[marx] Why do people continually feel the need to ruin my childhood memories? :(

[Nodrog]

http://hcmagazine.com/magazine.cfm/c...000210,00.html

[Kurashima]

I ****ing hate morons that write stuff like this.

KIDS DONT UNDERSTAND POLITICS. STOP ****ING MAKING OUT LIKE THEY DO OR YOUR WILD CONSPIRACY THEORIST IDEALS ARE REMOTELY ****ING SANE.

wankers.

[SYMM]

Oh dear.

[JonnyBGood]

I'm voting for that guy in whatever contest he wants to run in.


Reading on through it, surely he's taking the piss though?

[roadrunner_0]

come on, surely i cant be the only one around here who has heard that theory a hundred times before? its been all over the internet for years fs!

[Nodrog]

Originally Posted by Kurashima

I ****ing hate morons that write stuff like this.

KIDS DONT UNDERSTAND POLITICS. STOP ****ING MAKING OUT LIKE THEY DO OR YOUR WILD CONSPIRACY THEORIST IDEALS ARE REMOTELY ****ING SANE.

wankers.

Surely if kids dont understand it, thats even more reason for it to be pointed out otherwise its just subconcious indoctrination

[Nodrog]

Originally Posted by roadrunner_0

come on, surely i cant be the only one around here who has heard that theory a hundred times before? its been all over the internet for years fs!

u r good at the internet

[Tactitus]

I've always imagined that Dante wears a smurf hat.

[NEWSBOT3]

The name “SMURF” could even be an acronym for “Small Men Under Red Father.”

lolz0rs

[Dante Hicks]

Originally Posted by Tactitus

I've always imagined that Dante wears a smurf hat.

Only on special occasions.

The thing about articles like that (regardless of whether they're serious or not) that are depressing is the comments.

[SepH]

Originally Posted by Kurashima

I ****ing hate morons that write stuff like this.

KIDS DONT UNDERSTAND POLITICS. STOP ****ING MAKING OUT LIKE THEY DO OR YOUR WILD CONSPIRACY THEORIST IDEALS ARE REMOTELY ****ING SANE.

wankers.

It was pretty funny though

[G.K Zhukov]

That looser Trotsky brainy smurf??????????

GET REAL!

[Dante Hicks]

What's your beef with Trotsky man?

You may as well get it off your chest.

(and plz not just "he sucked" or "he was an idiot" or "he shagged your mum" or whatever)

[G.K Zhukov]

1) his theories are weak.
2) he was a whiner (If he had played pa, he would have joined fang asap).
3) trotskists ruined several things Ive been part of politicaly. They dont understand front-work, they dont understand the national issue, they always wants to break up organizations and parties, they want to discuss soviet 1924 instead of doing something today.
They are a bunch of morons, who ruins other peoples work.

[Dante Hicks]

Yeah, the Trotskyists (or Trotskyites, whatever) are generally rubbish. But that's not the same thing as Trotsky the man.

I'm not a great theory of the theory of Permanent Revolution, although I don't mind some of his writing (his autobiography and history of the revolution are pretty good, although I prefer the Isaac Deutscher bio). I can't even recall anything else he wrote of theoretical importance, although I did most of my Trotsky/Leninist readings when I was 16 or 17.

He may have whined a bit when he was in exile, but he was forced to flee the country and was eventually murdered. I can't comment if he would have joined FaNG or not, but his position seems fairly reasonable.

Trotsky did a lot of good during the revolution itself, and his motives, character and talents seem superior to Stalin's, although that's not exactly a tough contest. Therefore, he has my limited respect. Modern day Trots are another matter, and I've not actually encountered one with a functioning brain in a political context. I have met a couple more recently in a personal context who seemed nice enough.

[Deepflow]

i fully agree with that article and any views held therein

[queball]

I'm not sure the children would have been less indoctrinated had they watched the Capitalist Smurfs, a bunch of anti-social wage slaves living in concrete blocks.

