60 coaches online • Server time: 23:44
* * * Did you know? The player with the strongest arm is Cherrystone Hotpack with 5758 yards passed.
Recent Forum Topics  Gnome Roster - how a... | Problem to organize ... | Updated star player ... |
2009-03-08 00:01:57
67 votes, rating 3.2
67 votes, rating 3.2
Iran (a nice little history)
I thought I'd pass on this useful little article:
Iran is celebrating the 30th anniversary of its historic Islamic revolution after three decades of siege warfare by the western powers. To understand why relations between Tehran and the West are so bitter, we must understand their historical context.
Iran’s jagged relations with the West began during World War II. In 1941, the British Empire and Soviet Union jointly invaded and occupied the independent kingdom of Persia, as it was then known. This oil-motivated aggression was every bit as criminal as the German-Soviet occupation of Poland in 1939, but has been blanked out of western history texts.
The Allies deposed Iran’s ruler, Reza Shah, and installed his weak, pliant son, Mohammed Reza Pahlavi, on the throne as the latest puppet ruler in the British Empire.
But in 1951, a highly popular Iranian democratic leader, Mohammed Mossadegh, became prime minister and promptly nationalized Iran’s British-owned oil industry, ordering its profits be used to lift Iran from poverty rather than enriching Britain. The Shah and his entourage of western advisors fled.
Two years later, US and British intelligence mounted a coup that overthrew Mossadegh, ending Iran’s first democratic government. The Shah was restored to the Peacock Throne. Iran’s oil wealth returned to British and, now, US control. Washington and London proclaimed they had won an important victory against `Communism.’
more
Iran is celebrating the 30th anniversary of its historic Islamic revolution after three decades of siege warfare by the western powers. To understand why relations between Tehran and the West are so bitter, we must understand their historical context.
Iran’s jagged relations with the West began during World War II. In 1941, the British Empire and Soviet Union jointly invaded and occupied the independent kingdom of Persia, as it was then known. This oil-motivated aggression was every bit as criminal as the German-Soviet occupation of Poland in 1939, but has been blanked out of western history texts.
The Allies deposed Iran’s ruler, Reza Shah, and installed his weak, pliant son, Mohammed Reza Pahlavi, on the throne as the latest puppet ruler in the British Empire.
But in 1951, a highly popular Iranian democratic leader, Mohammed Mossadegh, became prime minister and promptly nationalized Iran’s British-owned oil industry, ordering its profits be used to lift Iran from poverty rather than enriching Britain. The Shah and his entourage of western advisors fled.
Two years later, US and British intelligence mounted a coup that overthrew Mossadegh, ending Iran’s first democratic government. The Shah was restored to the Peacock Throne. Iran’s oil wealth returned to British and, now, US control. Washington and London proclaimed they had won an important victory against `Communism.’
more
Comments
Posted by paulhicks on 2009-03-08 00:42:53
As much as i already knew most of this it is still nice (an inapropriate word here maybe) to be reminded of te things that are often hard to find without specificaly searching for them within western media. I bookmarked the article so i could read his other ones at a later date.
Just remember everyone....
The war on Iraq WAS necessery. Bush's government KNEW the had weapons of mass distruction hidden SOMEWHERE. After all, members of Bush's cabinet had been involved in selling them to Saddam not that long ago :D
Just remember everyone....
The war on Iraq WAS necessery. Bush's government KNEW the had weapons of mass distruction hidden SOMEWHERE. After all, members of Bush's cabinet had been involved in selling them to Saddam not that long ago :D
Posted by Pirog on 2009-03-08 00:53:18
I wonder if the low ratings are due to people disliking political blog posts in general or if it's because it's an uncomfortable truth for many people to read.
I voted a 6 to balance it out, because as a history student I always encourage people to learn more about why the world is like it is.
I voted a 6 to balance it out, because as a history student I always encourage people to learn more about why the world is like it is.
