US Features
Communism is target of new online museum
Jun 16, 2009, 12:03 GMT
Washington - Twenty years after the fall of the Berlin Wall, a group of historians and survivors is working to continue the fight against communism using the internet.
Organizers of the new online Global Museum on Communism will webcast the launch of their site from Washington into communist nations at 7:30 pm (2330 GMT) Tuesday from a reception at the Romanian ambassador's residence.
'We will be streaming through the internet into China, Vietnam and Cuba,' Lee Edwards, chairman of the Victims of Communism Memorial Foundation, told the German Press Agency dpa in a telephone interview.
Donors include some Eastern European governments, private foundations and nearly 1,000 individual contributors.
The non-profit foundation works to educate 'this generation and future generations about the history, philosophy and legacy of communism,' including its estimated 100 million civilian fatalities, possibly more, according to its website.
Edwards cited new technology that will allow the webcast to 'overcome the Great Firewalls of China.'
The same 'firewall-busting' protocols recently helped another group, Initiatives for China, to conduct a 30-day online forum for people in China to freely discuss the advancement of democracy in their country over the internet, said Jim Geheran, director of the group's Washington office.
Initiatives for China was founded by Harvard graduate and Tiananmen Square survivor Yang Jianli to advocate a peaceful transition to democracy in China.
The online museum will feature testimonials from people who have lived under communist rule and essays by historians.
The website aims to keep the crimes of communist regimes from being forgotten - especially as a new generation is coming of age during the US-led war on terrorism.
'We're determined to educate young people about communism, and to do that you need to go online,' Edwards said. One feature pitched especially to young people is the 'Gallery of Heroes' - where you can click on a picture for a biography with video or audio.
The gallery includes US presidents Ronald Reagan and Harry S Truman, Nobel Peace Prize-winner and former president of Poland Lech Walesa and author and former Czech president Vaclav Havel. Both Walesa and Havel are on the foundation's international advisory council.
'If you're looking for the dark side, you'll be able to see the 'Hall of Infamy': Pol Pot, Mao, Lenin, Stalin,' Edwards said.
He also hopes the site will be used to communicate with and educate those who are still living under communist rule.
Videos available on the preview website include a Vietnamese woman's testimonial about escaping the fall of Saigon and collections of historic news footage from communist countries.
These videos feature images of pro-Stalin rallies, prison camps, the fall of the Berlin Wall and the Chinese protestor who blocked the tank in Tiananmen Square. The images are edited together, sometimes tinted red and accompanied by dark and ominous music.
Edwards said the emotional impact of the website is part of its goal.
'If you look at the dictionary, it defines communism as a social system ... a dry, pedantic definition,' Edwards said. 'No gulags, no purges, no killing fields. (We) need to need to fill out the definition of communism.'
Organizers say the website is the second phase of the foundation's three-part plan to 'memorialize, educate and document the grim legacy of global communism.'
The first phase was the dedication of the Victims of Communism Memorial in Washington in June 2007 by former president George W Bush and survivors of communist rule in Belarus and Vietnam. That statue is a replica of one carved by Chinese students and erected in Tiananmen Square in 1989.
The online museum represents the education phase, and the third phase calls for the creation of a physical United States Museum of Communism in Washington.
For now, Edwards said, 'the online museum will keep us fairly busy.' The website will initially focus on ten countries that are now or were once under communist rule.
'We'll add to them,' Edwards said, 'and hopefully inspire someone to build a museum and library in (Washington).'
Project donors include members of the Baltic-American and Vietnamese-American communities, with additional money from the governments of Latvia, Lithuania, Estonia, Taiwan, the Czech Republic and others, Edwards said.
While the foundation accepted land from the US government for the statue in Washington they have not accepted any funding for their projects.
Asked whether a museum about communism was still relevant in the age of al-Qaeda, Edwards said it was important to understand communism so it doesn't resurge.
'It also hasn't really gone away ... the US is intimately connected with China, Cuba and North Korea, and you must understand who you are dealing with,' Edwards said.
COMMENT
blog comments powered by DisqusLatest Headlines in US
- 1. Mitt Romney Addresses Tea Party Summit Pictures
- 2. Seven injured as US Navy plane crashes into apartments
- 3. At least three injured in US Navy plane crash
- 4. Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, others to face death penalty trial
- 5. Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, four others to face death penalty trial
Older Talkback
page: 1
It is white christian devil based 'democracy' that is flawed and it is their so-called capitalism that is unraveling right in front of our eyes that are being ridiculed in the majority of countries around the globe. Besides, the so-called western world with their mouth pieces (their 'free' media), their so-called human rights watch and amnesty international and reporters without borders, and now their 'Communism memorial foundation' have NO credibility with the non-western world. NONE whatsoever!!!!
So go ahead and spew your non-sense.
And....we will watch YOUR world drown into the deepest ocean.
The fruit of capitalism tastes even more bitter .You and I are blamed for global warming ,but that is inherent to a system of production that does not care for the consequences of corporate greed but simply denies the problem even exists.
There once was a president ruling for eight yars,one of his first deeds was to discard the Kyoto agreement ,claiming it was contrary to the economical interests of the USA.Immediately the GOP lunatics launched several attacks against the very concept of global warming,much of their lunatic asylum boys not even having the faintest notion of the very thing they claimed to debunk.Now their whole script is unraveling,unfortunately too late for mankind.
www.nytimes.com/cwire/2009/06/17/17climatewire-us-study-projects-how-un equivocal-warming-wi-29186.html
Thanks to Bush bending over to the corporate bastards capitalism is destroying our planet
h
..we democratic nations never murdered the millions of our own citizens in an institutionalized spree like your Stalinist Boshevik buddies in Russia, China, the eastern euro block, Vietnam, etc, or condicted the enthnic cleansings torture, or filled countless gulags with political enemies.
We have never had the food shoratges or famines these nations have and have produced record personal wealth, the highest standard of living over ANY communist nation in history, and achieved milestones no communist nation could ever hope for, all while protecting and embracing personal freedoms.
Now run along and inform yourselves.
I must say, SP, for once I have to agree with your comment.
Did you really mention Vietnam ?
You forgot Guatemala,Chile,Iran,Congo,Iraq,Bolivia,Nicaragua,Granada,Cuba, Argentina ,Panama ,El Salvador ,Indonesia,the Philippines and a few other countries in which your government either intervened of fought leaving millions of people dead too over the last 5 decades.And shall we not forget HItler,Mussolini , Franco and Salazaras your heroes of capitalism ?
Fortunately all this now is history just as stalinism is .
Contemporary society and the future don't look too bright to me and capitalism is the cause to that:the greed of corporate business is stalling the implementations of measures that can save us.Their profit is more important to them than our lives.
you say:
We have never had the food shoratges or famines these nations have and have produced record personal wealth, the highest standard of living over ANY communist nation in history,
Though luck for you ,the UN issued a statement yesterday that 1.000.000.000 people are suffering from hunger thanks to the worldwide economical crisis .In what kind of fairy tale are you living ?
www.onpointradio.org/2008/12/hunger-in-america
..are in the democratic, free, nations that either are, or trade partners, of the United States, and those that are, usually have terrible corruption. Now run along and find out where they are, and then look at the governments that govern them. Let me just do some guessing for you, as advance work. Check:
'Asia'...!
'Africa....?ya think?
'india.....(a democratic nation in name only)'
'S. Ameirca...
God, even monkey boy #12 isn't THAT stupid...and he's pretty f--king stupid!
I suppose a democratic government means a GOP government for you ?
I'd love to hear your definition of democracy ,why India is not.And you might as well tell us what malnutrition has to do with democracy .You are obviously ignorant of the world outside 'hicksville' USA .
In many cases where food is grown, it is often for exports. In some cases, while local people may be going hungry, they are growing food to export for the hard cash that would be earned. The increasingly export-oriented economies are being promoted by the wealthier Northern countries and the international institutions that they have strong influence over, the IMF and World Bank...