[Nodrog]

Originally Posted by queball

I'm not sure the children would have been less indoctrinated had they watched the Capitalist Smurfs, a bunch of anti-social wage slaves living in concrete blocks.

Gummi Bears wasnt marxist propaganda and that didnt suck.

Also I have been in the library since midnight

[MrL_JaKiri]

I liked the Decayed Ruins of Ancient Technology thang that GB had going on occasionally.

[queball]

Gummi Bears was anti-Communist propaganda, and did suck. http://www.people.fas.harvard.edu/~allain/gumfan/
Our library closes at midnight. :-/

[Dante Hicks]

Originally Posted by Toccata & Fugue

He-Man was obviously NAZI propaganda, and Tin Tin had issues apparently. I saw an episode of something a few years ago (a sort of action man rip) where the baddie was a communist.

Tin Tin was explicitly anti-communist, since there's an entire adventure where he's fighting the Bolsheviks.

I was amused by the racism of Asterix though.

[roadrunner_0]

wasnt herge a nazi though?

[MrL_JaKiri]

Originally Posted by Toccata & Fugue

Your thinking of Mysterious Cities of Gold or possibly Phantom 2040. I don't remember any plot in Gummi bears which did not revolve around Gummi berry juice and some sort of moral dilema.

http://www.newgumbrea.com/cgi-bin/sh....cgi?g1197.jpg kind o'thang.

Given I've been watching MCoG recently, I doubt I'd be confused with it.

[Nodrog]

Everyone claiming that gummi bears sucked is wrong.

[MrL_JaKiri]

Originally Posted by Nodrog

Everyone claiming that gummi bears sucked is wrong.

The Gummi Bears was on before THIS when I last saw it on TV, which would have been mid/late 80's at the latest (they were both made in 85 according to imdb)

[LHC]

Originally Posted by Toccata & Fugue

Gummi Bears was appalling. Nice music though.

He-Man was obviously NAZI propaganda

Ok then, fine, but He-Man is and was a shit, homo-erotic wet dream in which an aryan teenage boy hold aloft his mighty, and lets not be coy, hugely phallic sword and groans in ecstacy the magic words "I have the POWEEEEEEEEEER" thereby simultaneously ejaculating and transforming into a loincloth wearing, musclebound, mulleted superman. This would be bad enough, but then he mounts his green and yellow cat (who is a subservient ponce beforehand but then turns into a gimp-mask wearing S&M monster) and rides off to fight evil, adding bestiality to the mix. Not only this, but his arch nemesis is a SKELETON IN A HOODIE, woo I'm terrified - an arch nemesis so evil that he constantly cackles in a moronically high, camp voice and is always allowed to escape to plot again. Ostensibly this is because he man has such an elevated moral conscience that he could not lower himself to Skeletor's level by grinding him into a powder while he's down. Bullshit, He-Man wants to **** skeletor, he's trying to fend off a whopping boner (see what I did there?) while he watches him piss off back to his lair. So He-Man is not only gay, he enjoys bestiality and necrophilia. Oh and he's a member of the SS. What a complete ****.

[Dante Hicks]

I wish you could review kids TV programmes for the Radio Times.

[roadrunner_0]

seriously LHC, thats really quite impressive.

[G.K Zhukov]

Originally Posted by Dante Hicks

Yeah, the Trotskyists (or Trotskyites, whatever) are generally rubbish. But that's not the same thing as Trotsky the man.

I'm not a great theory of the theory of Permanent Revolution, although I don't mind some of his writing (his autobiography and history of the revolution are pretty good, although I prefer the Isaac Deutscher bio). I can't even recall anything else he wrote of theoretical importance, although I did most of my Trotsky/Leninist readings when I was 16 or 17.

He may have whined a bit when he was in exile, but he was forced to flee the country and was eventually murdered. I can't comment if he would have joined FaNG or not, but his position seems fairly reasonable.

