6 ms·

Not to mention the blame on the current administration for the current situation, when it is well known that US diplomats and dignitaries where routinely target

by kls 6y ago

Not to mention the blame on the current administration for the current situation, when it is well known that US diplomats and dignitaries where routinely targeted with microwave weapons, some of which, have as of so far, suffered permanent brain damage, time will tell if they will fully recover. As well the previous administration killed wet foot / dry foot. It's pretty customary to break off relations with a country when diplomats are attacked, it goes against the very fabric of diplomatic immunity. Sure everybody tails them, everybody spies on them, but physical attacks are so far outside the norm, that I was actually surprised that it took as long as it did to disconnect the small ties that had been established. I have my issues with the current administration but to chalk one up against their side after US diplomats where attacked is wanting at best. There is no doubt the US meddles and sometimes (maybe even most times) for the worse, but to attribute Cuban or even Venezuelan strife to primarily the US is an overreach. The US has backed some bad players in response to communism (Pinochet comes to mind), but to attribute the misdeeds of the ones that actually went left, to the US is more of this fantasy-land, we want to try communism again and this time we will get it right thinking. What someone says, when they say, "if it where not for the US and capitalist influence it would have succeeded" is actually that they are saying: that they are smarter than Engle, Marx, Lenin, Castro, Che, Pol Pot, Mao Zedong, Stalin and the rest of them; if we just implement their non-dictator, non-western influenced, idea of communism things will be great this time. The problem is, all the above mentioned thought the same thing. I lived thru communism (had family that lived under it in East Germany, father-in-law was a refuge from Castro), I never realized it would only take a generation to completely forget how bad it was. Honestly what scares me more is, I always thought Fascism and the Nazis had run their course and there would be no way anyone could make that mistake again. Now watching the apologizes for the failings of communism, I am really not so sure, now I realize if these fringe Nazis find the right voice, appeal the the right social triggers and pull on the correct emotional strings, they could actually become a force to recon with.

aaomidi 6y ago
You didn't live through communism. A lot of the left rejects Cuban, or Russian (USSR) communism. You lived through a dictatorship. Very different things. There are various leftist thoughts that are more libertarian than whatever system we have right now. The fact that you're equating nazism which isn't even an economic school of thought to communism, which is, means you frankly don't know what you're talking about. Your experiences are valid, and I would hate to live in USSR or Cuba, but your experiences aren't the end-all of communism.
- kls 6y ago
  I know exactly what I am talking about when it comes to communism and Fascism as they have always been, when implemented, a direct path to central planning. Fascism absolutely has an economic model you could call it socialism lite. The Nazi's slid from full socialist to Fascist (the Chinese did the same thing, they represent somewhere between a socialist and Fascist state now, because communism does not work, as well, the US has had it's slide towards it, Prescott Bush was a known Fascist and wanted the US to trend towards it): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economics_of_fascism#:~:text=In%20general%2C%20fascist%20economies%20were,upon%20service%20to%20the%20state.&text=Historian%20Gaetano%20Salvemini%20argued%20in,the%20blunders%20of%20private%20enterprise https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economics_of_fascism#:~:text=I.... The Nazis where first and foremost national socialist and then softly migrated to Fascist. As far as political spectrum libertarians are to the extreme right, with Anarchist being the end of the spectrum to the right. What the new speak definitions of left/right are trying to do is interject economic, social and emotional issues into the spectrum, because communism cannot be sold in it's original form so now it is being packaged with social issues and plays to emotions. That being said, historically left/right was in systems of and the authorities of governance, the further to the right, the less authority the government had. It historically has not entailed economic models nor social issues like abortion, gay right, etc. You technically could have a far right communist utopia but given the limit of government authority, it would not last long as communism has to be enforced, thus back to central planning, thus back to the left. The left is defined by reliance in government and the desire for centrally planned governments, the right is towards the limitation or abolition of government. The Republic is a little to the right, Democracy is further right than that, confederation is further right than that and finally no law is the extremity of the right. We can certainly state that I lived thru communism, the fact that they all became dictatorship speaks more to the flaw of the system than it does that it did not get a fair shake. I would also certainly say I know what I am talking about given that I am well studied in geopolitical affairs, worked in the field and have extensive experience with the horrors of communism. The fact that you did not know that the Nazis where socialist and slid towards a Fascist economy means you frankly don't know what you are talking about or further that libertarians are extremely right and cannot be left as per their desires to limit government, as per historic and classically defined political pendulum analysis. As well, you most likely have had no experience with a real communist government as most people that even have peripheral experience with communism are wary of government overreach and would not look for a reason to argue or advocate for it. You would realize it's not something to get right. Your theory of we will do it better than Marx or Lenin puts millions of peoples lives in the balance. It's not going to work this time, central planning always leads to totalitarianism. That is what caused it, not the CIA not KSK not MI6, while they have had their meddlings they did not set up death camps, gulags or oppress dissidents for the communist (every communist regime that has come into existence mind you). It will not bring equality for the oppressed and will bring nothing but suffering for the majority under it's rule. The leaders of the movement, disillusioned with it not working out, will develop a final solution to fix it, which generally means getting rid of some people. This is the way it went down every time, and even before the US started meddling in their affairs. As further reading I would point you to the chronology of US and USSR spying. As you will note, the USSR had an established agency, propaganda network and sources before the US, and where actively meddling in US affairs, many agencies where formed in light of this new reality, the USSR had a active policy of world wide spread of communism, because Lenin believed in Marx as a profit and Marx was emphatic on the fact that for communism to succeed it would have to be a world wide revolution, Lenin is the text book example he implemented Marxist vision to a T, and honestly out of all of them he was probably the best example but it was the communist according to their core doctrine, that said the capitalist has to go. They painted a mark on people not the other way around. When the capitalist went and it still did not work, someone else had to go, in the case of the UUSR, it was the intellectuals then portions of the Bolsheviks, then the artists. the US response was to contain that spread after the fact, somewhere along the way, that commission changed and the CIA decided it was going to get into nation building, but that does not excuse communism for it's spectacular failings: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cold_War_espionage#Chronology https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cold_War_espionage#Chronology https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Central_Intelligence_Agency#Immediate_predecessors https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Central_Intelligence_Agency#Im...

