That was a good speach, but there is nothing inherently evil about Communism. Oh, ideologues will insits that competing ideologies are evil and their ideology is pure and good, but there is nothing pure or inherently good about either Capitalism or Communism. They are both political/economic systems for organizing society. Given the nature of man, Communism simply doesn’t work very well. Capitalism works better, though pure, unrestrained Capitalism has its failings also. What seems to work best is regulated Capitalism that tries to protect society from the excesses of pure Capitalism.
You might as well say there's nothing inherently evil about National Socialism. True enough in a dry intellectual sense, but.... would you really say there's nothing inherently evil about National Socialism, Mike?
Speech gave me goosebumps -- was in uniform at the time, United States Navy.
I didn't fully appreciate how right Reagan was, but, boy, he set out to destroy the Soviet Union, and he implemented numerous action plans from Solidarity in Poland to the Mujahdeen in Afghanistan to do it. And he succeeded.
The man deserves lot of credit for freeing a whole lotta people in the world.
The Reagan speech was pre-programmed nonsense. Reagan had already begun to cut his dealings with Gorby. So the speech didn't come as any big surprize to me.
On the other hand it was vintage Reagan and he was good at that kind of stuff.
And it might be pointed out Reagan really blew it for his visit to the Bitburg cemetery. Little Elie Weisel knocked him silly on the reality scale for his attendance and rightly so.
You might as well say there's nothing inherently evil about National Socialism.
Well, National Socialism was a collection of ethnic prejudices and random social/economic policies. National Socialism, as far as what I can make out, was mostly defined by what it was against, Jews, Communists, and the Treaty of Versailles. There were the original National Socialism policies, Hitler’s policies as outlined in Mein Kampf, and what the Nazzis actually did once they came to power. They are not all the same.
All that aside, there was much inherently evil about the racial prejudice and the belief in the superiority of the Aryan race mixed into National Socialism.
The whole Bitburg thing was a totally overblown crock. Only a small percentage of SS soldiers were involved in the horrible acts and war crimes against Jews and others. Not to say that SS soldiers weren't true believers. But most SS units performed their wartime mission in a professional and completely lawful manner. I realize I'm on dangerous ground, but I'm trying to tread lightly. I recognize the evil inherent in serving the Nazi regime, while at the some time repsecting the abilities of the German Army in World War II.
I recognize the evil inherent in serving the Nazi regime, while at the some time respecting (sic) the abilities of the German Army in World War II.
I'll be kind, BF, Reagan got in and out of the Bitburg cemetery as fast and as silently as he could. He only went to keep a committment to Kohl for the visit. Elie Wiesel, a holocaust prisoner and survivor, called Reagan on the proposed the trip, pleaded with him to not go to the cemetery to honor the military dead, and said to devastating effect:
"That place, Mr. President, is not your place. Your place is with the victims of the SS."
The underlying ethic of Communism is "From each according to their ability, to each according to their need." That is the credo of the slave. Except rather than having a 'master' in the form of an individual, everyone is the slave of society. Or, in practice, of whichever slave rises to the top of the political food chain and becomes the de facto master. A slave is a slave, whether to an owner, 'society', or a political director, and slavery is evil. Communism is evil in its most idealistic form.
Mike, every time I start thinking you might be respectably sane, you say something like that. The utter and absolute cognitive dissonance of that statement leaves me practically speechless. I mean, I could try discussing it with you, but I have this horrible feeling you'll just wave away whatever arguments or evidence I present.
It's like hearing someone tell you (with complete sincerity) that the moon really is made of of green cheese. Not only that, the stuff goes great with a dry white wine... What do you say to those people!?
...oh, what the Hell. I'll try...
mike, sure Communism isn't inherently evil. It's just some weird, freaky statistical coincidence that every time a communist government has been instituted, it has invariably turned into a vicious, repressive regime. Pop quiz: who was the biggest killer in the 20th century? Who was the second biggest killer? Hint: neither one's Hitler.
This stuff has been endemic to communism since at least the 1870 Commune in Paris after the war. There's something seductive about communism's steel logic, driving the scientific historical inevitability of it all, along with an idealism determined to succeed by Any. Means. Necessary. All that lovely dialectic just drives the soul out of the human body, turning them into a machine for the State.
Make no mistake; Nazism and Communism are the same, for all practical purposes. The biggest difference is that the Communists are the rationalists, while the Nazis are the irrationalists. I suppose the difference might comfort their victims...