Posted by pythrr on 2009-03-08 01:09:33
and for another view of this read
Marjane Satrapi's _Persepolis_
Marjane Satrapi's _Persepolis_
Posted by PhrollikK on 2009-03-08 01:14:14
You dear sir are misinformed. It all started with Xerxes (and father) wanting to put Europe under his rule ca 500BC, but was stopped at Marathon and Plataea. The persians have been bitter toward the west ever since :D
Posted by westerner on 2009-03-08 02:45:08
>This oil-motivated aggression was every bit as criminal as the German-Soviet occupation of Poland in 1939
The usual Evo revisionist nonsense... funny, I missed the part where Iranians were subjected to mechanized genocide as the Poles were at the hands of the Nazis, with millions systematically annihilated.
Iran was invaded in 1941 because it was WORLD WAR. Reza refused to allow the Allies to transport critical supplies to Russia (1941 being a rather critical time in the German-Soviet theater) and was suspected of having Axis sympathies.
No doubt Evo would have pleaded with Herr Hitler to peacefully lay down his arms..
The usual Evo revisionist nonsense... funny, I missed the part where Iranians were subjected to mechanized genocide as the Poles were at the hands of the Nazis, with millions systematically annihilated.
Iran was invaded in 1941 because it was WORLD WAR. Reza refused to allow the Allies to transport critical supplies to Russia (1941 being a rather critical time in the German-Soviet theater) and was suspected of having Axis sympathies.
No doubt Evo would have pleaded with Herr Hitler to peacefully lay down his arms..
Posted by paulhicks on 2009-03-08 02:59:16
Evo didnt actualy write it.
And whilst there can be no doubt that there have been few things in the history of man as appaling as the holocaust it is important not to get mixed up with what the author actualy wrote.
He did not claim that the alies commited genocide in their invasion... he claimed it was as illegal as germany's invasion of poland.... which it was.
.
Whilst the Iranians were never sent to concentration camps and exterminated in such an appalingly systematic and organised way as hitler did to the Jews they have non the less been the subject of genocide throughout history (as many nations unfortunatly have) and sadly England (my country) and later America have been involved in these genocides either directly or indirectly.
The story told in this article is not an isolated case. A small amount of reaseach throws up many many more cases of England and America working to overthrow democratic regimes and set up despotic rule in countries they have no right interfereing in in order to achieve their goals
And whilst there can be no doubt that there have been few things in the history of man as appaling as the holocaust it is important not to get mixed up with what the author actualy wrote.
He did not claim that the alies commited genocide in their invasion... he claimed it was as illegal as germany's invasion of poland.... which it was.
.
Whilst the Iranians were never sent to concentration camps and exterminated in such an appalingly systematic and organised way as hitler did to the Jews they have non the less been the subject of genocide throughout history (as many nations unfortunatly have) and sadly England (my country) and later America have been involved in these genocides either directly or indirectly.
The story told in this article is not an isolated case. A small amount of reaseach throws up many many more cases of England and America working to overthrow democratic regimes and set up despotic rule in countries they have no right interfereing in in order to achieve their goals
Posted by Shimin on 2009-03-08 02:59:57
History is written by the Wictors.
On that account you should always try to see it from "the other side" (that would be from the losing side).
Westener: Actually The Poles themselves annihaleted an entire city of jews. They were hated all over Europe, and WWII was never about the jews untill after the war. It was about power, GB/USA/Poland/France/Russia they all let Hitler round up jews, they only waged war as they became terrified that Germany would grow too strong. (Actually Russia didnt, but Germany needed the oil and Hitler didnt trust Russia to deliver and wanted to be independent from others resourses).
Invading a sovereign country when it is neutral is an act of war. Iran were NOT the aggressors.
On that account you should always try to see it from "the other side" (that would be from the losing side).