That is called capitalism.
I poop on America
I wouldn't do that if I were you,it would empty your head.
...if you sit down, pour a drink, and do some deductive reasoning, you will examine the facts and realize the nations with democratic governments are not the one's with the most glaring malnutrition. Zimbabwe is just a stellar example, once being the bread basket of Africa, now reduced by totalitarainism, racism and corruption to a mass of, ignorant malnurished racists.
Boo f--king hoo
China is another stellar example: in the late sixtes, secret overflights looking for a N. Vietnamese resupply discovered mass starvation as the result of a failed communist government, which motivated Nixon to make his historic overtures, and China to adopt the reforms that lifted, conservatively ( a nice word), what is now 400 million people, from some of the worst poverty on the planet. This little fact is almost ignored in the world and for good reason: if it were not, the world would RUN, not walk, to private enterprise, free markets and the economic miricle of the 20th century, started by Nixon, Carter and Bush and Clinton (one AND two). The fastest growing economy in the world is China....all due to the freedoms in their economy. Their personal freedoms are next.
Now, the boy king in the not-so white house seems to think 149 days in the Senate makes him the Keynes of his age, ignoring the above.
Freedom, professor, freedom.
Since capitalism is proving to be no longer working for America there seem to be some idiots trying to deflect attention away from that fact.
Capitalism is based on greed and that nurtures fraud, corruption, and outright thievery.
Take the US capitalist system for example it is with its mere money printing and bailouts itself a giant ponzy scheme.
The so-called EU its 27 members are competing which is in more dire financial and economic state. There too capitalism has failed them and has become a hindrance to progress.
So, I laugh at the idiots who are trying to 'sell' to the world that their capitalism is soo wunderbare.
Capitalism STILL produced the most productive workers in the world, the weathiest nations,with the highest standards of living, so I'd have to file your comments under the heading 'you-are-more-than-just-a-little full-of crap.
..people KNOW when it's really me.
You, like your posts, stink like sh*t.
See? Monkey boy, the stupidest person here, even knows the difference. Now run along, monkey boy, and try to inform yourself.
Haiti :capitalist country;Cuba socialist country .
Guess which one I prefer to live if I must choose .
And guess where you find the best health care,social securit,health care.Answer :NOT in the USA.
...but Haiti is not really a democratic nation. Once you grow up, you'll realize corrupt regiemes are really totalitarian ones. As for Cuba, Americans have a saying: 'no one is trying to build a boat to go back to Cuba.'
Now run along and inform yourself.
Negative growth for so-called united states for two years in a row. YEAH DIE BITCH!
tAKE THAT BITCH
..because a marxist nation (China) adopted Capitalism in order to lift itself from the worst poverty in the world, and is now the fastest growing economy on earth.
Now run along and inform yourself.
'adopted Capitalism'
Since when, a-hole. It is still a Communist country, internally. It uses capitalism when dealing with the outside world. This is no different than what Communist Russia did. F*ck, are you ever an idiot.
I think something to remind us of Communism is a great idea. A sort of 'Unnatural History Museum' as it were.
Perhaps a theme park next!
Everyone could be given an identical 'standard comrade' sized Boiler suit at the entrance, guaranteed not to fit and, say, $500 worth of 'peoples recreation' coupons in return for however much they had on them at the gate, to spend on the rides. Not actually go on them of course, as they'd all be broke. But folk could get the feel of the era by queuing up for them for several hours each before trudging on to look at the next one. Loudspeakers could transmit very bad martial music, inspiring Soviet era statistics and anti-Disney propaganda about the 'Pirates of the Carribean' feature having sunk every thirty seconds. The cafe would advertise Smoked Salmon, Beluga Caviar, and Fillet Steak. After enjoying the five hour queuing experiece, prospective diners would then be handed very small but socialistically identical helpings of Beetroot Soup.
The entire place could be surrounded by a thick, 20 foot high concrete wall festooned with barbed wire and machine gun nests to provide an authentic Gulag or Berlin Wall feel. This would be advertised as necessary to safeguard the ideological purity of the site and to prevent hordes of starving western escapees trying to enter the revolutionary paradise.
At 6pm each day a section of the wall would be knocked over and the tourists would emerge back into the real world, still clutching their unspendable coupons and nearly having lost the will to live.
Just like the real thing! I can hardly wait to avoid it. Still the museum is a brilliant idea!
AND, SP, SP! Have you noticed! Some of the exhibits can TALK to us!
STALINTASTIC!
..I have to say you put some real thought into it. I'd like to see a ride called 'Enchantment Under the Sea..Comrade!' where political prisoners would be herded onto barges and then the barge sunk like Stalin did. Other ideas would be 'reeducation camps' of the kind in Vietnam where western collaborators are starved and worked to death, or 'guest workers paradise' where a train transports you to Siberia to work on the Tran-Siberian pipline. Visitors would then get complimentery Euro's, to remind them of the skeletens of the dead who died to keep their homes warm.
Golly, sooo many other things come to mind....an ethnic cleasing wing of the Museum, showing Montagnards forced to marry Asians, numerous others lynched and shot..a whole Eastern Europe exhibit for that wing...with free bus trips right to the actuazl spots only a few years old!
I'm working on another masterpiece now called 'Obmamabomba'
Why thanks, SP. In truth it just flew off the keyboard, but I take little pride in that. Communism is hardly difficult to poke fun at. The only wonder is, that after millions of deaths, oppression on a scale that surpassed Hitlers, rank hypocrisy, the stifling of all human aspiration and the abject failure of pure centrally planned economies everywhere, some people can still be found who seem to want to repeat the disaster.
Capitalism has its faults to be sure but can anyone really maintain that the soulless hell of Communism was to be preferred in any respect!
...I remember the cold war days when, with the utmost civility, William Buckley would dismember some Bolshevik on PBS, leaving him looking like an ass. My favorite was the guy extolling the virtues of Chinese Marxism as he subtly reminded him that it took 85 people to feed each 100 of the overpadded automatons Mao called citizens, while he retreated to his palace and diddle 14 year olds, one after another, like he was in Bangkok instead of mainland China.
In other debates, he denuded countless liberals who poo poo'ed the conservative base's utter will, and success, to defeat communism and after doing it, tired to take credit for it themselves, like Carter has repeatedly done.
Castro, Kim and other so called 'communists' i.e. marxist monarchists, actually have millions in personal wealth, while they preach collective wealth to the masses. Separate health care, consumer access, rights, even separate money (cuba) defines the true reality of communism, far worse than any lopsidedness in the west.
Limbaugh, no matter what you may think of him, is undeniably correct in his opinion that the liberal elite loves communism because they envy it's ability to force its will upon its subjects. Afet all, one doe not have to care about the success of an economy if there is no voice to oppose them. Nonetheless, people like this current shepard we have in the not-so white house embraced Marxism in his youth and it still guides him today.
I've always been highly amused that a system like communism, directed supposedly at the attainment of some dubious and theoretical absolute equality, nevertheless always seems to lead directly to dictatorship and blatant leader-worship. Lenin, Stalin, Mao, Castro, Pol Pot, Kim Il Sung, and now Kim Jong Il, who I usually call 'Kim Kong Kill.' Even Ceaucescu; 'til they shot him!
And with Fidel and Kim getting a bit shaky who looks set to inherit? Castro's brother has already been installed. Kim is grooming his youngest son for the succession. So before too long the world will be able to look in wonder upon a third generation Marxist Monarch. Actually, 'King' does not even begin to describe these people. No British ruler since Magna Carta ever enjoyed such absolute, untrammelled power. Or even before, when back into Saxon times, the King was still bound by custom and Law. These people are more like some ancient potentates. Their sovereignty is a very personal affair and they rule largely by whim! They are 'God-Kings.'