Two recently-murdered victims show up in Heaven. They introduce themselves; "Hi, I'm Moishe. I got it in Germany, back in '43. What about you?" The other shakes his hand and replies "Ivan, from the Ukraine. 1951. What excuse did the Hitlerites use on you?" "Oh, you know; I'm a Jew, and I'm queer as a 3-pfennig piece; all that. Took 'em two years to kill me in Auschwitz." Ivan nearly let go of his hand, but relented. "Two years?" he asked, "Not bad! For me, it was Treblinka. I was judged clinically insane, since I opposed the Soviet People's regime in my homeland. Last time I trust a CIA agent, I'll tell you!"
Moishe laughed "You were scientifically murdered, while I was culturally murdered. Does it matter to the dead the virtuous motives of the killers?"
At the end of the day, someone has to be a garbage man. Capitalism says you offer enough reward so that someone will freely choose to do the dirty work. Communism says the masters will choose who does the dirty work, and of course that requires using the barrel of a gun to make it happen.
Mike, every time I start thinking you might be respectably sane, you say something like that. The utter and absolute cognitive dissonance of that statement leaves me practically speechless. I mean, I could try discussing it with you, but I have this horrible feeling you'll just wave away whatever arguments or evidence I present.
I also said:
Oh, ideologues will insist that competing ideologies are evil and their ideology is pure and good, but there is nothing pure or inherently good about either Capitalism or Communism.
The systems in and of themselves are not evil. It is the way that they are implemented that is evil. There are examples of “evil” implementations of both Capitalism and Communism. Take for example South Africa in the 1950s and 60s. It was a Capitalist system that still practiced apartheid.
Make no mistake; Nazism and Communism are the same, for all practical purposes.
I think that depends on how you look at things.
Communism favored state ownership and control of all farms and businesses. The Nazis believed in private ownership of farms and businesses, but with state planning and direction for strategic industries. Business owners that did not follow the directions from the government were removed.
The Nazis also practiced a lot of racism and persecution of minorities as well as political opponents. The Communists persecuted mostly political opponents.
The Nazis were also strongly anti-Communist so it is a little hard for me to see that they are really the same, unless by the same, you just mean you don’t like either one.
Power corrupts. This is known and accepted. Socialism, both National and International, seek to concentrate power in the hands of The State. The holders of power within The State will be corrupted. That is inherent and unavoidable with humans. Therefore, it is either by design or with reckless disregard that these systems bring forth corruption and its resultant evils.
Capitalism is neither pure nor good. It does, however, take power away from The State and place it in the hands of a mind (the market) that really does not care. It is not benevolent, but at least it is not inherently malevolent.
Some systems are impossible to implement without utilizing evil means. Communism is an example of that.
Now, it is of course possible that Capitalism is also such a system (I disagree) and it is certainly possible that a system that is not inherently evil can be implimented in an evil way. Neither of those would change the fact that Communism is inherenlty evil, because only be force and the removal of freedom can it be made to function at all.
Some systems are impossible to implement without utilizing evil means. Communism is an example of that.
I like it.
mikeca, it is true that -theoretically- Communisim values state ownership, while Nazism values private ownership, in practice they're both oligarchies. "Big" business owners had to join the NSDAP to operate, just as one had to join the CP in the Soviet Union. And while the USSR might not have had "private" ownership, certain individuals (and sometimes groups) ended up owning factories organiztions by default. I give you the nomenklatura in evidence. But yes, in theory, the two are different.
I don't consider your citation of South Africa as valid, since there is no evidence that capitalism per se was responsible for aparteid.
Yes, the Nazis hated the commies. And the commies returned the favor, with interest. Doesn't mean both systems aren't substantially similar. In fact, one may argue that this would produce even greater hostility. Sort of a "so close, yet so far" mentality. I will point out that Churchill once noted that the further a man politically is to the Left, the more hateful he is to the Party, unless he joins the CP.
The Nazis also practiced a lot of racism and persecution of minorities as well as political opponents. The Communists persecuted mostly political opponents.
Well, yeah, I pointed that out above. One of the primary differences is that Nazism is an irrationalistic system, while Communism is massively rationalistic. What you seem to ignore is that not only did they use this rationalism to diagnose opponents as insane (since they fought against the inarguable logic of scientific historical development) but that the Soviets did in fact widely practice racism and other forms of general oppression. Ask the Jews from the USSR about that one, or any of the central Asian countries, or any Muslims. Or any non-Russian speaker, for that matter.
I think where we differ is that you seem to be looking at the intent of the system, while I'm looking at the application. True, neither system is avowedly "evil." Very few people think that way. IIRC, Heinlein actually once said something along the lines of "'I' am not evil, for any value of 'I'." In other words, no one sees themselves as evil.