Westener: Actually The Poles themselves annihaleted an entire city of jews. They were hated all over Europe, and WWII was never about the jews untill after the war. It was about power, GB/USA/Poland/France/Russia they all let Hitler round up jews, they only waged war as they became terrified that Germany would grow too strong. (Actually Russia didnt, but Germany needed the oil and Hitler didnt trust Russia to deliver and wanted to be independent from others resourses).
Invading a sovereign country when it is neutral is an act of war. Iran were NOT the aggressors.
Posted by Jon_Guitard on 2009-03-08 03:44:19
There is unfortunately no monopoly on inhumanity. North America was colonized on the corpses of it's native people, who suffered the loss of 90% of their population. Europeans would give them blankets infested with smallpox, and the tradition of scalping was a western one. They were paid a bounty on native scalps brought in.
There are very few 'civilizations' who can claim a moral high ground. So it's best not to point fingers.
There are very few 'civilizations' who can claim a moral high ground. So it's best not to point fingers.
Posted by paulhicks on 2009-03-08 03:52:29
You are quite right Jon. I would find it hard to believe that ANY country didn't have a history of inhumanity somewhere in their collective past.
But "it's best not to ppoint fingers"...... do you mean we should never bother to point out these atrocities?
But "it's best not to ppoint fingers"...... do you mean we should never bother to point out these atrocities?
Posted by EvolveToAnarchism on 2009-03-08 04:06:22
It's interesting to see the ill-thought-out knee-jerk reactions of some of some people on FUMBBL. It's almost laughable to read some of the comments.
When it comes to fighting fascists, if you know any history, you'll know that anarchists were amongst the earliest opponents of fascism, unlike certain nations who waited well into WWII to take a stand.
It would be an interesting alternate history to read, if the anarchists and their allies had won the Spanish Civil War. It probably would have sent a strong message to the German fascists. Heck! It may have prevented WWII...
When it comes to fighting fascists, if you know any history, you'll know that anarchists were amongst the earliest opponents of fascism, unlike certain nations who waited well into WWII to take a stand.
It would be an interesting alternate history to read, if the anarchists and their allies had won the Spanish Civil War. It probably would have sent a strong message to the German fascists. Heck! It may have prevented WWII...
Posted by westerner on 2009-03-08 05:27:47
Posting articles verbatim is the equivalent of graffiti, only slightly less imaginative...
Comparisons to the 1939 German invasion of Poland are highly inappropriate.
But delete that comparison and you have a more innocuous piece... although it still whitewashes the ayatollahs.
Evo is right that Spain would have been a good place to take an earlier stand against the Axis (along with Ethiopia, the Rhineland, Austria, and Czechoslovakia). One of the principal allies of the Republicans fighting the Axis in Spain was the Soviet Union, which Britain was attempting to get supplies to by invading Iran in 1941.
I guess the world is a bit more complicated than this article makes it out..
Comparisons to the 1939 German invasion of Poland are highly inappropriate.
But delete that comparison and you have a more innocuous piece... although it still whitewashes the ayatollahs.
Evo is right that Spain would have been a good place to take an earlier stand against the Axis (along with Ethiopia, the Rhineland, Austria, and Czechoslovakia). One of the principal allies of the Republicans fighting the Axis in Spain was the Soviet Union, which Britain was attempting to get supplies to by invading Iran in 1941.
I guess the world is a bit more complicated than this article makes it out..
Posted by Balle2000 on 2009-03-08 06:32:10
Nice article, cheers.
Posted by pythrr on 2009-03-08 06:35:19
"When it comes to fighting fascists, if you know any history, you'll know that anarchists were amongst the earliest opponents of fascism"
True.
However: If B=Bad, it doesn not necessarily follow that just because A opposes B, then A=good.
@paulhicks: no, it shouldn;t stop us pointing fingers, but we should perhaps all point fingers at ourselves first. tends to avoid the old hypocrisy thingy.
@ jon: yup, inhumanity is universal. pretty much every culture/religion/group has done some f**ked up things over the years. To err is human, and all that.
True.
However: If B=Bad, it doesn not necessarily follow that just because A opposes B, then A=good.
