Suddenly?

"Those on the left suddenly outraged about the treatment of Tibet by China may now, finally, understand the right's longstanding problem with Communismthemselves. Congratulations"
TFIFY

It's opposite day... isn't it?

Blah. Everytime I hear some idiot conservative tell me what I apparently think, he's always so far off that I feel I should slap him out of principle.

and I thought it was the Chinese conservative right that was the problem

This is as stupid as conservatives who say that feminists are only just now concerned about women's rights in Iran. No, it's just that such concern was ignored by the right for a long time, or mocked.

[facepalm jpeg]

/Never thought I'd be able to use this pic twice today

kmmontandon: This is as stupid as conservatives who say that feminists are only just now concerned about women's rights in Iran. No, it's just that such concern was ignored by the right for a long time, or mocked.

SRSLY. Remember the responses made when people were trying to bring up the issue of women's rights in Afghanistan circa 1996? There were quite a few people reporting on it, people from the inside, etc but it tended to be dismissed as "people whining about women's issues" or "Damn feminists" etc.

Then all of a sudden the US goes to war with the Taliban and you'd think it was all about saving those poor, poor wimmin.

What does this have to do with communism? There's nothing 'communist' about the colonization of Tibet.

The Chinese are NOT communist--they're authoritarian capitalists. It's all in how you market yourselves.

Skleenar: [facepalm jpeg]

I thought it was only the Russian pinkos...

DamnYankees: What does this have to do with communism? There's nothing 'communist' about the colonization of Tibet.

it has everything to do with what right-wingers think the definition of communism is.

I remember when people got worked up about this twelve years ago. Nothing was done about it then either. Its great to go to concerts worrying about some issue - but it doesnt fix shiat.

/especially when they wont put the bong down

burndtdan: it has everything to do with what right-wingers think the definition of communism is.

I was a Poli Sci major in college, and I studied both Fascism and Communism. To this day, when you look at communism and fascism as implemented, I see very, very little difference. It's really strange what some people categorize as 'right' and 'left'.

I thought James Monroe settled this crap once and for all about 200 years ago. We're all for it.

Live in the Press Room...

After carefully considering the masturdebation put forth, Speak For Your Own Position Duck is ready to release his prepared rebuttal statement.

burndtdan: it has everything to do with what right-wingers think the definition of communism is.

This.

Communism, in its inherent principles, isn't all that bad. What makes it bad is that a communist movement is usually led by an totalitarian or dictator.

You know who else was anti-communist?

DamnYankees: burndtdan: it has everything to do with what right-wingers think the definition of communism is.

I was a Poli Sci major in college, and I studied both Fascism and Communism. To this day, when you look at communism and fascism as implemented, I see very, very little difference. It's really strange what some people categorize as 'right' and 'left'.

communism is just a red herring

burndtdan: communism is just a red herring

You win one free internet. You can use your coupon to redeem it at the front desk.

DamnYankees: I was a Poli Sci major in college

Can I get fries with that?

/I keed, I keed!
//suddenly just realized that Tibet is not just a small morsel of food and I am outraged!!

Ruca: Communism, in its inherent principles, isn't all that bad.

You will elicit many a post disputing this contention

What makes it bad is that a communist movement is usually led by an totalitarian or dictator.

Because people don't behave in the way necessary to create this sort of system without heavy coercion.

There is too much of a payoff for an individual to cheat the system, so you need to create pretty huge penalties for doing so.

It's all about game theory and/or basic economics.

alonzinator: Can I get fries with that?

Yes. That's why I double-majored. I realized halfway through how useless my degree would be.

Easy, though.

When a self proclaimed "conservative" starts telling you what "the Left" thinks, it's a pretty good sign that he's not a conservative in any meaningful sense, besides perhaps socially.

Skleenar: Ruca: Communism, in its inherent principles, isn't all that bad.

You will elicit many a post disputing this contention

Me being one of them. I find communism pretty reprehensible.

fascism is still ok though, right?

Skail: Blah. Everytime I hear some idiot conservative tell me what I apparently think, he's always so far off that I feel I should slap him out of principle.

Agreed.

Let us face it, we're the world's biggest strawman for them.

Nightmaretony: Let us face it, we're the world's biggest strawman for them.

Honest disputation is not a virtue in many 'conservatives' books.

Skleenar: Nightmaretony: Let us face it, we're the world's biggest strawman for them.

Honest disputation is not a virtue in many 'conservatives' books.

well, to be honest, it isn't in very many peoples books regardless of how they label themselves.

/and if you disagree, you're just being a retard

"Reasonably Priced Tibet!"

burndtdan: /and if you disagree, you're just being a retard

Why do you hate the mentally challenged so much?

