Kevin's Watch

Cail wrote:I think that's conditioning though. It irks me to no end seeing teenagers wandering around wearing Hammer and Sickle (or Che Guevara) t-shirts when I know that they have no clue what they mean. They'd (probably) never wear a Hitler or Swastika t-shirt, but they have no clue that what they're wearing is analogous.

Well said about Che. I'm sick of seeing people wearing a Che t-shirt and not know a thing about what he was really like.

Prebe wrote:Wearing a t-shirt with an image of Stalin might be analogous to wearing one with a picture of Hitler. But wearing a t-shirt with hammer and sickle is quite different from wearing one with a svastika (assuming, of course, that the svastika is symbolising national socialist ideology).

Says you. Millions of people were slaughtered under the Soviet flag, and millions more were oppressed. How do the citizens of the former Warsaw Pact countries feel about that flag? The simple fact is that both flags are symbolic of the wholesale slaughter of millions of people.

That said, I don't think either of them should be banned (free speech and all), but I find it funny that there are clothing manufacturers who would never, ever consider making swastika t-shirts, but don't think twice about Che, CCCP, or hammer & sickle t-shirts.

Cail wrote:...there is nothing written in the communist ideology about butchering whole ethnic groups.

That's the difference, as I already statet.

Millions have been slaughtered in the name of Christianity, but even so the ideology does not endorse wholesale slaughter of ethnic groups. If the bible said it was ok to slaughter millions, I'd think it reprehensible to flash the cross as well.

I don't see what the effective difference is. In practice, communism has been a bloody, repressive form of government. There has been no communist reformation, no communist version of Vatican II.

By necessity, communism is restrictive of human rights, and in practice has proven to be as repressive (if not more so) than fascism as practiced by Hitler & Co.

Edit-And that was a legitimate question. How do the people of formerly Soviet-occupied countries feel about the hammer & sickle? 'Cause I find this...


as offensive as this...

I don't. Because the basic ideology is different.

I wouldn't feel the same way toward a person subscribing to a communistic ideal as I would toward a person subscribing to a nazist ditto.
I might think, that the person subscribing to communist ideals was somewhat misguided, and try to teach him a little history. I would however, consider a person subscribing to national socialism an asshole.

(for the record, my previous title was a joke: I don't subscribe to the communist ideology in spite of my leftist viewpoints).

The basic ideology is different, but in practice both ideologies are brutally repressive and place little value on human life.

IOW, there is more of a veneer of altruism to be found in communism, but in actuality it's not a system that anyone would want to live under.

Cail wrote:I don't see what the effective difference is. In practice, communism has been a bloody, repressive form of government. There has been no communist reformation, no communist version of Vatican II.

By necessity, communism is restrictive of human rights, and in practice has proven to be as repressive (if not more so) than fascism as practiced by Hitler & Co.

But there was/is communism as opposed to Stalinism. The brutal era of communism had more to do with Stalin and his inner circle (and the way the country was run following his system) than communism itself.

Leftist communism is a viable political view to hold. Fascism, not so much. I agree with Prebe.

All views are equally viable. Personally, I don't find either of the pictures offensive. Anymore than I find a cross or a pentagram offensive. The image never killed anybody, and I'm quite capable of distinguishing between the people and the symbol. Symbols are just that.

It does however annoy me to see people wearing shirts with Che on. Not because Che was a butcher, but because they don't know anything about him or what he did. (I know I've told this true story before, but it rates a mention again...when I asked my cousin who the guy pictured on his shirt was (it was Che obviously), he said "Isn't it Bob Marley?" I laughed so hard I nearly cried.)

I just don't get offended by what people say or appear to proclaim by means of whatever...shirts, bumper stickers, whatever. Either what it says is true (or a true reflection of something), or it's not. The truth should never be offensive, and lies aren't worth being offended over. *shrug*

--A

It just irks me that people get so worked up over the Stars and Bars or a Swastika, but don't think twice about the Hammer and Sickle, CCCP, or Che.