A good parallel is Ptolemaic Egypt (The famous Cleopatra VII was the last ruler of the dynasty). Ptolemy I was 'Soter' (The Saviour). Ptolemy II; 'Philadelphus' (The Brotherly Loving). His son, Ptolemy III (surprise, surprise) was 'Euergetes' (The Benefactor or Prosperity-Bestowing). Cleo herself was 'Thea Neotera' (The New Goddess).
All sounds very, very familiar, doesn't it?
To move on, I fail to see how Carter can claim anything other than complete disaster. American prestige under him reached a postwar low. It was the Gipper who stood up to the Soviets. Assisted ably by Maggie, he checked them, forced them onto the back foot, contained them and encouraged their oppressed peoples until their rotten system collapsed under the weight of its own contradictions. All through the process, Leftist 'intellectuals' whined and gibbered about US and British 'aggression' and 'nuclear provocation' and 'failure to engage with Soviet concerns'. Why don't you ask the Poles, East Germans or Czechs? I used to say, wearing my 'Cruise On!' T shirt.
I always liked Reagan's response when asked why he did not do more to cultivate good relations with individual Soviet leaders. 'I'd like to' he replied, 'but they keep dying on me.'
Limbaugh has a point. Possibly somewhat overstated but there are some in 'the liberal elite' who are at least a tad nostalgic about Communism. The cuddly, idealistic, touchy-feely theoretical version of course. Some do 'envy it's ability to force its will upon its subjects' though they would not phrase it like that. I think the most that many of them aspire to is the creation of a social market economy in the USA. Some ordinary Americans would support that: And it does have its good side. Nevertheless, people need to be made aware of the downsides too. The high marginal tax rates, huge inefficient arrogant bureaucracy, misspent money and meddlesome, nannying governmental interference in peoples private lives that inevitably goes with it.
Obama is probably the most left wing president you've had. In fact, though, after the first month or two the reality of his responsibilities seems to have hit him. He made a rod for his own back with Gitmo, for example, but his practical policy is not too different from Bush's; apart from the accompanying rhetoric. One after another of Bush's measures have been reinstituted. Now I see the indefinite detention matter is back on the agenda too. Another one of Dubya's orders to be revived, this time, a tad ironically, supported by the Civil Liberties people on the grounds that a legislative solution would be harder to reverse later. Ooooh! Yet another thing that didn't seem to occur to them before, when they screamed their heads off at GW about it. Ah well, live and learn, live and learn, eh?
(Haven't seen Tonny here for some time, by the way. Pity. Now that, as I foresaw, indefinite detention without trial looks very much like what's going to happen, I'd LOVE to ask him about his 'stance anent the policy of the present US administration' today!)
Is using America and ONLY the parts of its capitalism just like it is using that part of communism that works for CHINA.
The key here is: U S I N G
We will continue to take advantage of and use America for as long as it suits us.
''We will continue to take advantage of and use America for as long as it suits us.''
Said the flea to the dog.
Sorry truebrit;I don't like to participate in propaganda wars,even if they are based on ignorance and being brainwashed (SP4) or you (being biased).
Your observations are correct but you very conveniently leave out all the stuff that gets in your way.You should perhaps start by analysing the conditions that existed in Russia and China before the revolutions annex civil wars that created these so called communist countries.In none of those countries there was a developed industry,none of the two had a middle class worth mentioning,an educated mass of people,a transport infrastructure ,electricity.With such poor prerequisites it is impossible to create a modern nation with mass production,a transport infrastructure,modern agriculture,education ,media etc.
Russia was completely bankrupted by the Tsar in the first world war,China was ravaged by warlords and the japanese occupation on top of that.You can compare their situation with some contemporary african counties .Nothing much good can come out of that,yet the Soviet Union managed to build an extensive industry in twenty years that managed to defeat Hitler .That was probably the only positive thing that can be said of Stalin.I would not call any country communist of socialist anywhere in the world .China has become a strange mixture of a free market society heavily regulated by a rigid government and a strict organized financial system.It's growth is spectacular indeed but I think it is a giant on clay feet,totally relying on investment from outside and export .
As for Cuba,compare it with it's neighbours like Haiti and Santo Domingo,that is more fair to it.it used to be ptivate property of the US mafia until it's proxy Batista was ousted by the cubans .It has a n excellent education system and medical infrastructure.Now compare that with it's neighbours in Central America .I's rather be cuban than haitian if I had to choose.
Now have a look at capitalism from a different angle:what is happening with this planet ?
It's natural resources are vanishing very quickly,pollution is hardly fought,carbon emissions and global warming are causing massive transformations in our ecosystem,impairing the future of our children.Now what is the answer of the corporate controlled media to all that ?Denial at first for more than 20 years.Do you really think global warming is just a hoax ,like SP4 ? Or perhaps do you simply think marker mechanisms hold an answer for this problem ?If so share it with the world ,we are still struggling to find answers to that.
Welcome back, Tonny.
'Your observations are correct but you very conveniently leave out all the stuff that gets in your way.'
Not maliciously or deliberately, Tonny. It was simply not germane to the point I was making. Of course I accept that Tsarist Russia or Nationalist China were hardly ideal jumping off points from which a modern, developed economy might reasonably be expected to evolve. (Still, have a look at the industrial development in pre-revolutionary Russia and you may be quite surprised. It was certainly a factor in German strategic planning before WWI.)
Nor, for that matter, was feudal Japan a 'good jumping off point', even after the Meiji restoration. Yet Japan today is a major power with a capitalist economy. South Korea seems to have done rather well, too, compared to it's northern neighbour. How much need I labour this line of reasoning?
I'm inclined to agree with your feet of clay remark about contemporary China, by the way. They may be becoming the workshop of our world but are still shackled by state direction of resources: and reliant upon the economic health and resultant continuing demand fluctuations in the west to maintain growth and amass currency reserves. Internally, their economy is still a bit too 'command' oriented, wouldn't you say? Imagine what they could do if they were able to take the brakes off, allow free capital flows, the development of a mature, autonomous tertiary sector, attract openly international investment into purely Chinese enterprises with a view to better exploiting their vast nascent domestic markets. The Keyword, Tonny, is 'causation.' Try placing 'Direction of' in front of it, and see what you come up with.
Oh, and as you're here, Tonny:
What, in light of recent developments is your current stance anent the present US administration?
I await your response, Monsieur, with bated breath.
Well then...was feudal Japan a 'good jumping off point', even after the Meiji restoration. Yet Japan today is a major power with a capitalist economy.Umphh,need I tell a heir of the british empire how Japan built it's industrial strength?Look on a map of the thirties from the previous century and look at the piece of cake Japan took out of China .It was an empire of it's own ,profiting from the chinese resources and slave labour to boost it's own aspirations .Considering the millions of casualties amongst the chinese population it built it's industrial power in a similar manner europeans did:colonization .After the second world war when it had to rebuild it' industry it profited from the fact that building a new industry from scratch it quickly had at it's disposal the newest machine tools and infrastructure (just as germany in fact );so very quickly the losers became the winners .One has to look at post WW2 England and Belgium to find out that the infrastructure inherited from pre war technology rapidly became obsolete .
As for the present administration in the USA,I'm not naive at all.THe real power is in the hands of corporate tycoons ,the choice between only two candidates already preselected after a fortune consuming campaign never allowed anybody that did not heavily profit from corporate funding to step into the arena ;until now that is .The campaign conducted by Obama is different as it was based on a grass root movement previously unknown in US politics .I guess the internet ha greatly contributed to that .It gave Obama the financial edge in this election over the GOP candidate .However Obama has to present his plans to the Congress and the Senate and that is a very different game .There the lobbies can fully play their games,a good indicator of which is the introduction of modern health care in the USA .serious polls indicate 72 percent of the population want modern single payer health care such as we enjoy in Europe .The present private health care in the USA is the most expensive system in the entire world,it is a burden to every american,the reason for which many of them have lost their house in the crisis .
