are still under the impression that the titanic battle is between communism versus capitalism.

Did these people NOT SEE how capitalism just dealt with the economic meltdown of our banks?

Apparently not.

I noted (and called incidently, but not on this board) that the nation states are not really dealing all that well with the Somalian pirates.

Don't any of you find it strange that the nation states cannot deal with a bunch of Somalian pirates so that now a PRIVATE ARMY is planning on taking on this menance to shipping?

I will continue to alert those of you who can't see the forest for the trees that the long range plan in this century is to defang the nation states and vest all REAL POWER into the corporate elite's hands.

Expect to see more privatization of military and policing roles in our futures, folks.

Expect to see more and more national and state and local governments going hat in hand to coporations begging them to take over those social functions that once our democratically elected governments were responsible for.

That is the plan and the plan is moving on, even if some of you still think the battle is between communism and capitalism.

The ongoing transfer of power is really the eroding power of representational governments and the usurption of that power into the hands of the captians of international capitalism, folks.

 

[Diuretic]

Makes sense. After all, the modern state isn't that old a concept. Perhaps it will be overtaken by international megacorps.