Myself, on the other hand (again, as I mentioned in my previous post) see that Communism has never worked, ever. You'd think we would see at least one valid example of a "good" Communist regime, but such creatres are aprocryphal.
As well to argue that "rape" and "cold-blooded murder" are not evil, because the concepts themselves neither rape nor murder anyone. The evil remains inherent in the attempt at implementation.
I think the inherent evil becomes clear as soon as any political doctrine explicitly defines a group of enemies and pronounces that those enemies are subject to destruction. Nazis aimed at elimination of racial minorities. Communists also had an 'enemy target', the whole social atrata of entrepreneurs and bourgeoisie, which were subject to destruction and elemination without any compromise. Millions of people were persecuted, sent to labor camps and murdered simply for being 'well-to-do'. Btw, mikeca, you'd be included.
"Say what you will about National Socialism, Dude, at least it's an ethos."
6.14.2007 3:59pm
Commenting on Dean's World is a privilege, not a right. Dean is your host, you are his guest, and you should behave in that fashion. Dean is not your babysitter, nor is he your punching bag. Please remember this. In general, you are free to disagree with anyone on any subject you wish, but abusive behavior will not be tolerated.
Of course we all lose our tempers now and then. Dean freely admits to being imperfect in this regard, which is why regulars to this establishment will generally be cut more slack than people who we don't know very well.
Still: behave like an adult, or go find somewhere else to play. Thanks.
You might as well say there's nothing inherently evil about National Socialism. True enough in a dry intellectual sense, but.... would you really say there's nothing inherently evil about National Socialism, Mike?
I didn't fully appreciate how right Reagan was, but, boy, he set out to destroy the Soviet Union, and he implemented numerous action plans from Solidarity in Poland to the Mujahdeen in Afghanistan to do it. And he succeeded.
The man deserves lot of credit for freeing a whole lotta people in the world.
HBarnes
On the other hand it was vintage Reagan and he was good at that kind of stuff.
And it might be pointed out Reagan really blew it for his visit to the Bitburg cemetery. Little Elie Weisel knocked him silly on the reality scale for his attendance and rightly so.
Well, National Socialism was a collection of ethnic prejudices and random social/economic policies. National Socialism, as far as what I can make out, was mostly defined by what it was against, Jews, Communists, and the Treaty of Versailles. There were the original National Socialism policies, Hitler’s policies as outlined in Mein Kampf, and what the Nazzis actually did once they came to power. They are not all the same.
All that aside, there was much inherently evil about the racial prejudice and the belief in the superiority of the Aryan race mixed into National Socialism.
The whole Bitburg thing was a totally overblown crock. Only a small percentage of SS soldiers were involved in the horrible acts and war crimes against Jews and others. Not to say that SS soldiers weren't true believers. But most SS units performed their wartime mission in a professional and completely lawful manner. I realize I'm on dangerous ground, but I'm trying to tread lightly. I recognize the evil inherent in serving the Nazi regime, while at the some time repsecting the abilities of the German Army in World War II.
I'll be kind, BF, Reagan got in and out of the Bitburg cemetery as fast and as silently as he could. He only went to keep a committment to Kohl for the visit. Elie Wiesel, a holocaust prisoner and survivor, called Reagan on the proposed the trip, pleaded with him to not go to the cemetery to honor the military dead, and said to devastating effect:
"That place, Mr. President, is not your place. Your place is with the victims of the SS."
Reagan wouldn't change his mind.
Mike, every time I start thinking you might be respectably sane, you say something like that. The utter and absolute cognitive dissonance of that statement leaves me practically speechless. I mean, I could try discussing it with you, but I have this horrible feeling you'll just wave away whatever arguments or evidence I present.
It's like hearing someone tell you (with complete sincerity) that the moon really is made of of green cheese. Not only that, the stuff goes great with a dry white wine... What do you say to those people!?
...oh, what the Hell. I'll try...
mike, sure Communism isn't inherently evil. It's just some weird, freaky statistical coincidence that every time a communist government has been instituted, it has invariably turned into a vicious, repressive regime. Pop quiz: who was the biggest killer in the 20th century? Who was the second biggest killer? Hint: neither one's Hitler.
This stuff has been endemic to communism since at least the 1870 Commune in Paris after the war. There's something seductive about communism's steel logic, driving the scientific historical inevitability of it all, along with an idealism determined to succeed by Any. Means. Necessary. All that lovely dialectic just drives the soul out of the human body, turning them into a machine for the State.
Make no mistake; Nazism and Communism are the same, for all practical purposes. The biggest difference is that the Communists are the rationalists, while the Nazis are the irrationalists. I suppose the difference might comfort their victims...