However many in congress receive campaign contributions from the insurance and pharmaceutical lobbies and stall all progress to modern healthcare,even in the democratic party .Similar mechanisms play in the armament industry too.The big industries involved in armament have wilfully dispersed their plants over every possible state in order to gain support fom every congressman ,waving in their faces eventual lay- off s in their constituency in case the spending gets opposed .
I think it is a near impossible task for any single individual to reform the political landscape .The GOP will not lift a finger to avoid bankrupting the country,their panacea to all problems is reducing taxes,even in a bankrupt state as California that is their only medication . Considering the incredible budget deficit which also means there is very little to invest in a reconversion it is even harder of the democrats to modernize the USA .
What is needed is a reconversion from the armament industry in order to adapt the US society to the challenges of energy production based in low carbon emission.Now,they have the infrastructure,they have the tools and the technology ,the government doesn't have the money to fund it after the catastrophic depletion the state finances by Bush and Cheney to finance the invasion of Iraq.Sooner or later the population will understand that weapons are not consumer goods and producing about 50 percent of the world's arsenal does nothing to improve their comfort,on the contrary .
It will take at least ten years to get eventual new investments to produce tangible results in those domains .Can one single figure accomplish that ?Of course not,the GOP ,wavering democrats the media and the lobbies combined are probably stronger .
As for the industry in Russia previous to 1917 it was entirely concentrated in Petrograd.the working class in Russia ,if one considers those that work in the industry,represented only something like 2.5 percent of the total population .With such small demogaphic footprint the october revolution was doomed from the start .The main reason why such a large part of the population was gained to the bolshevik cause was simply their promess to end the war immediately,at any cost ,which they did indeed.Perhaps Germany has some interest in Russia but it was the Tsar who declared war on Germany ,not the opposite,let us not forget that .
or overlook, or miss entirely, is the fact that there have been no true communist states, ever. If one takes an unbiased, fair look at the systems employed by these countries, it was, in fact, state run capitalism. The revolution under Lenin and Trotsky was hijacked by people like Stalin. All of the states allegedly to be communist are nothing more than personal capitalist fiefdoms. Sort of sounds like america under Bush and Cheney. What ever happened to the continuing american revolution? It died a long time ago under the economic enslavement guise of unbridled capitalistic greed.
“Umphh,need I tell a heir of the british empire how Japan built it's industrial strength?”
No, Tonny. You need not. But perhaps an heir of the British Empire (I like that) can put you straight about how Japan built hers. By the time the militarists took over in Japan she already had a developed economy, a considerable, and growing industrial base, and a mature tertiary sector. Look up the Zaibatsu, Tonny. She achieved this by trade, amassing capital, importing experts from the west, reforming her education system and investing heavily in science and technology; remodelling her entire society from scratch, in fact, along western liberal capitalist lines.
The last ship built abroad for the IJN was launched in 1912, and I should know because it was built in the town I hail from! All subsequent design and construction was entirely Japanese. In less than 50 years they’d gone from junks to super-dreadnoughts. Are you aware of the level of technological sophistication, industrial organisation, secondary and other support services, machine tool industrial capabilities, infrastructure, political stability and financial muscle implied?
Japan did not go looking for an Empire to build her economy. It was her economic and industrial sophistication that allowed her to go and look for an Empire. She was after cheap primary factor inputs. Natural resources to feed her already existent industries. Direction of causation again, Tonny.
“After the second world war when it had to rebuild it' industry it profited from the fact that building a new industry from scratch it quickly had at it's disposal the newest machine tools and infrastructure (just as germany in fact );so very quickly the losers became the winners”
True: And the immense US aid packages helped more than a little, too.
“One has to look at post WW2 England and Belgium to find out that the infrastructure inherited from pre war technology rapidly became obsolete.”
Right again: And there were other factors as well. The perhaps premature creation of large welfare states, overt government interference in the private sector, high marginal tax rates discouraging investment and entrepreneurial endeavour, and in the UK at least –the terrible decline in educational standards that accompanied comprehensivisation.
”THe real power is in the hands of corporate tycoons”
(OOOOOH!)
followed by the somewhat contradictory;
“The campaign conducted by Obama is different as it was based on a grass root movement previously unknown in US politics .I guess the internet ha greatly contributed to that .It gave Obama the financial edge in this election over the GOP candidate.”
Are you seriously suggesting that Barack is not part of the US political class, has no corporate backers of his own, no lobbyists, no slick and professional party machine, and owes his election solely to millions of enlightened, humble but faithful supporters contributing a dollar or two over the net to bolster the holy cause of social righteousness?
How very American of you! Sounds like the plot of one of the “Rocky” movies to me.
“However Obama has to present his plans to the Congress and the Senate and that is a very different game”
Boo Hoo Hoo! So the holy lamb of god is being stymied in his selfless efforts to save Yankdom for social justice by the evil Pharisees of corporate vested interest?
“serious polls indicate 72 percent of the population want modern single payer health care such as we enjoy in Europe”
Of course they do. Now ask them if they want to pay double the income tax, and have thresholds lowered so an extra 10 million or so of them become eligible to be charged it too. Wot? No 72% majority for that? How surprising!
Actually, I’d agree that single payment or NHS type systems can deliver as good a result for less cost, but health finance is a bottomless pit under any regime and we have our own troubles with supporting it in Europe as well.
Oh, and Tonny, people in Europe, certainly in the UK have lost their houses too. They did so for much the same reason as their American counterparts. They borrowed too much, lost their jobs or had hours cut, couldn’t keep up the payments and fell victim to repossession orders. You may recall that the present recession started with a crisis in the US sub-prime mortgage industry. This derived from Fannie and Freddie being leaned on by the Clinton administration to advance credit to bad risks in a drive for affordable housing.
Well! Holy negative equity traps, boy wonder!!
“What is needed is a reconversion….etc”
I am speechless with admiration at how you manage to work Global Warming into almost any debate, but do you really want the Yanks to curtail their military spending that much? After all, they currently protect you for free whilst you yap and preach at them about their reprehensible imperialism. Surely, if continental Europe was forced to spend more than about 1.5% of GDP to do the job for itself, the world would come to an end amidst much wailing and gnashing of teeth about such disgraceful Anglo-Saxon irresponsibility.
“catastrophic depletion the state finances by Bush and Cheney to finance the invasion of Iraq.”
True, but hasn’t the sainted Barack recently made yet another, additional $150 billion + appropriation for Iraq and Afghanistan? Just thought I’d mention it.
I’ll get back to you on Russia, comrade. When I’ve checked my sources. As for Russian entry into WWI, it was largely dictated by the Alliance system that pertained at the time, and a military / political infrastructure and viewpoint that made war an almost inevitable corollary to mobilisation. As far as I recall, the sequence of events was Austria-Hungary declared war on Serbia; Russia ordered general mobilisation; Germany demanded that Russia halt her mobilisation, Russia refused, Germany declared war on Russia and ordered her own general mobilisation, Britain communicated to Germany her willingness to stay neutral if Germany refrained from attacking France, Germany demanded a promise of neutrality from France, France refused to give one, Germany declared war on France, Germany demanded that her troops be allowed to pass through Belgium, Belgium refused, Britain demanded that Germany respect Belgian neutrality, Germany refused and invaded Belgium, Britain declared war on Germany, Austria-Hungary declared war on Russia and a week later, France and Britain declared war on Austria Hungary.
War by timetable, as A.J.P. Taylor termed it.
Toodle pip!
Oh, and to the next poster. Why do you suppose that despite twenty or thirty separate attempts to bring the socialist pardise to earth in various parts of the world it always ends up with Gulags and repression? Western leftists always whine on about a 'Stalin' figure or say the glorious revolution was hijacked or something. In EVERY case?
The truth is far simpler and would be recognised easily by anyone used to experimental science. If you try to do something on twenty different occasions and despite the fact that you have a guidebook and stipulate your objectives in advance, you always seem to end up in an entirely different place, and at that, the same place, every time: Then what does that suggest to you?