Trotsky did a lot of good during the revolution itself, and his motives, character and talents seem superior to Stalin's, although that's not exactly a tough contest. Therefore, he has my limited respect. Modern day Trots are another matter, and I've not actually encountered one with a functioning brain in a political context. I have met a couple more recently in a personal context who seemed nice enough.

In one of his books, Trotsky portray himself as a true democrat and all that stuff, whining like he was posting on AD. He seems little mature, quite frankly more like a 14 year old. Fact is he lost the internal powerstructure in the party, and was showed out.
When it comes to the theory of the permanent revolution, I would say its rather crap. Thats what I thought when I read about it 5-6 years ago.
Since that I havent read Trotsky, as I find him dull, not particular bright and a idealistic intelectual.
I rather read something useful of marx, lenin or mao.

[Deepflow]

Originally Posted by LHC

Ok then, fine, but He-Man is and was a shit, homo-erotic wet dream in which an aryan teenage boy hold aloft his mighty, and lets not be coy, hugely phallic sword and groans in ecstacy the magic words "I have the POWEEEEEEEEEER" thereby simultaneously ejaculating and transforming into a loincloth wearing, musclebound, mulleted superman. This would be bad enough, but then he mounts his green and yellow cat (who is a subservient ponce beforehand but then turns into a gimp-mask wearing S&M monster) and rides off to fight evil, adding bestiality to the mix. Not only this, but his arch nemesis is a SKELETON IN A HOODIE, woo I'm terrified - an arch nemesis so evil that he constantly cackles in a moronically high, camp voice and is always allowed to escape to plot again. Ostensibly this is because he man has such an elevated moral conscience that he could not lower himself to Skeletor's level by grinding him into a powder while he's down. Bullshit, He-Man wants to **** skeletor, he's trying to fend off a whopping boner (see what I did there?) while he watches him piss off back to his lair. So He-Man is not only gay, he enjoys bestiality and necrophilia. Oh and he's a member of the SS. What a complete ****.

it reminds me a bit of screen burn by charlie brooker... anyone read that?

[JonnyBGood]

Originally Posted by G.K Zhukov

I rather read something useful of mao.

Posting in utter bemusement.

[MrL_JaKiri]

Originally Posted by JonnyBGood

Posting in utter bemusement.

You'd better look exactly like damien duff, or I'll be confused for life.

[G.K Zhukov]

Originally Posted by JonnyBGood

Posting in utter bemusement.

so what is it you dont get?

[LHC]

Originally Posted by Deepflow

it reminds me a bit of screen burn by charlie brooker... anyone read that?

I haven't, but Charlie Brooker the best angry man around.

[Deepflow]

its in the guardian guide every week (which happens to be the best little weekly book thing EVER).

and i only found out he had moved from PC zone to that absolutely by accident. but still, it was a nice surprise.

[LHC]

I've only read him in PC Zone, but those rants at the back used to be great.

[JonnyBGood]

Originally Posted by G.K Zhukov

so what is it you dont get?

The idea that Mao has written something useful that applies to the western world which couldn't be found written by a more literate and sensible author strikes me as a rather bizzare idea. However to each his own, I once met someone who found Noddy books a relevant commentary on racial and gender questions during the 1960s and 70s.

[Dante Hicks]

Pretty much everything that "famous" people said has been said better by other people. This is particularly true of anyone who didn't originally write in English or anything published over 25 years ago.

I found some of Mao's essays on revolutionary theory or contradiction (for instance) to be interesting. I'm sure plenty of other people have said what he said but better, but they weren't involved in the deaths of millions so they don't get the publicity.

As for Trotsky, I'm not sure if "moaning" is really the right term. To be fair to him, the Soviet Union turned into one of the biggest massacres ever. So it's a bit unfair to equate him to people shouting "omg bot users" over on AD. I think pretty much anyone criticising Stalin could be said to have had a point.

