[RD] Does free speech even exist as a concept?

[Lexicus]

I'm sure Traitorfish would know better than I.

 

[Traitorfish]

yes its Old Hippies fault ... always said I'd be first up against the wall when the revolution comes for ''claiming'' I'm a centrist (a right wing small business owner and strong Union member in the most militant left wing union in the country and a lifelong Socialist)

And suddenly our discussion of the perils of Bolshevism converges with our discussion of Christian martyrs.

Did any of those peaceful, democratic communist movements have sufficient power to destroy their host country's legislature?

The Nepal Communist Party control 63% of the lower house, and 71% of the upper house. That's about double what the NSDAP ever had in Germany.

 

[Mouthwash]

And is the Nepal Communist Party actually communist in some sense (besides labeling)?

 

[Old Hippy]

And suddenly our discussion of the perils of Bolshevism converges with our discussion of Christian martyrs.
.

just as suddenly the comparison of nazis being the most vile ideology there is converges with communist purges of jews under Stalin like there is no difference between identity political ideologies

 

[Hrothbern]

And is the Nepal Communist Party actually communist in some sense (besides labeling)?

From a bit of researching on internet:

The people of Nepal freed themselves from an absolute monarchy by a row of civil wars.
That monarchy had installed a lip-service democracy in 1962 whereby 15% of the members of parliament were democratically chosen and 85% members were appointed by the King.
After continuous fighting and struggles the King introduced a new democratic system in 1990 and in 1994-1995 a communist headed up the government.
The civil war continued by coomunists that wanted communism like China. In 2005 the King dismissed the democratic government and ruled as an authoritarian King again. (ofc he was aided in the conflict by western countries).
The King was forced to resign as absolute monarch in 2006 and in November 2006 a peace agreement was made between the government and maoist rebels.
In 2007 a overwhelming majority of the Parliament decided to abolish monarchy completely and in 2008 Nepal became the Democratic Federal Republic Nepal.
If you look at the history of the communist party, you see a long row of splits and mergers throughout decades.
If you look at the economy, the voters/rebels landscape, you see a country where 70-80% is a farmer, much like China originally.
The end result is a solid traditional base for communists in a parliamentary, two chamber, multi-party, democracy.
=> imo a manifestation of a communist country, adapted to its history, its freedom fight history, its natural resources and not to forget its tourism and high share on GDP of remittances (25%-30%) from Nepalese people working abroad, in line with the Gurkha tradition.

Whether this communist country fulfills the labels of communism thought out by ideologists in the western countries..... IDK

 

[Lexicus]

just as suddenly the comparison of nazis being the most vile ideology there is converges with communist purges of jews under Stalin like there is no difference between identity political ideologies

Well, if you actually think that "communist purges of jews under Stalin" are comparable to the goddamn HOLOCAUST then no wonder you're saying all this stupid crap.

 

[Broken_Erika]

Well, if you actually think that "communist purges of jews under Stalin" are comparable to the goddamn HOLOCAUST then no wonder you're saying all this stupid crap.

The Great Purges and Ukrainian Famine on the other hand........
But Stalin was more Tsar(in the mould the Ivan the Terrible) than communist.....

 

[El_Machinae]

Well, if you actually think that "communist purges of jews under Stalin" are comparable to the goddamn HOLOCAUST then no wonder you're saying all this stupid crap.

It's important to not fall for a bait and switch, but to also not create one yourself.

The comparison was that they were both anti Jewish. They have their separate Holocausts. And both atrocities are worthy of complete disgust. There is no point saying that the Holocaust is worse than Stalin, because the conversation eventually spirals to make it look like Stalin's evil is being discounted.

 

[Lexicus]

There is no point saying that the Holocaust is worse than Stalin, because the conversation eventually spirals to make it look like Stalin's evil is being discounted.

I regard it as essentially a statement of support for fascism to say that Stalin's crimes were as bad as or worse than the Holocaust

In any case the real conversational bait-and-switch here was taking Tfish's defense of Communists engaging in parliamentary politics and spinning it as a defense of Pol Pot.

 

[El_Machinae]

I regard it as essentially a statement of support for fascism to say that Stalin's crimes were as bad as or worse than the Holocaust

You can regard it that way, just be aware that it might not be perceived that way. Both are sufficiently evil that any effort to elevate one as worse is met with the temptation of downplaying the other.

Even more frustrating, even with a noble effort, it can be perceived that way.

 

[Traitorfish]

And is the Nepal Communist Party actually communist in some sense (besides labeling)?

There's doubtless a dozen Marxist critiques you could make to prove that they're revisionists or backsliders or the left wing of capital or whatever, but from an outside perspective, they're pretty legit. The Maoist wing of the party, then a seperate group, carried out a ten-year armed struggle against the royal government, and the Communists, first as a coalition and then as a unified party, lead the constituent assembly which oversaw the tradition from a semi-absolute monarchy to a democratic republic. At a minimum, they fit the bill of what most people imagine when you say "Communist".