Starter for ten?
All this starts to get ramifications all over every history and economical book.So let's concentrate on the important issues,the ones that define the future ,not the past.regarding Obama:I never said there is no corporate backing behind him,nowhere at all.Of course there are.I have no clues yat about which ones so I have to make an educated guess that it is the medium to small enterprises that have a potential of profiting from modern technologies involved in fighting climate change .
Let's name a few losers to start with:the high tech armament industry,aircraft industry,insurance industry,pharmaceuticals perhaps too,investment banks eventually.That is not a small fish,considering the USA spends half of the entire world's budget on armament .The winners are still hiding in the shadow somewhere,probably much smaller entities concentrating on products required to implement the new rules that are to curb the worst effects of global warming .
Obama's victory was an accident of history though,I don't have the figures at hand,anybody can find them quite easily ,but it is a well established fact that the GOP always benefits more from the input of corporate gifts in a political campaign,as well as media goodwill.For every 2 dollars they give to the GOP,they give a dollar to the Dems .
If one analyses the latest presidential election however the amounts of corporate goodwill towards the GOP was largely surpassed by grass root campaign contributions benefiting Obama .His vow to implement euèropean style health care has been an important rallying factor for community based organisations to boost his campaign.The internet was alive and buzzing with these new phenomena .Whatever the traditional media like TV stations and the newspapers wanted to feed the public,the focus was on the internet,mouth to mouth did the rest in urban areas.It was an efficient campaign.
You ask me if US citizens are willing to pay more taxes in order to implement modern health care.Stranger question that is:US health care is already the most expensive in the world ,without delivering much more than head aches to it's recipients .It is much more bureaucratic than european health care too.There are more pen pushers than nurses in the USA taking care of patients,or should I say taking care of the insurer's interests .Have you got any idea about the paperwork doctors have to perform to fill in the papers after or even before serving their patients ?I guess not but believe me ,in Europe doctors are much better off,they don't need secretaries to fill in forms,at least not in Belgium .
So we are much cheaper,more sophisticated,less bureaucratic compared to the USA.And by the way;yes most people polled in the USA are willing to pay more taxes to protect their health .Wouldn't you ?
You probably have no idea how lucky you are to live in Europe ,I guess you are a bit ignorant on matters pertaining to private health care .Just consider that the insurances companies are out there to make maximum profits:that means raking in as much as possible whilst doling out the absolute minimum.They draft the contracts and believe me,if you are not an astute lawyer you always end up in big problems when you are in the unfortunate position of having to rely on these crooks .
Believe me ,most americans want our health care,but no europeans want US health care.
Going back to Obama:him being a figure that arose out of community work,he knows the situation of the poorest part of US population,life without a safety net is much harder when you are poor and out in the USA than in Europe.He is an idealist with brains and respect for the intellect of his own population,hat is no joke .He knows the health carte situation both in Europe and the USA well,certainly much better than you truebrit,I'm certain of that.Perhaps you should take some time to look a bit deeper into US health care,there are lots of internet sites on which US citizens debate on health care reform.
The two reasons they fail is for the same that capitalism is a failure. It is pure, unadulterated human greed and thirst for power, that destroys them. It is not the system that is bad, but the f*cking rats that hijack the system. As was stated, there have never been any true communist states. They have all been state run capitalist systems. Ergo, by using your yardstick, it is capitalism that is the failure.
@truebrit,
I take your point, but market economies, whether of the more open American or European Social Market type are a million miles removed from the monolithic command economies of states which have referred to themselves as communist. To me 'State Capitalist' is an oxymoron.
Marxist philosophy is pure and high minded in its intent. I can think of no phrase that encapsulates one of the better aspects of human nature quite so well as 'from each according to his abilities to each according to his needs.' Unfortunately, attempts at its practical application seem to invoke altogether darker human attributes.
In short, history indicates that it just doesn't turn out well in the real world, wherever and whenever it's been tried. A pity, perhaps, but there it is.
with heavy emphasis on the moron part of oxymoron. Whether under 'communism,' or capitalism, the name name matters not. A wage slave is a wage slave. Somewhere, there must/should be a system that is fair to the majority of people. Laws of the land are supposed to bring fairness to all, however, we know that lie quite well, don't we.
Then we have pontificating idiots like the Chocolatier from some forgotten backwater in Europe who believes he is the greatest thinker on this planet. Cripes Almighty, he deserves the EU and its interfering, blathering bureaucracy. He spews more bilge than a pump in a leaky ship's hold.
....Unfortunately, attempts at its practical application seem to invoke altogether darker human attributes....
Perhaps if there were a model in which political pluralism,open debates concerning major discussions involving all concerned,better education to allow those concerned to understand the implications of those decisions were to be invented that would be combined with a more egalitarian society ,we might profit .
The society we live in is democratic by name only .How else to explain the failure to implement a modern health care in the USA.
Lobbies are more powerful than voters .Just today a fine example illustrating the power of the media and lobbies in decision making has been has been revealed .It clearly indicates how insurance lobbies are invited by the Washington post in ventures that grants them acces to government officials in order to influence the process of decision making .
www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/07/02/washington-post-selling-l_n_224658.ht ml
You get a hell of a lot from Huffintonpost, Tonny. Anyway, in answer to your previous effort:
“regarding Obama:I never said there is no corporate backing behind him,nowhere at all.Of course there are.”
Well done, Tonny. AND lobby groups: AND a slick, professional party machine.
“I have no clues yat about which ones so I have to make an educated guess that it is the medium to small enterprises that have a potential of profiting from modern technologies involved in fighting climate change .”
An educated guess or just wishful thinking?
“Let's name a few losers to start with:the high tech armament industry,aircraft industry,insurance industry,pharmaceuticals perhaps too,investment banks eventually”
If these are your “losers” then it’s a peculiar definition of the term you’re applying.
“That is not a small fish,considering the USA spends half of the entire world's budget on armament”
A bit disingenuous of you. It’s not even half on nominal exchange rate measures and you are conveniently forgetting about purchasing power parity under which it becomes far, far lower.
“The winners are still hiding in the shadow somewhere”
In a locked case, in a bank vault basement in a secure establishment whose existence is barely known with a big sign on it saying “Beware of toxic nuclear waste” would be nearer the truth.
“probably much smaller entities concentrating on products required…”
Aw, BLESS! Like cute little furry bunnies waiting for the evil old dinosaurs to die out from state financial asphyxia. You wish, Tonny, but where’s the evidence?
“…to implement the new rules that are to curb the worst effects of global warming”
Oooh, careful. You’re getting a tad prophetic and biblical, if I may say so.
“Obama's victory was an accident of history”
Gnomic utterance. Please to be explaining. I always put it down to the Yanks being fed up after 8 years of Dubya, the recession biting and folk blaming the incumbents, divisions over various foreign and military policy failures, the attractiveness of Barack’s candidacy, both as an African American per se, and because he wasn’t the expected Democrat nominee until quite late in the game and Yanks, like Brits, love plucky underdogs and successful outside bets. Folk climbing on bandwagons. Sudden worsening of the financial crisis during the campaign. In other words, all the bog standard reasons that have been repeated again and again throughout electoral history.
“it is a well established fact that the GOP always benefits more from the input of corporate gifts in a political campaign,”
Grant you that, Tonny. Much as the Tories did over here until comparatively recently: But the keyword is “more,” not exclusively.
“corporate goodwill towards the GOP was largely surpassed by grass root campaign contributions benefiting Obama”
Say private, individual, or merely “non corporate” rather than grassroots and you’d be closer. Some donations were of five and six figure sums. Hardly the oppressed masses selflessly donating their last dime to the child of light, saying “bless you, master, remember me when you come into your heavenly kingdom,” was it?
“community based organisations”
Oh dear, the third and least assessable constituent part of the leftist trinity.
God the State welfare provider, God the oppressed minorities, and God the community based organisations. Words without end, amen!
