If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Time)   The Chinese government reminds us that political figures "are not Gods", noting that Mao was 30% evil while Reagan was more like 70%   (world.time.com) divider line 41
    More: Obvious, Chinese, political figure, Great Hall of the People, People's Republic of China, gods, evils  
•       •       •

716 clicks; posted to Politics » on 27 Dec 2013 at 11:19 AM (38 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



41 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest
 
2013-12-27 08:28:49 AM
An interesting question: who was more badass, the pretend cowboy president or the violent revolutionary?
 
2013-12-27 09:03:03 AM

Voiceofreason01: An interesting question: who was more badass, the pretend cowboy president or the violent revolutionary?


Well let's see. Mao caused the deaths of 40,000,000 (possibly far more) and Regan spent too much bankrupting the Soviets. So yeah, pretty hard to answer.
 
vpb [TotalFark]
2013-12-27 09:23:28 AM
flucto:

Well let's see. Mao caused the deaths of 40,000,000 (possibly far more) and Brezhnev Regan spent too much bankrupting the Soviets. So yeah, pretty hard to answer.

FTFY.
 
2013-12-27 09:38:14 AM

vpb: Well let's see. Mao caused the deaths of 40,000,000 (possibly far more) and Brezhnev let Regan force the Soviets into spending too much, bankrupting then. So yeah, pretty hard to answer.


He gets some credit here, even a small minority didn't like him.
 
2013-12-27 09:44:55 AM

flucto: Voiceofreason01: An interesting question: who was more badass, the pretend cowboy president or the violent revolutionary?

Well let's see. Mao caused the deaths of 40,000,000 (possibly far more) and Regan spent too much bankrupting the Soviets. So yeah, pretty hard to answer.



That's just because Reagan liked to keep poor people alive, so he could watch them suffer. Like a kid who won't even squash a fly after he tears off its wings.
Besides, no matter how evil you are, you can't be expected to kill millions of people when you sleep 20 hours a day.
 
2013-12-27 11:30:56 AM
70% good? Better watch your Mao, China!
 
2013-12-27 11:31:35 AM
Is this the Chinese equivalent of Fox News or something?
 
2013-12-27 11:32:55 AM
If you think Reagan is more evil than Chairman Mao, you ain't gonna make it with anyone, anyhow. Don't you know it's gonna be alright?
 
2013-12-27 11:35:21 AM

Voiceofreason01: An interesting question: who was more badass, the pretend cowboy president or the violent revolutionary?


Yeah seriously, subby is way out of line.  As much as people can say Reagan farked over America, it's nowhere near what Mao did to China.
 
2013-12-27 11:42:30 AM
I like 70% ChairMao, that's the fancy stuff. Even better when it's got chilies or lime or somesuch.
 
2013-12-27 11:53:30 AM
I was only in China once, for two weeks in one big city that tourists don't visit much, six years ago. The only time I ran into anything referencing Mao was at a theme restaurant that treated Mao and his whole era as camp -- posters on the walls, the waitstaff wore those old outfits and randomly shouted revolutionary slogans. If only they'd had animatronics, it would have been Mao Zedong as Chuck E. Cheese.
 
2013-12-27 11:58:24 AM
Great men are almost always bad men -  Lord Acton
 
2013-12-27 12:08:41 PM

Nabb1: If you think Reagan is more evil than Chairman Mao, you ain't gonna make it with anyone, anyhow. Don't you know it's gonna be alright?


But I said I want a revolution.
 
2013-12-27 12:13:41 PM
The headline seems to be implying that gods can't be evil.
 
2013-12-27 12:15:58 PM

nyseattitude: Nabb1: If you think Reagan is more evil than Chairman Mao, you ain't gonna make it with anyone, anyhow. Don't you know it's gonna be alright?

But I said I want a revolution.


You'd better free your mind instead.
 
2013-12-27 12:35:10 PM
Say what you will about tenets of maoism, but at least they had an ethos.
 
2013-12-27 12:42:18 PM
Sounds about right.  I have heard, from sources I trust, that the Russians' own internal records show that they were ready and willing to throw in the towel on the Cold War much earlier than ended up happening.  However, they were so apprehensive about Reagan's mental stability (to the point where they believed that he might actually attack if they looked like they were folding), that they went to extraordinary lengths to keep the USSR staggering along as long as possible.

So, if this is indeed correct, rather than 'ending' the Cold War, Reagan's lunacy only served to *prolong* it for several more years.
 
2013-12-27 12:56:14 PM
I wonder if this is also a subtle hint to the North Koreans that their leaders are just people too?  I'm sure the N. Koreans can pick up radio and TV broadcasts from China.
 
2013-12-27 12:56:58 PM
No doubt some intellectual wannabe jerk-off will use this as in an attempt to draw parallels between the US & China by saying; "See even the Chinese don't put their politicians on a pedestal. "
 
2013-12-27 01:14:58 PM
All these threads mean to me is 'HURR DURR YOU LIBURULS SUPPORT COMMUNIST DICK TATORS DURRR"

stop submitting Mao articles, subby. We get it. You hate liberals, and you loved Reagan.
 