@paulhicks: no, it shouldn;t stop us pointing fingers, but we should perhaps all point fingers at ourselves first. tends to avoid the old hypocrisy thingy.
@ jon: yup, inhumanity is universal. pretty much every culture/religion/group has done some f**ked up things over the years. To err is human, and all that.
Posted by Jaim on 2009-03-08 09:35:46
History is written by those who own functional pens.
Posted by Cloggy on 2009-03-08 09:47:37
The most shocking about the reactions to this:
1: The fact that apparently for some people this is news. The West have behaved like total bastards all over the world for 100 years and more. Wake up!
2: The fact that it appears that people think this bit of somehwat selective historical reporting to insinuate that it has any relevance to the current political situation in Iran.
My own 2 cents:
Having a country that is run by a bunch of reli-fascists develop nuclear weapons technology is NOT a good idea, despite anything other nation may have done to them in the distant past, period. I realy don't give a crap who might be responsible for the Iranians being somewhat mistrustful of the West.
You can't hide behind history to permanently excuse any criminal policy or actions forever. I we use the facts relayed in this piece to say that perhaps what Iran does is ok, that would also extend to Israel. And I think we all know how much the posters who agreed with you love them....
In all honesty I would have appreciated it a lot more if the blog would have contained some more balanced info about the regime you are giving some support here. Their humans rights and womens rights record are nearly the worst in the entire world, quite close to the Taliban. Or is that also ok because we bullied them in the past?
1: The fact that apparently for some people this is news. The West have behaved like total bastards all over the world for 100 years and more. Wake up!
2: The fact that it appears that people think this bit of somehwat selective historical reporting to insinuate that it has any relevance to the current political situation in Iran.
My own 2 cents:
Having a country that is run by a bunch of reli-fascists develop nuclear weapons technology is NOT a good idea, despite anything other nation may have done to them in the distant past, period. I realy don't give a crap who might be responsible for the Iranians being somewhat mistrustful of the West.
You can't hide behind history to permanently excuse any criminal policy or actions forever. I we use the facts relayed in this piece to say that perhaps what Iran does is ok, that would also extend to Israel. And I think we all know how much the posters who agreed with you love them....
In all honesty I would have appreciated it a lot more if the blog would have contained some more balanced info about the regime you are giving some support here. Their humans rights and womens rights record are nearly the worst in the entire world, quite close to the Taliban. Or is that also ok because we bullied them in the past?
Posted by Dragons on 2009-03-08 14:01:17
All war startes with religion and money.
Posted by Panda_ on 2009-03-08 14:41:57
It looks like someone watched Persepolis, a good movie by the way.
It's also good to see you blogging there, and i like cultural articles.
It's also good to see you blogging there, and i like cultural articles.
Posted by EvolveToAnarchism on 2009-03-08 14:49:21
Cloggy, there is a huge difference between an explanation and an excuse. I think you fundamentally misunderstand the whole point of the article.
Posted by Catalyst32 on 2009-03-08 15:43:04
What Cloggy said...
Plus... the US and Brits claimed a victory over Communism when they restored the Shah to power because the regime they toppled was Communist. Elected or not when you NATIONALIZE any industry that is an act of Communism.
It also is an act of ROBBERY of those that actually owned the means to produce in that industry and you are giving it to YOURSELF, not the people. Nationalized industries are not owned by the people they are owned by the Political Elite as a proxy for the people. If you aren't part of that Political Elite you get NOTHING. That's Communism in a nutshell.
AND... Evo... Anarchists are against EVERYTHING. To claim they were the first to be against the Nazi's is ludicrous. Who/What aren't anarchists against?
Is their any form of government, any form of religion, any social club, any organized body of people with similar beliefs and goals that anarchist don't oppose?
Plus... the US and Brits claimed a victory over Communism when they restored the Shah to power because the regime they toppled was Communist. Elected or not when you NATIONALIZE any industry that is an act of Communism.