“The internet was alive and buzzing with these new phenomena”
Good use of a new medium, and they certainly reached their target audiences. Yes, efficient, and more to the point, devastatingly effective, too. Well funded, slick, and professional!
”US health care is already the most expensive in the world ,without delivering much more than head aches to it's recipients”
Agreed. The US spends about 15% of GDP on a cumbersome system, although government spend amounts to only 45% of that total. We achieve roughly similar outcomes in Europe from spends of between 9% and 12%. Yet don’t overstate your case, Tonny. US medical facilities and technique are amongst the best. It is the lack of universal availability, and the creaking, corrupt system of health finance that lets Americans down. That does need reform, and I hope it is successfully undertaken.
As to your following points, I could wish that our NHS was as efficient as your Belgian system. In some respects our “free at the point of need” service is overly bureaucratic and unresponsive. Medical staff are buried in paperwork. Independent trusts are breeding grounds for jobsworths and third-rate political appointees. They are part of our Quangocracy, in fact. There are layers of useless administrators and managers who would not be missed if they were to suffer alien abduction. There is a complex system of outsourcing essential but non-medical services and an entirely faux market mechanism for awarding these publicly funded contracts. To top it all off, the system has been made subject to ludicrous target driven performance criteria that are frequently quite inappropriate.
And now I’m going to surprise you, Tonny. In my estimation, the problems date almost entirely from the Tories’ imposition of an ill conceived “internal market” and New Labour’s subsequent tinkering, target related initiatives, and placing of useless apparatchiks on unnecessary trust boards. The NHS is, and should be run as, a pure public service ethos based organisation. There are some services that are better run so from an empirical perspective. Health is one of them.
“You probably have no idea how lucky you are to live in Europe ,I guess you are a bit ignorant on matters pertaining to private health care.”
A sweeping statement, Tonny. I had no idea that you are telepathic. I’m quite content to be a European, thanks. I confess to some degree of ignorance about healthcare. I do not work in the industry, after all. I have worked in insurance, and know a bit about PMI: Individual, group, and company provision. Over here, only about 8% go private and then the cover is usually restricted to acute conditions and is of a specific and limited nature. Chronic ailments usually are referred back to the NHS.
Yet I see no problem with private provision as a supplement to publicly funded care. If someone, having already paid their tax to support the NHS chooses to then opt out, all well and good. They’re freeing up resources for other patients who may not have the wealth to exercise such a choice. Of course, things are not always so clear-cut, but even if private patients end up in NHS facilities, they are still bringing more cash into the system and, so long as priorities are still assessed upon medical need, no harm done.
“ Just consider that the insurances companies are out there to make maximum profits:that means raking in as much as possible whilst doling out the absolute minimum.”
I assume you are referring to the US system, again. Have you worked in insurance? I would not like to just guess that you are a bit ignorant on matters pertaining to it. Not without more evidence, anyway.
“Going back to Obama”
Must we?
“He is an idealist with brains”
That’s a novel combination. I hope you’re wrong for all our sakes. I’ve met the occasional idealist with brains and even the ones who could tie their own shoelaces were like small, unguided missiles. So I hope that Barack is a Machiavellian pragmatist, myself. There’s much evidence to suggest so, even though he is a bit green still.
“He knows the health carte situation both in Europe and the USA well,certainly much better than you truebrit,I'm certain of that”
Another divine revelation, perhaps? Actually, Tonny, I hope you’re right. After all, I can do nothing to affect it: FOR GOOD OR ILL
“internet sites on which US citizens debate on health care reform.”
My constant bedtime reading, I assure you, Tonny.
To close, Tonny, I’ve read this back before posting. I do wish that you would try to be a little more objective about Obama. Your overt enthusiasm is misplaced in one who is so obviously well informed and owns some critical sense. Even worse, it drives me to be perhaps unduly ironic and cynical in response. Nevertheless, let it stand. It may one day occur to you that I may be just as interested in other people’s welfare as yourself, but restrict my own expectations to what I believe to be practical and realisable in a very complex world. Still;
Chacun a son gout, eh, Tonny?
@Truebrit,
Again, I take your point. Yet do not believe that anyone can answer it convincingly. I like to think that my own philosophy is based upon empiricism and realism. A sort of bod about in the moderate centre because it offers the least worse solution and reduces, though can never eliminate human exploitation, oppression, want, etc. That implies, I suppose that I accept these things as part of the human condition.
Phew! Deep breath, but here goes. Yes, I must accept them because I can see no way to prevent them or even try to absolutely without risking a huge augmentation in them by doing so. Particularly via the imposition of preset political constructs claiming an almost formulaic provenance for the creation of a flawless society.
So I'm left f*ck*ng about in the middle of the political spectrum addressing issues that seem to be important as they become moot. Ameliorating symptoms, as it were, rather than trying to address the cause of each problem. I've no choice, because I firmly believe that the problems derive directly from our humanity, itself. They can't be addressed without depriving us of what defines us as members of our particular species.
That is why I think marxist societies are unattainable in the full sense of the term and why I oppose attempts to bring them about. I contend that hisorical evidence backs my claim overwhelmingly.
Be aware truebrit that my enthusiasm towards Obama is only based on comparing him with the previous president of the USA which was Cheney (not Bush as so many seem to think)Hence I am entitled to even hubris if ever I felt the need for that .
Abot health care again .
Indeed I have extensive experience with our own belgian system because my parents badly needed it until they died .It is cheap,fast,extensive,hardly burocratic and well organized.Both of them having been in hospitals frequently over the last years,sometimes for periods of one month,it might have cost me or them perhaps as little as 600 euros ,I didn't even bother to calculate the costs as there was no impact on living standards .We have a social security card with an electronic chip,it is used in hospitals,mutual health care insurance funds,pharmacy and lots of other instances,very handy as you don't have to fill in paperwork at all,your medical files are accessible easily and transferable when you use it .
Well applied informatics is a blessing for the entire society,cuts through the red tape,saves a lot of work for the pen pushers and speeds up the flow of information betwen the concerned organizations .Doctors perform house visits on demand,waiting times in most hospitals vary around one hour (depends on the medical disciplin involved and the season).
As for the technology I am well informed,here as much as in the USA we have the latest and best.I know that because some of my friends used towork in that branch,selling medical equipment to hospitals for big american companies .
Just another remark,irony and sarcasm are no valid attributes to be used in discussions when you want to score,they are only useful to ventilate your own opinion ,they might make you feel as the all knowing superior mind that doesn't have to get into the arena, to fight but give the thumbs up or down from the tribune to settle the result of the gladiator fight .
and I maintain: 'Man is born free; and everywhere he is in chains.'
Except, perchance, in Belgium?
doesn't count. It is merely a boil on the ^ss of the world. It should be lanced and drained.
'Just another remark,irony and sarcasm are no valid attributes to be used in discussions when you want to score,they are only useful to ventilate your own opinion ,they might make you feel as the all knowing superior mind that doesn't have to get into the arena, to fight but give the thumbs up or down from the tribune to settle the result of the gladiator fight .'
When have I ever failed to engage with issues, Tonny? Or when have I presented myself as an all knowing or superior mind? Take our latest exchanges on this page as an example. You initiated the discussion. I have responded to your points quite unselectively. I have, furthermore, refrained until now from drawing your attention to the fact that you have been much more selective in your responses to myself. I have allowed you to set the agenda, in fact, and have confined my responses to addressing the issues that you have chosen to raise.
As for irony and sarcasm; if you are going to post on English language sites then I'm afraid they are techniques that you are going to encounter: Quite often, I would say. Yet if you read back through the comments on this page, you will perhaps see that I have only resorted to them in order to illustrate what I believe to be the shortfalls in some of your less well substantiated assertions.
Regarding your claim about your support for Obama being relative or considered: The tenor of your previous posts here casts doubt upon it. I'm afraid that you present as a 'Groupie' when Barack is mentioned, Tonny.