2013-12-27 04:20:02 PM

whidbey: All these threads mean to me is 'HURR DURR YOU LIBURULS SUPPORT COMMUNIST DICK TATORS DURRR"

stop submitting Mao articles, subby. We get it. You hate liberals, and you loved Reagan.


meowhearthis.files.wordpress.com

Not so funny Mao, is it?
 
2013-12-27 04:21:10 PM
Off your meds again whidbey?
 
2013-12-27 04:24:29 PM
Well the last time the Chinese went crazy over Mao they sent most of their intellectuals to prison and destroyed whatever cultural artifacts they had in the name of "progress".

I'd be worried too if people stated worshipping the Old Ones again.
 
2013-12-27 04:26:59 PM

Farker Soze: Off your meds again whidbey?


There's bias against his side EVERYWHERE and it's his mission to correct all of it.
 
2013-12-27 04:41:13 PM

Nicholas D. Wolfwood: Sounds about right.  I have heard, from sources I trust, that the Russians' own internal records show that they were ready and willing to throw in the towel on the Cold War much earlier than ended up happening.  However, they were so apprehensive about Reagan's mental stability (to the point where they believed that he might actually attack if they looked like they were folding), that they went to extraordinary lengths to keep the USSR staggering along as long as possible.

So, if this is indeed correct, rather than 'ending' the Cold War, Reagan's lunacy only served to *prolong* it for several more years.


And when Bush Sr. did end the Cold War he was dropped like a hot potato and basically scrubbed out of History.

Funny that.
 
2013-12-27 04:44:57 PM

whidbey: All these threads mean to me is 'HURR DURR YOU LIBURULS SUPPORT COMMUNIST DICK TATORS DURRR"

stop submitting Mao articles, subby. We get it. You hate liberals, and you loved Reagan.


Whatever kinda crazy you are, it must have a totally awesome long Latin name associated with it.
 
2013-12-27 04:46:04 PM

DiarrheaVanFrank: whidbey: All these threads mean to me is 'HURR DURR YOU LIBURULS SUPPORT COMMUNIST DICK TATORS DURRR"

stop submitting Mao articles, subby. We get it. You hate liberals, and you loved Reagan.

[meowhearthis.files.wordpress.com image 512x288]

Not so funny Mao, is it?


I love that bit.
 
2013-12-27 04:46:52 PM

Nicholas D. Wolfwood: Sounds about right.  I have heard, from sources I trust, that the Russians' own internal records show that they were ready and willing to throw in the towel on the Cold War much earlier than ended up happening.  However, they were so apprehensive about Reagan's mental stability (to the point where they believed that he might actually attack if they looked like they were folding), that they went to extraordinary lengths to keep the USSR staggering along as long as possible.

So, if this is indeed correct, rather than 'ending' the Cold War, Reagan's lunacy only served to *prolong* it for several more years.


Any sources? I recall a Russian friend from college saying that the average Russian was doing pretty well in the 70's, at least economically, and that the decline really came in the 80's.  That doesn't mean Reagan or Bush necessarily should get the credit (Gorbachev probably deserves it as much as any man) but I'm skeptical about this counterfactual.
 
2013-12-27 04:52:25 PM

Arkanaut: Nicholas D. Wolfwood: Sounds about right.  I have heard, from sources I trust, that the Russians' own internal records show that they were ready and willing to throw in the towel on the Cold War much earlier than ended up happening.  However, they were so apprehensive about Reagan's mental stability (to the point where they believed that he might actually attack if they looked like they were folding), that they went to extraordinary lengths to keep the USSR staggering along as long as possible.

So, if this is indeed correct, rather than 'ending' the Cold War, Reagan's lunacy only served to *prolong* it for several more years.

Any sources? I recall a Russian friend from college saying that the average Russian was doing pretty well in the 70's, at least economically, and that the decline really came in the 80's.  That doesn't mean Reagan or Bush necessarily should get the credit (Gorbachev probably deserves it as much as any man) but I'm skeptical about this counterfactual.


Dude... It's a guy he trusts.  That's good enough for me.
 
2013-12-27 05:22:31 PM
Ontos: Arkanaut:  Nicholas D. Wolfwood: Sounds about right.  I have heard, from sources I trust, that the Russians' own internal records show that they were ready and willing to throw in the towel on the Cold War much earlier than ended up happening.  However, they were so apprehensive about Reagan's mental stability (to the point where they believed that he might actually attack if they looked like they were folding), that they went to extraordinary lengths to keep the USSR staggering along as long as possible.

So, if this is indeed correct, rather than 'ending' the Cold War, Reagan's lunacy only served to *prolong* it for several more years.

Any sources? I recall a Russian friend from college saying that the average Russian was doing pretty well in the 70's, at least economically, and that the decline really came in the 80's.  That doesn't mean Reagan or Bush necessarily should get the credit (Gorbachev probably deserves it as much as any man) but I'm skeptical about this counterfactual.