[JonnyBGood]

Originally Posted by Dante Hicks

Pretty much everything that "famous" people said has been said better by other people. This is particularly true of anyone who didn't originally write in English or anything published over 25 years ago.

I found some of Mao's essays on revolutionary theory or contradiction (for instance) to be interesting. I'm sure plenty of other people have said what he said but better, but they weren't involved in the deaths of millions so they don't get the publicity.

Obviously. However the question here is supposed to be about whether the value attached to the fact mao was famous and killed lots of people outweighs the fact he was a raving lunatic. That said I've read Mein Kampf, although I don't think I'd read something else (if there was) written by old Adolf after that.

[G.K Zhukov]

Originally Posted by Dante Hicks

Pretty much everything that "famous" people said has been said better by other people. This is particularly true of anyone who didn't originally write in English or anything published over 25 years ago.

I found some of Mao's essays on revolutionary theory or contradiction (for instance) to be interesting. I'm sure plenty of other people have said what he said but better, but they weren't involved in the deaths of millions so they don't get the publicity.

As for Trotsky, I'm not sure if "moaning" is really the right term. To be fair to him, the Soviet Union turned into one of the biggest massacres ever. So it's a bit unfair to equate him to people shouting "omg bot users" over on AD. I think pretty much anyone criticising Stalin could be said to have had a point.

First of all, Trotsky was deaply involved into the brutality in the Soviet Union (not that I say that a civil war with outside interference isnt going to be brutal in some way). Now someone will say that Stalin did more. Sure, but its hardly relevent in many ways, becouse Trotsky didnt sit in power long enough. Im quite sure Trotsky would have done alot of the same as Stalin did.

Some people think politics is a intelectual exercise in front of your computer. For them, Im afraid Mao has nothing to offer (sorry JonnyBGood). Mao is only interesting if your going to do something with what you read, or rather your already involved in politics and interested in others experience with common problems.
Had Mao sat quiet in his room writing crap (like George Monbiot, Boris Kagarlitskij, Negri and Susan George) Im sure some people (like those who like the 4 I mentioned) would be overly happy. Not me though, becouse I want to CHANGE things, not just participate in the "OMG, Im so intelectual and read so many books by the cool people).
Mao DID something. He started a communist party with 13 others, in a country witch had little industry, few industrial workers (almost none after Chang Kai-Shek killed half a mill) and 700million people (approx). And the worst things is, he succeded. I guess thats why todays wannabe-intelectuals (who got nice office jobs) and the bourgoise hate him.
A revolution is hardly a tea-party, and there is always a few landlords who get hanged/shot/beaten up. So what did Mao&Co accomplish in China, even with their mistakes?
1) Education and health-care for all.
2) Lifiting the people away from beeing slaves for the landlords.
3) Introduction local democracy.
4) Stopping the tradtion with warlords roaming around, making life misserable for everyone.
5) Increadible growth.
6) Providing rights to woman, like abortion and legal rights.
7) Extending the average life time alot. (above 15 years is my guess)
8) The enourmous growth we see today in capitalist china is all based on what the maoist did. Thats why China today is succesful, and why India is still backwards, illierate, feudal and having huge problems with "hindufascism" or "hinduvata".

So If the trotskist would actually bother reading Mao, they might actually start archiving something

I could have continued another page, but I think I'll leave it there.

added: and yes, if you want to run a guerrila, its also very useful to read Mao

[LHC]

Originally Posted by G.K Zhukov

6) Providing rights to woman, like abortion

That's more like a law than a right.

[JonnyBGood]

If we put zhukov and alexander marriot in the same room I think the universe might implode.

[G.K Zhukov]

Who the feck is alexander marriot?

P.S JonnyBGood, your crap :\

[Phang]

Originally Posted by G.K Zhukov

First of all, Trotsky was deaply involved into the brutality in the Soviet Union (not that I say that a civil war with outside interference isnt going to be brutal in some way). Now someone will say that Stalin did more. Sure, but its hardly relevent in many ways, becouse Trotsky didnt sit in power long enough. Im quite sure Trotsky would have done alot of the same as Stalin did.