I think you'll find it's the Netherlands that have been drained. Though I believe Belgium has seen quite a lot of lances. Napoleon showed them a good few.
Yes, we've heard the bolshevik propaganda of the socialist health miricle on the pages before from Tonny from Stalingrad. Yet he ignpores the glaring fact:
Amercians are far more likely to get a life saving procedure in time, even without health insurance, than their european and brit counterparts, in time to treat the disease.
American medicine is twice as likely, in cases of Cancer, to cure the individual and apply heart disease treatment sooner.
You see, the euro health care myth relies on the winners i.e. Switzerland, The Netherlands, etc., who really do not have socialist health care per se, to pump up the dismal performance of the rest of these states. Then, the stats are skewed by the fact that the untreated, and/or untimely treated who may die, are not counted in the treatment stats i.e. only the winners get counted.
We call this death therapy.
The sale being made is that it's 'fair' to deny care to one person, in favor of treating another. This is what Obama is pimping, instead of offering real care options to the uncovered (not the same as the uninsured), a group that shrinks dramtically once you shave off the illegal aliens, the uninsured who can buy insurance but refuse, etc.
In this system, the care assets never match the need. One only has to look at the waitng lists in Canada to verify this fact, and the clinics across the borders in America treating Canadians.
It is, in essence, the equality argument that drives this farce. All the talk about Neocons, the GOP, the corporate monster, boogyman, etc., that seems to disappear when you're a libnazi i.e. Countrywide, Boeing, General Motors and the rest of the corporate welfare, libnazi-style that make Halliburton look like an egg stand, only seem to be part of the argument when the right is in office.
That being the case, looking to the left for equality and personal rights, in the face of Obama greenlighting every Bush antiterror point, search without warrant, indefinite dentention, to white firemen in Conneticut just reinforces the pig now wearing the farmers clothes, why would health care be any different?
Are you a bit sloshed, SP?
The problem with SP4 is that he prefers to believe Rush Limbaugh,I rather trust statistics .I'll be happy to provide tham,what about yours SP4.Sources please !
idiot sp4 ...Obama greenlighting every Bush antiterror point...
Didn't dawn on you yet that Bush never really was the president ?
And tat everything else you say is just wishful thinking from a neocon republican without any clues.
'I rather trust statistics'
Then try supplying some occasionally. Your posts above are full of unsubstantiated assertions. I am beginning to think that the only authority you really endorse is Obama's press office.
A bit odd, don't you think, Tonny, that Barackaios (Soter, Epiphanes) should have to resort to such mundane measures to obscure the fact that he's adopted Bush (OR Cheney)'s policies on everything from Iraq to indefinite detention without trial?
Surely a negligent wave of the godly hand and a casual 'let it be so' should have sufficed for general consumption. It seems to have worked on you and ACLU anyway, Tonny!
Statistics, Tonny? Your posts on this page are full of unsubstantiated assertions. I'm beginning to think the only source you refer to is Obama's press office.
I'd have thought that they would have their hands full just explaining his adoption of every policy of the previous administration from indefinite detention without trial to bombing Afghans.
truebrit,before I give you statitical figures comparing health care in the USA and Europe ,or even the entire world,I'like to ask you,what do you build your case on ?If not statistics or as you claim I do Obama's press office (wrong of course and plain silly affirmation).
I think, tonny, that if you look at the posts above, you will find that I am not really referring primarily to 'Health.' I am sure that SP4, you, and myself could merrily throw health statistics at each other until hell freezes over.
I am talking about all the other unsubstantiated assertions you have made. How about a little quantitative back-up for your remarks about GOP and Democrat sources of election funding. Some evidence to support your contention about 'winners' and 'losers' from Obama's election. Evidence of US insurance company malpractice. Or US defence expenditure as a percentage of total world spend, to name but a few examples.
As to my remark about Basileus Barack (Soter, Epiphanes)'s press office, it should be clear enough. As previously stated, you present unswervingly as an Obama groupie. Your remarks could hardly be less critical if you worked IN his press office. On any issue, at any time, you can be relied upon to parrot a pro-Obama line even when you have previously decried identical policy decisions implemented by the previous incumbent.
You may recall when I pursued you through several pages on one article, (Gitmo closure if I remember correctly) asking you repeatedly what your stance would be if the present administration returned to a policy of indefinite detention without trial. After three sheets or so of unadulterated goo and drivel in which you employed every technique known to man to avoid giving a straight answer to a straight question, you finally made a gnomic declaration, tucked snugly into the middle of a long, opaque, rambling post, that boiled down to;
'I trust Obama unconditionally.'
Well I don't, Tonny! I trust no politician as far as I could throw them. As I pointed out to SP4 on another thread, Euro and UK leftists have been clucking over Barack like a hen with a cute, downy new chick ever since he was elected. 'We all know why' I said. Tonny, I continued, has reached the uncritical half way house stage between reasoned criticism and unthinking partisanship. Looks like I underestimated your capacity for outright bias.
Well, Tonny, the question is no longer conditional or hypothetical, is it? That's why I asked you about it again on this page, and was ignored again. Obama HAS returned to a policy of indefinite detention without trial.
I know it.
You know it.
SP4 knows it.
The other person who is still visiting this page, and who sees so far through you that he invariably refers to you as 'Tonny from Bilge-um' knows it too.
All three of us have, I suspect, widely differing views on the matter but at least, from the evidence of our previous posts, none of us lack consistency or are afraid to state and debate them.
I'll summarise my own thoughts for you here, Tonny.
1) This policy was wrong when practiced by the previous incumbent,
2) It remains wrong now,
3) Attempts to justify it NOW by persons or organisations that decried it THEN smack of sophistry and hypocrisy and undermine their credibility as commentors with any claim to objectivity.
Tonny, WHAT IS YOUR VIEW ON THE REINTRODUCTION BY MEANS OF A PRESIDENTIAL ORDER OF BARACK HUSSEIN OBAMA, 44th PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, OF THE POLICY OF INDEFINITE DETENTION WITHOUT TRIAL.
www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/databriefs/db09.pdf
USA ranked no 29 in 2004,no recent statistics available.Infant mortality rates are a good indicator for the quality of health care.
...is a SINGLE measure, easier for the masses to understand than a more complex set of measurements. It does not address the data, it does not address the areas covered and in the hands of a skilled statatican, can be made to look like anything you want, so No, Tonny, it in itself is a poor gauge.
Drawing wide conclusions from a narrow set of facts is dangerous.
Trubrit gave you a lot to do, so I'll leave you to the task of informing yourself. Remember the words of Robin Williams i.e. 'a Producer-Director is a person who blows smoke up his own ass.' and try to make sure you do not.
Obviously SP4,you have no clues,a ranking is a ranking ,n 29 is no29,infant mortality is infant mortality,it is as simple as that .But of course if these parameters can be the subject of understandability as you claim,go aed,show us why they are wrong.Or just shut up when facts are inconvenient .
...you missed the point. I, for instance, have doubts about whether premature infants, left to die from unadministered healthcare in Europe enter the count. It would also be interesting to know who tabulates these figures in, say, the Czech Republic, or other places, and how, exactly they do it, let alone a host of other nations, where most children are not delivered in health care facilites at all but rather in the home.
Measuring anything by a single method usually is the beginning of knowledge, not the end. By your methods, one might look at longevity and conclude from it that health is getting better. The case, by your standards, could certainly be made, but real thinkers are not fooled by such simple measurements. I suspect this is the same reason we get such conclusion in climate studies as well, on top of gagging dissenting scientists.
The other glaring point is that with all of our present technology we still have the most difficult time with the simplest of measurements i.e. a census (you know, that place where infant mortality stats come from?)for example. Counting people, inside a border of even a small nation is exceedingly difficult. Earth temperature measurements are another, with temperature stations left unmaintained and then having scientists use these degraded instruments and act as if they're infallible. In every discipline, the current predilection is to accept these figures as sacrosanct, making sicence into a religion, exactly as Michael Creighten (a real scientist) accused the global warming establishment of.