I regard it as essentially a statement of support for fascism to say that Stalin's crimes were as bad as or worse than the Holocaust

Or alternatively, that the Holocaust was no worse than the Stalinist purges. We've previously discussed the Venn diagram of anti-Communist and soft Holocaust denial.

 

[Old Hippy]

Well, if you actually think that "communist purges of jews under Stalin" are comparable to the goddamn HOLOCAUST then no wonder you're saying all this stupid crap.

no one here thinks the Nazis are good because the west has spent 70 years teaching our kids to understand why identity politics is so bad, atrocious and immoral

The Great Purge or the Great Terror was a campaign of political repression in the Soviet Union which occurred from 1936 to 1938. ... Modern historical studies estimate a total number of Stalinism repression deaths (executions and camp deaths) in 1937–38 as 950,000–1,200,000.

its just a pity education was lacking in the left's version of identity politics and intersectionality
its between between 60 and 100 million deaths its hard to get an exact number.... that alone should cause one to think hard, when they tell you this time they will get it right

of Communism and Nazism. Courtois considers Communism and Nazism to be distinct, but comparable totalitarian systems. He says that Communist regimes have killed "approximately 100 million people in contrast to the approximately 25 million victims of the Nazis".

 

[Traitorfish]

Stalinism [...] identity politics and intersectionality

You're using at least one of those words incorrectly.

Also!,

Or alternatively, that the Holocaust was no worse than the Stalinist purges. We've previously discussed the Venn diagram of anti-Communist and soft Holocaust denial.

Communist regimes have killed "approximately 100 million people in contrast to the approximately 25 million victims of the Nazis".

What do I win?

 

[Archon_Wing]

Uhh, pretty sure Hitler's death toll would have kept going if he had not been stopped. He had a lot of plans; even wrote a crappy book about it. Oh and hey, let's not forget about their copycat allies over in the east. How many people did Imperial Japan kill?

But uhh.... yea totalitarian regimes are bad yes, regardless of flag. This really is splitting hairs.

 

[Berzerker]

Uhh, pretty sure Hitler's death toll would have kept going if he had not been stopped. He had a lot of plans; even wrote a crappy book about it. Oh and hey, let's not forget about their copycat allies over in the east. How many people did Imperial Japan kill?

But uhh.... yea totalitarian regimes are bad yes, regardless of flag. This really is splitting hairs.

yup, he was just getting started... Others had more time and more 'freedom' to continue their ethnic cleansing before they either ran out of 'enemies' or into people who could make their blood thirst too costly.

 

[Archon_Wing]

yup, he was just getting started... Others had more time and more 'freedom' to continue their ethnic cleansing before they either ran out of 'enemies' or into people who could make their blood thirst too costly.

Yea at the end of the day they all had the same endgame, except the combination of victims was different. Some were smarter and stuck around longer; that has nothing to do with morality which long bottomed out before the counter went in the millions.

Hitler was doomed to lose from the moment WW2 started but the problem with sociopaths like these is that it's not about them losing but about minimizing the damage they will cause. If he was in a position where he could win, well, that would not have been any good.

 

[Berzerker]

Hitler's mistake was turning on Stalin and Japan hitting Pearl Harbor, the axis had to keep us out of the war and they bungled that

 

[Ajidica]

Hitler's mistake was turning on Stalin and Japan hitting Pearl Harbor, the axis had to keep us out of the war and they bungled that

If the Nazis hadn't attacked the Soviet Union, they would have been out of the war and completely bankrupt. They were already so stretched for credit they were giving the Soviet Union almost complete battleships and factories to keep the raw materials coming. The Nazis needed the grain of Ukraine -with the British blockade the Nazis lost access to cheap foreign grain and animal feed- and when the Nazis run out of things to give the Soviets for it, they were going to take it by force.

 

[Timsup2nothin]

So, here's a "free speech" question, "ripped from the headlines," as they say.

At a high school football game with a predominantly white school from an affluent suburb hosting a predominantly not white school from a less affluent suburb the home team's cheerleaders routinely lead their crowd in the familiar USA USA USA chant. Of course school officials say they were 'just patriotic.' The interspersed chants of 'go home _______s' and 'build the wall' were, in their opinion, 'spontaneous outbursts by unknown individuals who may not even have been part of the student body or boosters.'

Now, since the predominantly Latino visiting team had only a handful of players who were not native born USians, and in fact a clear majority are at least second generation US citizens, one could say that the USA chant was 'cheering on both teams.' Of course, no one can remember their high school, or any other high school, with cheerleaders that cheered both teams...but the school administration when pressed did use that defense as well.

The visiting team contends that this was taking the traditional 'make the visiting team unwelcome' too far.

Opinions?

 

[Hygro]

Ban the jingoism until the kids learn to behave. Load them with sensitivity assemblies.