It also is an act of ROBBERY of those that actually owned the means to produce in that industry and you are giving it to YOURSELF, not the people. Nationalized industries are not owned by the people they are owned by the Political Elite as a proxy for the people. If you aren't part of that Political Elite you get NOTHING. That's Communism in a nutshell.
AND... Evo... Anarchists are against EVERYTHING. To claim they were the first to be against the Nazi's is ludicrous. Who/What aren't anarchists against?
Is their any form of government, any form of religion, any social club, any organized body of people with similar beliefs and goals that anarchist don't oppose?
Posted by paulhicks on 2009-03-08 22:49:06
Catalyst. Nationalization is NOT a comunist act (though it is often one of the steps that comunist regeimes take) it is a SOCIALIST act. Towards the same end of the scale but still far away from it and a very different thing. In fact around the time we are talking about we in England were busy nationalising large sectors of our services and we wernt living in a comunist regeime... mearly one that had moved further left than it was previously and had a percieved necessity at the time to do so.
Also don't confuse anarchists (the reasonably well thought out political ideal which generaly aims for a utopian co-operative society.... hope i've got this right evo... please let me know if i'm wrong) with idiot "punk-type-anarchists" who didnt really believe anything (more nihilists really but the word was never as popular as anarchy) and who claimed to want to destroy all systes etc.....
***side note: true story: one of my brother in laws best friends often tells me how i know nothing about punk because he was "one of the true anarchists listening to the sex pistols".... hes deputy manager at our local bank now...."""
Real annarchists (though i'm not one myself) arn't "against everything" or even any form of organization at all (again evo can correct me if i've misunderstood my reading on teh subject).
I'm suprised that Evo has yet to pen one of these blogs explaining exactly what Annarchism actualy is to put an end to some of this confusion.
P.S. apologies that my spelling and gramer are probably even worse than normal... very i'll today
Also don't confuse anarchists (the reasonably well thought out political ideal which generaly aims for a utopian co-operative society.... hope i've got this right evo... please let me know if i'm wrong) with idiot "punk-type-anarchists" who didnt really believe anything (more nihilists really but the word was never as popular as anarchy) and who claimed to want to destroy all systes etc.....
***side note: true story: one of my brother in laws best friends often tells me how i know nothing about punk because he was "one of the true anarchists listening to the sex pistols".... hes deputy manager at our local bank now...."""
Real annarchists (though i'm not one myself) arn't "against everything" or even any form of organization at all (again evo can correct me if i've misunderstood my reading on teh subject).
I'm suprised that Evo has yet to pen one of these blogs explaining exactly what Annarchism actualy is to put an end to some of this confusion.
P.S. apologies that my spelling and gramer are probably even worse than normal... very i'll today
Posted by EvolveToAnarchism on 2009-03-09 00:18:51
It's always refreshing to here a voice of sanity in the comment section of my blog.
paulhicks, you are pretty much accurate with the "utopian co-operative society" as IMHO anarchism at it's core is about non-coercive mutually beneficial communities. Even it's greek linguistic roots give you a good idea of what it means: "without rulers". Democracy used to be dismissed as utopian and mob rule. Anarchism is just a further extension on human beings innate desire to be free.
As for the jab at "punk-type-anarchists", there's a reason why there's a connection with the legitimate political philosophy. There are a lot of serious political punk bands who believe in anarchism. So, don't dismiss the stereotype on sight, you may be pleasantly surprised.
And for the record, I believe my first blog post was to cite Berkman's [url=http://www.lucyparsonsproject.org/anarchism/berkman_abc_of_anarchism.html]ABCs of Anarchism[/url]:
"I want to tell you about Anarchism.
I want to tell you what Anarchism is, because I think it is well you should know it. Also because so little is known about it, and what is known is generally hearsay and mostly false.
I want to tell you about it, because I believe that Anarchism is the finest and biggest thing man has ever thought of; the only thing that can give you liberty and well-being, and bring peace and joy to the world.