/I actually agree, but I do think there is a disproportionate representation of dishonest disputants on the right. I don't necessarily think that this is an intrinsic position, but more one that is due to the fact that recent events (read: The Bush Administration) have made it all but impossible for honest disputants to retain their positions.

Dead for Tax Reasons: fascism is still ok though, right?



Looks like you need one of these!

Suddenly?

Dead for Tax Reasons: fascism is still ok though, right?

Good enough for the current US administration.

/And China isn't "communist".

DamnYankees: There's nothing 'communist' about the colonization of Tibet.

Agreed. Communism is simply a socioeconomic system that incorporates a classless society with common ownership of all resources.

The takeover of Tibet was a hostile and uninvited land grab by a government that just happened to be Communist. However, even Republics have been known to have expansionist aspirations, as seen from the days of Rome to modern expansion by the United States.


Ruca: Communism, in its inherent principles, isn't all that bad.

It is an interesting idea in theory. However, it is a horrible idea in practice.

Communism almost always invites a totalitarian government given that it takes one to forcefully take property from others.

Furthermore, human nature always subverts the principal behind Communism. Although people are supposed to be equal under its watch, eventually, a subset of people always end up being MORE EQUAL than others.


You could argue that Tibet is better off with the Chinese in there. The Dalai Lama and his religious institutions essentially ran Tibet as an authoritarian theocracy. Buddhist monks had a higher standing in the country while peasants toiled and labored in misery beneath them.

Under the Chinese, Tibet has modernized and improved in numerous ways. Life may still suck for ethnic Tibetans due to issues of racism and marginalization, but at least they're being drug along into the 21st century.

No, those of us on the left have the capacity to differentiate between real crimes and actual threats, and specious claims and perceived threats.

Dinjiin: You could argue that Tibet is better off with the Chinese in there. The Dalai Lama and his religious institutions essentially ran Tibet as an authoritarian theocracy. Buddhist monks had a higher standing in the country while peasants toiled and labored in misery beneath them.

Under the Chinese, Tibet has modernized and improved in numerous ways. Life may still suck for ethnic Tibetans due to issues of racism and marginalization, but at least they're being drug along into the 21st century.

This is an argument you hear very often from Chinese (my girlfriend being one of them), and one some level it makes sense, and it somewhat attractive. The problem is that is basically says its ok to control and enslave someone as long as you treat them well.

It's easy to say the Tibetans are better off as long as you don't consider "independence" and "self-determination" to be core values, or at least not very important ones. In many ways, saying Tibetans are better off is sort of like saying black slaves were better off in America. It actually might have been true in a purely materialistic sense (and it almost certainly is true for black Americans nowadays), but its a pretty wretching defense of an horrible action.

DamnYankees: What does this have to do with communism? There's nothing 'communist' about the colonization of Tibet.

this.

DamnYankees: It's easy to say the Tibetans are better off as long as you don't consider "independence" and "self-determination" to be core values, or at least not very important ones.

LOL. Give me Liberty or give me Death a 3G cellphone.

Not gonna happen.

DamnYankees: The problem is that is basically says its ok to control and enslave someone as long as you treat them well.

See: European expansion into the United States and Canada.


North America is the modern powerhouse that it is because the Europeans came in, kicked the crap out of the locals, forced them onto reservations and dictated how they could live.

Is it a suck story? Of course it is. But if the aboriginals could have killed off the Pilgrims like they did the Vikings in Newfoundland a few centuries before, and managed to keep them out, this continent would most likely be a third world shiate hole.

Ask most people what they think of how Europeans colonized American and they'll usually give you a negative answer. Yet in the end, none of them are willing to pack up their belonging and move back to the old country.

Communism, in its inherent principles, isn't all that bad.

True, however, when those inherent principles inevitably lead to negative consequences then whether they are 'inherently' bad or not is moot. What matters is that it always goes totally farking tits up.

Note: This does not change the fact that submitter is an idiot who was possibly raped in the brain as a child.

Under the Chinese, Tibet has modernized and improved in numerous ways.

Tibet has 'improved' for the Chinese people who moved there, not so much for the dead Tibetans.

Skleenar: Why do you hate the mentally challenged so much?

because of their monopoly on hugs and free ice cream

DamnYankees:The problem U.S. stance is that is basically says its OK for an ally such as France to control and enslave someone Viet Nam as long as you treat them well, regardless of the fact they declared independence.

/ftfy

Communism, in its inherent principles, isn't all that bad.

False. I doubt you know what its inherent principles really are. The short story is that they're completely batshiat insane.

Also.. There is no such thing as "authoritarian capitalism"! That's an oxymoron.

amindtat: DamnYankees:The problem U.S. stance is that is basically says its OK for an ally such as France to control and enslave someone Viet Nam as long as you treat them well, regardless of the fact they declared independence.

/ftfy

What a relevant response.