by kls 6y ago

aaomidi 6y ago

You didn't live through communism. A lot of the left rejects Cuban, or Russian (USSR) communism. You lived through a dictatorship. Very different things. There are various leftist thoughts that are more libertarian than whatever system we have right now. The fact that you're equating nazism which isn't even an economic school of thought to communism, which is, means you frankly don't know what you're talking about. Your experiences are valid, and I would hate to live in USSR or Cuba, but your experiences aren't the end-all of communism.

kls 6y ago
I know exactly what I am talking about when it comes to communism and Fascism as they have always been, when implemented, a direct path to central planning. Fascism absolutely has an economic model you could call it socialism lite. The Nazi's slid from full socialist to Fascist (the Chinese did the same thing, they represent somewhere between a socialist and Fascist state now, because communism does not work, as well, the US has had it's slide towards it, Prescott Bush was a known Fascist and wanted the US to trend towards it): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economics_of_fascism#:~:text=In%20general%2C%20fascist%20economies%20were,upon%20service%20to%20the%20state.&text=Historian%20Gaetano%20Salvemini%20argued%20in,the%20blunders%20of%20private%20enterprise https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economics_of_fascism#:~:text=I.... The Nazis where first and foremost national socialist and then softly migrated to Fascist. As far as political spectrum libertarians are to the extreme right, with Anarchist being the end of the spectrum to the right. What the new speak definitions of left/right are trying to do is interject economic, social and emotional issues into the spectrum, because communism cannot be sold in it's original form so now it is being packaged with social issues and plays to emotions. That being said, historically left/right was in systems of and the authorities of governance, the further to the right, the less authority the government had. It historically has not entailed economic models nor social issues like abortion, gay right, etc. You technically could have a far right communist utopia but given the limit of government authority, it would not last long as communism has to be enforced, thus back to central planning, thus back to the left. The left is defined by reliance in government and the desire for centrally planned governments, the right is towards the limitation or abolition of government. The Republic is a little to the right, Democracy is further right than that, confederation is further right than that and finally no law is the extremity of the right. We can certainly state that I lived thru communism, the fact that they all became dictatorship speaks more to the flaw of the system than it does that it did not get a fair shake. I would also certainly say I know what I am talking about given that I am well studied in geopolitical affairs, worked in the field and have extensive experience with the horrors of communism. The fact that you did not know that the Nazis where socialist and slid towards a Fascist economy means you frankly don't know what you are talking about or further that libertarians are extremely right and cannot be left as per their desires to limit government, as per historic and classically defined political pendulum analysis. As well, you most likely have had no experience with a real communist government as most people that even have peripheral experience with communism are wary of government overreach and would not look for a reason to argue or advocate for it. You would realize it's not something to get right. Your theory of we will do it better than Marx or Lenin puts millions of peoples lives in the balance. It's not going to work this time, central planning always leads to totalitarianism. That is what caused it, not the CIA not KSK not MI6, while they have had their meddlings they did not set up death camps, gulags or oppress dissidents for the communist (every communist regime that has come into existence mind you). It will not bring equality for the oppressed and will bring nothing but suffering for the majority under it's rule. The leaders of the movement, disillusioned with it not working out, will develop a final solution to fix it, which generally means getting rid of some people. This is the way it went down every time, and even before the US started meddling in their affairs. As further reading I would point you to the chronology of US and USSR spying. As you will note, the USSR had an established agency, propaganda network and sources before the US, and where actively meddling in US affairs, many agencies where formed in light of this new reality, the USSR had a active policy of world wide spread of communism, because Lenin believed in Marx as a profit and Marx was emphatic on the fact that for communism to succeed it would have to be a world wide revolution, Lenin is the text book example he implemented Marxist vision to a T, and honestly out of all of them he was probably the best example but it was the communist according to their core doctrine, that said the capitalist has to go. They painted a mark on people not the other way around. When the capitalist went and it still did not work, someone else had to go, in the case of the UUSR, it was the intellectuals then portions of the Bolsheviks, then the artists. the US response was to contain that spread after the fact, somewhere along the way, that commission changed and the CIA decided it was going to get into nation building, but that does not excuse communism for it's spectacular failings: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cold_War_espionage#Chronology https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cold_War_espionage#Chronology https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Central_Intelligence_Agency#Immediate_predecessors https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Central_Intelligence_Agency#Im...