No, Tonny, you have much to learn about how knowledge is aquired. This hiding behind what passes for fact will go on for a while, but when it starts failing, and we will want peoples support, it will not be there.
Tonny, Truebrit asked you a direct question. Where is your answer? Hiding inside a Chocolate Truffle and ignoring it does nothing to advance your cause. By continuing to maintain your silence on this matter does nothing but reinforce the impression that you are nothing more than an empty shirt with nothing meaningful to say and less than nothing to back it up. You are losing credibility every second that passes, Mr. Bilge-um. You are about to become a non sequitur in addition to being a laughingstock.
'where most children are not delivered in health care facilites at all but rather in the home.'
Are you down on home-births, SP?
They are not a bad thing at all. They are exceedingly safe. 3 of my 4 children were born at home, with family and licensed midwives midwives in attendance. Only one of my children was born in a 'medical' center and she died at birth, before my eyes. Even if she had died at home, there is a requirement to report the death to authorities. So, EssPee, be very careful of what you say. Check your facts first. INFORM YOURSELF.
...but I was referring to Eastern Europe, and the developing nations, not the USA or western Europe. Try keeping up.
Tonny,
I did not answer the post immediately below my last because, although I assumed you to be the author, it was not signed. Your next effort reveals that you WERE the author, anyway. When you begin to state honestly what you believe without striking poses, indulging in semantics, or regurgitating formulaic crap in support of your fashionable preconceptions, you may be taken a tad more seriously. I have attempted to address each and every one of the issues that YOU have chosen to raise on this thread. You have not returned the compliment. I am forced ineluctably to the conclusion that you are so intrinsically biased that nothing you say may be regarded as genuine.
By all the Gods SP4,
That was masterly! Your response to tonny's last is... (words fail me)
I had no idea that you are so well acquainted with statistical technique. I won't even quote from it. It stands on it's own merits. How can you, who so often seems to present as an unthinking bigot, display such erudition? Am I addressing the most unjustly maligned man on this site? Well, that's very much up to yourself. Be careful, though, not to extrapolate too far.
I saw your 'Obamabomba' piece, by the way. The concept was sound, but you flogged it to death! 'Well, you can write, but it's just not funny' springs to mind, my irreverent fellow comedian. Less 'smoke' and more 'mirror' would be my suggestion. (The 'veers sharply to the left' bit was a good idea, though)
Oh, and Tonny, no use pointing out that SP is 'biased' too. He has never laid claim to objectivity. You have, you hypocrite!
To 'The Man With No Name'
I see that you have looked back here, and have summarised our discussions very appositely. I think that you percieve my intent, and have drawn your own conclusions from Tonny's responses.
Your second post is unanswerable. Given the subject, I'll shut my stupid trap. Everyone should always be 'very careful' about what they say.
'..but I was referring to Eastern Europe, and the developing nations, not the USA or western Europe. Try keeping up.'
For YOUR education, Mr. Sh*tsack, there are more nations in the developed than the ones you just puked up. By the way, crap-for-brains it would be nice if you included them in your meager references. Otherwise people will see what a feckless moron you really are. Try and CATCH UP, idiot.
So that SP doesn't die from confusion '... the developed than...' Should have read '...the developed world than...'
To make a comment, step in a pile of sh*t and then try to find some way to blame the other person. Set the paradigm first, moron, and then make a statement, not make a fool of yourself and then set the paradigm to cover your ^ss. Say what you mean and mean what you say, fool. Don't be a Belgium Waffle, like Tonny. Go smoke another doobie and crawl back up your own arse, EssPee. Try and grow up, Sh*thead.
..yeah, the Obamabomb needs work, but I have to build on it. I had a Chevy Chase advertisment-style planned but did not get there. I should have used Obama as the spokesman...his Chappelle white person voice, that cardboard laugh, the oreo cookie smile...woulda worked better. Still, Laura and GW on the side...it's sweet...plus the 'Guiliani Bomb' with the words 'It's Guiliani Time!' (look up THAT Americana)on the side....
Masterly? Stats? I had one class in stats, more than enough for me, and got by woo'ing a young lady who had a real talent for it...among others. That is my experience in it's totality, outside of some Prop, Integral, Derivative program (PID)loops I need about once every four years, and the constant marketing drivel thrust out of every corporate orifice that seems pointed at my desk ( I throw most of it out).
So when one of these wimps pulls out a stat....It's Guiliani time!
Cheers. It's 5:00PM (somewhere!) and time for some Canadian and 7!
I am sure there are lots of time in the day that you break open the 'Canadian'. Probably a quart or two a day?
as it is known is nothing more than rotgut Rye that no self respecting Canadian would drink. We export 99.9% of it to the US where is is considered Manna from Heaven. Those clowns have no taste, no couth and absolutely no class whatsoever. But what can be said about a subspecies of human that drinks p*sswater and calls it beer? As was said elsewhere American beer is like sex in a canoe. It's f*cking near water.
Better to stick to English Real Ale!
It's warm, it's flat,
It puts you on the mat!
...I live in a town with 31 independent breweries, who have won numerous international awards, so if you're going to pimp beer in Portland Oregon, get a sack lunch and an army and come inthe summer because I only like beer on a hot day. Like the wine snobs of France, a new sherriff has come to town and the frogs still think wine is made by angry little men wearing berets and smoking gitanes. This could be why they're pulling up vines by the acre. It's a pity when your chips are disappearing and you do not know why.
Like our founders, we're proud of the fact that the american is a simpler, clearer thinking, more honest, person than the colonial oppressing dickheads we ran out...and back across the St Laurence.
In defense of our neighbors up north though, they do make a reasonably priced alchoholic beverage that goes down well with mixer, and have what I think are some of the best tittie bars anywhere, full of pretty french canadian women who seem happy to polish a yanks knob on a cold night, gratis. Now if any nation can have a neighbor like that, he can make fun of our love for his rot gut with our blessing, just remembering that they only learned to make whiskey after an american first taught them how.
Take off!
Ran us out across the St. Lawrence River(that is how it is spelled, sh*t head, not St Laurence?) Bullsh*t. We left on our own volition after burning the White House. There was nothing else to destroy, so we left. You sodding idiots LOST the War of 1812, moron. All your lies and obfuscating will never change that FACT.
As for a yank teaching us how to make whiskey, that's outright bullsh*t, once again. Many Scotsmen immigrated to Canada and they brought the secret to making a good Scotch with them. The fricking swill you drink is made by the Frenchies, who have all the good taste of a dead pig. No wonder you swill that rot-gut Rye, it's made by your equals. No self respecting Canadian would touch that bilge water. It's pure poison. As for the rest of your drug induce mental meanderings, all that can be said is: Dream on, drug addict, dream on.
In response to your 'take off': F*ck off, a-hole.
War of 1812, SP?
Been looking at Conservapedia again? The Canadians, with far smaller numbers wiped your arses for you! The invasion of Canada was a fiasco. Madison scuttled out of Washington like a rat up a drainpipe. Cochrane and Ross, having enjoyed the dinner he was kind enough to leave behind for them, raised their glasses to the health of His Britannic Majesty (as True Brits ought) and then burned the White House before heading leisurely back to the fleet.
About the only battles you won were the Thames and New Orleans. The second was due entirely to that idiot, Pakenham, and was fought after the Treaty of Ghent had been signed anyway. Did you know that Wellington was offered the high command after finishing with Napoleon? Care to speculate about what would have happened if Nosey had turned up over there with about 100,000 Waterloo and Peninsula veterans?
I think your leaders must all have been pissed on the 'Club'. Lucky for you lot that they sobered up long enough to make peace before you got squashed!
page: 1
SP4: refreshingJun 16th, 2009 - 14:12:55
..in that someone is still working on this.
Report this comment