I want to tell you about it in such plain and simple language that there will be no misunderstanding it. Big words and high sounding phrases serve only to confuse. Straight thinking means plain speaking.
But before I tell you what Anarchism is, I want to tell you what it is not.
That is necessary because so much falsehood has been spread about Anarchism. Even intelligent persons often have entirely wrong notions about it. Some people talk about Anarchism without knowing a thing about it. And some lie about Anarchism, because they don't want you to know the truth about it."
Sorry for the vandalism ;)
paulhicks, you are pretty much accurate with the "utopian co-operative society" as IMHO anarchism at it's core is about non-coercive mutually beneficial communities. Even it's greek linguistic roots give you a good idea of what it means: "without rulers". Democracy used to be dismissed as utopian and mob rule. Anarchism is just a further extension on human beings innate desire to be free.
As for the jab at "punk-type-anarchists", there's a reason why there's a connection with the legitimate political philosophy. There are a lot of serious political punk bands who believe in anarchism. So, don't dismiss the stereotype on sight, you may be pleasantly surprised.
And for the record, I believe my first blog post was to cite Berkman's [url=http://www.lucyparsonsproject.org/anarchism/berkman_abc_of_anarchism.html]ABCs of Anarchism[/url]:
"I want to tell you about Anarchism.
I want to tell you what Anarchism is, because I think it is well you should know it. Also because so little is known about it, and what is known is generally hearsay and mostly false.
I want to tell you about it, because I believe that Anarchism is the finest and biggest thing man has ever thought of; the only thing that can give you liberty and well-being, and bring peace and joy to the world.
I want to tell you about it in such plain and simple language that there will be no misunderstanding it. Big words and high sounding phrases serve only to confuse. Straight thinking means plain speaking.
But before I tell you what Anarchism is, I want to tell you what it is not.
That is necessary because so much falsehood has been spread about Anarchism. Even intelligent persons often have entirely wrong notions about it. Some people talk about Anarchism without knowing a thing about it. And some lie about Anarchism, because they don't want you to know the truth about it."
Sorry for the vandalism ;)
Posted by Catalyst32 on 2009-03-12 06:46:12
I've read enough of Communist Manifesto to know that Socialism is a step on the ladder towards Communism. And as the only country of any power to stop the world from slipping into Communist control is now stepping further up the ladder. Watch out, England, your slope will be even slicker without the US to anchor you to reality.
The whole world is collapsing economically right now while Nero Obama does nothing. You will soon see that your economy sinks without the Capitalist Powerhouse kicking out widgets and buying Cold Play CD's.
If Anarchy is a good thing go live where Anarchy reigns supreme. You won't because anarchy is Hell on Earth because their is no Earthly Utopia. You high-minded, peaceful, humanist, anarchist will be the first to drown in the non-system of non-governance you crave.
You've heard of Divide and Conquer? Anarchy is simply a way to divide us. Then the Conquistadores come.
The whole world is collapsing economically right now while Nero Obama does nothing. You will soon see that your economy sinks without the Capitalist Powerhouse kicking out widgets and buying Cold Play CD's.
If Anarchy is a good thing go live where Anarchy reigns supreme. You won't because anarchy is Hell on Earth because their is no Earthly Utopia. You high-minded, peaceful, humanist, anarchist will be the first to drown in the non-system of non-governance you crave.
You've heard of Divide and Conquer? Anarchy is simply a way to divide us. Then the Conquistadores come.
Posted by paulhicks on 2009-03-12 12:15:51
i couldn't quite decide if you were being totaly serious Catalyst32 but i thought i'd answer as if you were....
(things like this make me wish blog replies had the same quoe function as the forums do)
Catalyst32 wrote:
"I've read enough of Communist Manifesto to know that Socialism is a step on the ladder towards Communism"
Very true. But it does not automatically follow that ust because a country is "socialist" that they will next become comunist. Thats like saying that if a country is conservative that they will automaticaly slip further down the chain into facism. It just doesn't work like that. It's whats known as a "Slippery Slope" arguement and their are countless bad examples of its use.