Dude... It's a guy he  trusts.  That's good enough for me.


I wasn't trying to troll or to be disingenuous.  I didn't list primary sources, because I don't have them.  I got the word from a friend of mine, a (former Navy) buddy who makes digging through this kind of stuff his hobby.  I've seen him be right about things often enough that, as I said, I trust him.

You will note, please, that unlike some posters, I did *not* come in here and state these things as *fact*.  I put the relevant qualifiers on my statements, and in fact, was kinda hoping that some of the well-read and well-educated folks here *could* point me at the primary sources.

The sad fact is that life is too short for me to go around re-verifying every last thing I run across.  I don't spend time double-checking things like election results or physical constants, either.  At some point, I consider my sources and take things as given, and if and when any particular matter rises from idle curiosity to something that has a more direct impact on me, *then* I will expend some lifespan on looking into it more deeply.

So, if you're disappointed, my apologies.  If you think the point I brought out is interesting and worthy of consideration, then by all means, let's research it.  But for me, although these threads are an often-interesting pastime, I don't intend to make a doctoral dissertation out of each of my posts.  There are people here who are quite skilled at marshalling facts and references, and I stand in awe of them.  More power to them.

... Anybody here have the skinny on this whole 'Russians vs. Reagan' thing?  If I'm wrong, I'm more than willing to admit it.
 
2013-12-27 07:28:31 PM

vpb: flucto:

Well let's see. Mao caused the deaths of 40,000,000 (possibly far more) and Brezhnev Regan spent too much bankrupting the Soviets. So yeah, pretty hard to answer.

FTFY.

You know who else he bankrupted?

 
2013-12-27 07:35:12 PM
On Carter, Ford and Nixon:

See no evil, hear no evil, and Evil. -- Bob Dole

That's one thing I love about Republicans. You don't have to say anything bad about them. You can just quote them.
 
2013-12-27 07:38:15 PM

PC LOAD LETTER: Is this the Chinese equivalent of Fox News or something?



All Red Chinese State News is the equivalent of Fox News or something. China and Murdock have had a love-hate relationship for a long time. They're so much alike they can't stand each other--or say good-bye.
 
2013-12-27 07:39:42 PM

brantgoose: On Carter, Ford and Nixon:

See no evil, hear no evil, and Evil. -- Bob Dole

That's one thing I love about Republicans. You don't have to say anything bad about them. You can just quote them.


There's internal disagreements in parties all the time. A complete hivemind would be more scary.
 
2013-12-27 08:52:21 PM

phaseolus: I was only in China once, for two weeks in one big city that tourists don't visit much, six years ago. The only time I ran into anything referencing Mao


Never touched a renminbi, huh?
 
2013-12-27 10:09:05 PM

Nogrhi: The headline seems to be implying that gods can't be evil.


In total agreement with SG-1 apparently. They don't want to say the Ori are gods, so they... point out how evil they are. (Don't want to offend religious people I guess)
 
2013-12-27 11:35:25 PM
Xi has to step on the Mao enthusiasts because the Party is in danger of a neo-Maoist uprising to clean out the corrupt nouveau riche Party members. I don't know if he will succeed.
 
2013-12-28 03:39:22 AM

Ontos: whidbey: All these threads mean to me is 'HURR DURR YOU LIBURULS SUPPORT COMMUNIST DICK TATORS DURRR"

stop submitting Mao articles, subby. We get it. You hate liberals, and you loved Reagan.

Whatever kinda crazy you are, it must have a totally awesome long Latin name associated with it.


How is it "crazy" to peg you spot-on?
 
2013-12-28 09:57:53 AM

whidbey: Ontos: whidbey: All these threads mean to me is 'HURR DURR YOU LIBURULS SUPPORT COMMUNIST DICK TATORS DURRR"

stop submitting Mao articles, subby. We get it. You hate liberals, and you loved Reagan.

Whatever kinda crazy you are, it must have a totally awesome long Latin name associated with it.

How is it "crazy" to peg you spot-on?


Your type of crazy comes from the whole mouth-frothy "Grrr... So ANGRY!" schtick you've got going on.

It's cute.  Keep on rock'in it.
 
2013-12-28 11:24:05 AM

MNguy: phaseolus: I was only in China once, for two weeks in one big city that tourists don't visit much, six years ago. The only time I ran into anything referencing Mao

Never touched a renminbi, huh?



Hey, it was a long time ago, and who really pays attention to faces on paper money, anyway?
 
2013-12-28 01:30:57 PM

GentlemanJ: Xi has to step on the Mao enthusiasts because the Party is in danger of a neo-Maoist uprising to clean out the corrupt nouveau riche Party members. I don't know if he will succeed.


China has 200 billionaires (in US $) who cant use Bitcoin anymore. Somethins gotta give.

The veneration of politicians is a mental disease. Naming things after politicians is always wrong because it enshrines them, glossing over their crimes. All politicians are whores.
 
Displayed 41 of 41 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report