Loremaster, I'd say that Chinese communism and Cuban communism are pretty brutal as well.

Cail wrote:Loremaster, I'd say that Chinese communism and Cuban communism are pretty brutal as well.

Without a doubt. However, communism as an ideology is not. I now we're discussing ideals, yet my point stands.

To be honest with you, it's been a looooooong time since I've read any Communist ideology, so I'll have to stipulate that.

But in practice, Communism is an incredibly effective way of controlling the masses.

Cail wrote:To be honest with you, it's been a looooooong time since I've read any Communist ideology, so I'll have to stipulate that.

But in practice, Communism is an incredibly effective way of controlling the masses.

No way is effective in controlling the masses. No system is perfect.

Cail wrote:It just irks me that people get so worked up over the Stars and Bars or a Swastika, but don't think twice about the Hammer and Sickle, CCCP, or Che.

Oh, I agree that the double standard is ridiculous.

--A

actually political systems are all about control what differs between them is the degree of control exercised.

communism is not communism .. the ideology is not the same as its application .. and to apply it in soviet russia it was repressive .. and violent .. and likely had to be if you were going to force such social change over a relatively short period of time ..

its interesting to me that such regimes - russian communism -- chinese communism and korean communism are different ..

its like any theory .. it is interpreted and applied by the implementer .. and arguably inevitably adapted to the unique envinment it was intended to occupy

communist and fascist regimes have all been without exception brutally oppressive .. entirely about control

as to the issue of stalin and hitler - no one wins here - both were exercised with terror ........

petfection is often sought in a political theory .. and hailed as bein g it .. but alas communism is a far cry from perfection ..

the denial of liberty and individuality being among the most significant flaws

our system is built on generalities but will not extinguish basic human rights as stalins and hitlers regimes did ..

I personally don't feel that communism is offensive or even bad when it is applied in real life. It's worth mentioning that in many ways, Stalin's, Mao's; *any* "communist" regime seen so far is not communism: but merely what tyrants choose to call it to justify their actions. There hasn't *been* a communist country. Stalin is the classic example of this; communism is supposed to mean everyone is equal: and what Stalin created in the Soviet Union was the complete opposite; (no, not Capitalism) a complete one man rule. The Soviet Union *revolved* around Stalin completely; the armies, the arms of governments; everything. To me, men like Stalin are complete betrayers to the idealogy they espouse.

i agree with cail that the hammer & sickle should be seen as offensive as the stars & bars or che shirts.

revan - no communist country seems to have "got it right." could it be that at it's core, communism just can not translate to real life without becoming corrupt?

sgt.null wrote:i agree with cail that the hammer & sickle should be seen as offensive as the stars & bars or che shirts.

revan - no communist country seems to have "got it right." could it be that at it's core, communism just can not translate to real life without becoming corrupt?

Perhaps that is just it sgt. But all I can say then it is no longer communism

But this is an anargument., communism can't translate to real life without becoming corrupt because all it takes is one man in millions to want more, and the entire edifice comes crumbling down... Unless you push that man down with force... Thus all these attempts at communism are inherently corrupt.

sgt.null wrote:i agree with cail that the hammer & sickle should be seen as offensive as the stars & bars or che shirts.

revan - no communist country seems to have "got it right." could it be that at it's core, communism just can not translate to real life without becoming corrupt?

Perhaps that is just it sgt. But all I can say then it is no longer communism

But this is an old argument; that Communism can't translate to real life without becoming corrupt because all it takes is one man in millions to want more, and the entire edifice comes crumbling down... Unless you push that man down with force... Thus all these attempts at communism are inherently corrupt and oppresive of the very people they are trying to "enlighten" with equally.

so maybe man just can not be enlightened. there can be no utopia. we will always have crime and poverty - because man himself is corrupt.