Catalyst32 wrote:
"And as the only country of any power to stop the world from slipping into Communist control is now stepping further up the ladder. Watch out, England, your slope will be even slicker without the US to anchor you to reality."
Firstly this belief that America is the worlds knight in shining armour protecting us all from the evils of comunism is rather outdated now. I'd say america's current image accross most of the world isn't quite so flatering for them (my scotish relatives tell me a comon joke up there is that america will invade (sorry "liberate") scottland next to get at the pityfull North Sea Oil reserves).
England has very little chance of slipping into comunism (though never say never). We are a rather dull and stable "middle of the road" type pollitically and i see very litle chance of that changing just because he economy is going through one of its periodic downturns.
Catalyst32 wrote:
"The whole world is collapsing economically right now while Nero Obama does nothing"
It's Obama's fault? Cool. Not living in America i didn't realise it was all down to him (love the Nero comparison btw). Here was me thinking this was a fairly natural consequence of an international economy that has been growing too fast without enough control for too long.
Catalyst32 wrote:
"You will soon see that your economy sinks without the Capitalist Powerhouse kicking out widgets and buying Cold Play CD's."
Whilst it's certainly true that 86% of our economy relies on Coldplay album sales to America we have come up with a plan. We're going to cut the price and sell hem cheap to China instead since their rapidly becoming more of a "capitalyst powerhouse" than you guys ;P
Unfortunately we may not be able to afford to al come to Disneyland this year though :(
Catalyst32 wrote:
" If Anarchy is a good thing go live where Anarchy reigns supreme. You won't because anarchy is Hell on Earth because their is no Earthly Utopia. You high-minded, peaceful, humanist, anarchist will be the first to drown in the non-system of non-governance you crave"
Your quite right... there is no earthly utopia. Thats kinda the point. Utopia is an ideal society dream. Every political belief system has a utopian dream not just the anarchists and every system takes little steps towards creating it for themselves.
I'm not sure why you consider the Anarchist utopian dream (a co-operatve, peacefull, interdependant, caring etc etc society) as particularly "hell on earth". Sounds quite nice to me. If it wasn't for the fact that i beieve human nature stands in the way of this i think i'd probably go whole hog and declare myself an Anarchist too.
As i said i was about 50/50 as to wether you were joking or not (sadly humour translates so badly accross the internet sometimes) but i thought i'd debate it anyway just for fun :D
(things like this make me wish blog replies had the same quoe function as the forums do)
Catalyst32 wrote:
"I've read enough of Communist Manifesto to know that Socialism is a step on the ladder towards Communism"
Very true. But it does not automatically follow that ust because a country is "socialist" that they will next become comunist. Thats like saying that if a country is conservative that they will automaticaly slip further down the chain into facism. It just doesn't work like that. It's whats known as a "Slippery Slope" arguement and their are countless bad examples of its use.
Catalyst32 wrote:
"And as the only country of any power to stop the world from slipping into Communist control is now stepping further up the ladder. Watch out, England, your slope will be even slicker without the US to anchor you to reality."
Firstly this belief that America is the worlds knight in shining armour protecting us all from the evils of comunism is rather outdated now. I'd say america's current image accross most of the world isn't quite so flatering for them (my scotish relatives tell me a comon joke up there is that america will invade (sorry "liberate") scottland next to get at the pityfull North Sea Oil reserves).
England has very little chance of slipping into comunism (though never say never). We are a rather dull and stable "middle of the road" type pollitically and i see very litle chance of that changing just because he economy is going through one of its periodic downturns.
Catalyst32 wrote:
"The whole world is collapsing economically right now while Nero Obama does nothing"
It's Obama's fault? Cool. Not living in America i didn't realise it was all down to him (love the Nero comparison btw). Here was me thinking this was a fairly natural consequence of an international economy that has been growing too fast without enough control for too long.