Number of Civil Wars won by Trotsky despite near-insurmountable odds: 1
Number of Austrian Nazi Chancellors not allied with by Stalin: 0

[JonnyBGood]

Originally Posted by G.K Zhukov

Who the feck is alexander marriot?

This is alexander marriot. My favourite human being <3

P.S JonnyBGood, your crap :\

k



Edit: Found a better one

[Dante Hicks]

Originally Posted by G.K Zhukov

Im quite sure Trotsky would have done alot of the same as Stalin did.

While this might be true, from a legal (or ethical) point of view, we can pretty much only look at what actually happened, not what might of happened. Stalin was guilty of causing literally millions of deaths, Trotsky was not. Sure, the latter may have gone on to do fundamentally the same as Stalin (as may Lenin) but this is mere speculation.

The bruality engaged in by Stalin is far and beyond anything Trotsky performed during the Civil War. (Not that I think you can compare war-time and peace-time actions anyway)

8) The enourmous growth we see today in capitalist china is all based on what the maoist did.

I'd leave fetishing growth to the capitalists. The current growth is indeed partially down to what the Maoists did. But since the current growth involves curtailing fundamental freedoms, oppressing free-speech, harrassing some trade unionists, etc I wouldn't be overly proud of it.

Obviously the Maoist revolution achieved a great deal, as did pretty much every other revolution (well, except for the Khmer Rogue madness) so far. The issue is not whether they did good, it's whether some of the excesses were necessary. Capitalism does a great deal of good too (e.g. boosting living standards in the long, long term for some) but that's not the debate.

added: and yes, if you want to run a guerrila, its also very useful to read Mao

I think this is part of the point JBG was raising. A lot of Mao's tactics are more useful to rural revolutionaries not industrial workers. As I mentioned earlier though, there are some common themes. In one of the Mao's essays he talks about replacing the tasks Capitalism performs (e.g. welfare) before overthrowing it, which I thought was an excellent idea. It's been (attempted) to apply it on English housing estates by at least one far-leftist group in Britain for instance.

[Dante Hicks]

Originally Posted by JonnyBGood

This is alexander marriot. My favourite human being <3

I realise it's utterly irrelevent to the quality of his political writings/beleifs, but does this dude have a girlfriend?

I'd be morbidly curious to see the woman who would go for him.

Obviously if she was a really hot chick then I'm killing myself immediately on general protest against the universe.

Originally Posted by Alex

When environmentalists decided that the Earth deserved a day of celebration in 1970, they could have picked any day of the year, as no one knows the exact day date of the Earth’s birthday. They chose Lenin’s birthday, just as Khrushchev had done. Was this just a coincidence? I think not.

lol

edit : Although I just realised that the 'Earth Day' concert was apparently devised by Senator Gaylord Nelson. That's much more ace than it being on Lenin's birthday.

[G.K Zhukov]

Originally Posted by JonnyBGood

This is alexander marriot. My favourite human being <3
k

Edit: Found a better one

About the Author: Alexander Marriott is a history major at the University of Nevada - Las Vegas, and opinion columnist for the Rebel Yell.

This guy is clueless looser

"Lenin’s goal was to destroy private property and this goal is obviously shared by environmentalists." HAHAHAHA, he's really funny

[G.K Zhukov]

Thanks for the link JohhnyBGood. That website provide alot off good laughs, such as this "article": http://www.capmag.com/article.asp?ID=3632

[G.K Zhukov]

"To put it in dollars, more than $125 billion dollars have been spent by the federal government and the only result are children who have been deliberately rendered ignorant of basic skills, ignorant of the history of their nation, or the superiority of Western culture, while at the same time being brainwashed with lies the environment is endangered and capitalism is an evil economic system."
Taken from: http://www.capmag.com/article.asp?ID=3631

I smell fascism.