Two recently-murdered victims show up in Heaven. They introduce themselves; "Hi, I'm Moishe. I got it in Germany, back in '43. What about you?" The other shakes his hand and replies "Ivan, from the Ukraine. 1951. What excuse did the Hitlerites use on you?" "Oh, you know; I'm a Jew, and I'm queer as a 3-pfennig piece; all that. Took 'em two years to kill me in Auschwitz." Ivan nearly let go of his hand, but relented. "Two years?" he asked, "Not bad! For me, it was Treblinka. I was judged clinically insane, since I opposed the Soviet People's regime in my homeland. Last time I trust a CIA agent, I'll tell you!"
Moishe laughed "You were scientifically murdered, while I was culturally murdered. Does it matter to the dead the virtuous motives of the killers?"
Whoops. Got kinda literary there. My bad...
Communism IS inherently evil.
I also said:
Oh, ideologues will insist that competing ideologies are evil and their ideology is pure and good, but there is nothing pure or inherently good about either Capitalism or Communism.
The systems in and of themselves are not evil. It is the way that they are implemented that is evil. There are examples of “evil” implementations of both Capitalism and Communism. Take for example South Africa in the 1950s and 60s. It was a Capitalist system that still practiced apartheid.
I think that depends on how you look at things.
Communism favored state ownership and control of all farms and businesses. The Nazis believed in private ownership of farms and businesses, but with state planning and direction for strategic industries. Business owners that did not follow the directions from the government were removed.
The Nazis also practiced a lot of racism and persecution of minorities as well as political opponents. The Communists persecuted mostly political opponents.
The Nazis were also strongly anti-Communist so it is a little hard for me to see that they are really the same, unless by the same, you just mean you don’t like either one.
I disagree.
Power corrupts. This is known and accepted. Socialism, both National and International, seek to concentrate power in the hands of The State. The holders of power within The State will be corrupted. That is inherent and unavoidable with humans. Therefore, it is either by design or with reckless disregard that these systems bring forth corruption and its resultant evils.
Capitalism is neither pure nor good. It does, however, take power away from The State and place it in the hands of a mind (the market) that really does not care. It is not benevolent, but at least it is not inherently malevolent.
Some systems are impossible to implement without utilizing evil means. Communism is an example of that.
Now, it is of course possible that Capitalism is also such a system (I disagree) and it is certainly possible that a system that is not inherently evil can be implimented in an evil way. Neither of those would change the fact that Communism is inherenlty evil, because only be force and the removal of freedom can it be made to function at all.
mikeca, it is true that -theoretically- Communisim values state ownership, while Nazism values private ownership, in practice they're both oligarchies. "Big" business owners had to join the NSDAP to operate, just as one had to join the CP in the Soviet Union. And while the USSR might not have had "private" ownership, certain individuals (and sometimes groups) ended up owning factories organiztions by default. I give you the nomenklatura in evidence. But yes, in theory, the two are different.
I don't consider your citation of South Africa as valid, since there is no evidence that capitalism per se was responsible for aparteid.
Yes, the Nazis hated the commies. And the commies returned the favor, with interest. Doesn't mean both systems aren't substantially similar. In fact, one may argue that this would produce even greater hostility. Sort of a "so close, yet so far" mentality. I will point out that Churchill once noted that the further a man politically is to the Left, the more hateful he is to the Party, unless he joins the CP.
Well, yeah, I pointed that out above. One of the primary differences is that Nazism is an irrationalistic system, while Communism is massively rationalistic. What you seem to ignore is that not only did they use this rationalism to diagnose opponents as insane (since they fought against the inarguable logic of scientific historical development) but that the Soviets did in fact widely practice racism and other forms of general oppression. Ask the Jews from the USSR about that one, or any of the central Asian countries, or any Muslims. Or any non-Russian speaker, for that matter.
I think where we differ is that you seem to be looking at the intent of the system, while I'm looking at the application. True, neither system is avowedly "evil." Very few people think that way. IIRC, Heinlein actually once said something along the lines of "'I' am not evil, for any value of 'I'." In other words, no one sees themselves as evil.
Myself, on the other hand (again, as I mentioned in my previous post) see that Communism has never worked, ever. You'd think we would see at least one valid example of a "good" Communist regime, but such creatres are aprocryphal.
Of course we all lose our tempers now and then. Dean freely admits to being imperfect in this regard, which is why regulars to this establishment will generally be cut more slack than people who we don't know very well.
Still: behave like an adult, or go find somewhere else to play. Thanks.