Catalyst32 wrote:
"You will soon see that your economy sinks without the Capitalist Powerhouse kicking out widgets and buying Cold Play CD's."
Whilst it's certainly true that 86% of our economy relies on Coldplay album sales to America we have come up with a plan. We're going to cut the price and sell hem cheap to China instead since their rapidly becoming more of a "capitalyst powerhouse" than you guys ;P
Unfortunately we may not be able to afford to al come to Disneyland this year though :(
Catalyst32 wrote:
" If Anarchy is a good thing go live where Anarchy reigns supreme. You won't because anarchy is Hell on Earth because their is no Earthly Utopia. You high-minded, peaceful, humanist, anarchist will be the first to drown in the non-system of non-governance you crave"
Your quite right... there is no earthly utopia. Thats kinda the point. Utopia is an ideal society dream. Every political belief system has a utopian dream not just the anarchists and every system takes little steps towards creating it for themselves.
I'm not sure why you consider the Anarchist utopian dream (a co-operatve, peacefull, interdependant, caring etc etc society) as particularly "hell on earth". Sounds quite nice to me. If it wasn't for the fact that i beieve human nature stands in the way of this i think i'd probably go whole hog and declare myself an Anarchist too.
As i said i was about 50/50 as to wether you were joking or not (sadly humour translates so badly accross the internet sometimes) but i thought i'd debate it anyway just for fun :D
Posted by Catalyst32 on 2009-03-14 01:20:31
"We will never have to invade you. We will spoon feed you Socialism until one morning you wake up living in under Communism." -- Breznev (I believe) speaking to US Congressman.
Of course then the USSR invaded a few small nations to begin porxy wars that the US gets blamed for. But the US is used to being blamed for everything anyway by now so we don't care. We know we did the right thing. Nothing else matters.
Paul... how big is that spoon these days? Is it yet a bowl of Socialism?... a bathtub?... a swimming pool?...
Whatever size it is today it will continue to grow until it IS Communism and you or your children will be enslaved by it.
Anarchy has existed... it was peaceful once before resources started to become scarce for whatever reasons... then the Romans, or the Vikings, or the Moors, or Napolean, or the British Empire, or the Nazis, or the Soviets, or the Terrorists, or some other conquerer comes. And Anarchy does exist today among every little genocide.
Of course then the USSR invaded a few small nations to begin porxy wars that the US gets blamed for. But the US is used to being blamed for everything anyway by now so we don't care. We know we did the right thing. Nothing else matters.
Paul... how big is that spoon these days? Is it yet a bowl of Socialism?... a bathtub?... a swimming pool?...
Whatever size it is today it will continue to grow until it IS Communism and you or your children will be enslaved by it.
Anarchy has existed... it was peaceful once before resources started to become scarce for whatever reasons... then the Romans, or the Vikings, or the Moors, or Napolean, or the British Empire, or the Nazis, or the Soviets, or the Terrorists, or some other conquerer comes. And Anarchy does exist today among every little genocide.
Posted by paulhicks on 2009-03-14 08:53:44
Catalyst32, are you aware that just because one person says something which makes a nice sound bite doesn't actualy make it true?
Thank goodness we have you who know so much about socialism and teh political climate in England to protect us from the evils of Comunism. Between this and your tirade about Muslims in the other blog you really do seem to think we're under attack from evil on all sides.
I have seen much about how America's news sources have become increasingly sensationalist in their scaremongering over the years. Is ths the final result?
Would you actualy like to know a little something about socialism in the UK? Over a decade ago Tony Blair and some public relations advisors decided to rename it "New Socialism" when they changed their parties name to "New Labour". Most of us believed this was a cheap and cynical marketing ploy but it turned out they really were changing Socialism without anyone realising. Socialism in the UK has been moving further to the right and away from Comunism ever since.
So no.... your unpleasent scaremongering that my children will be enslaved by comunism because we allow socialism to exist still seems pretty far from the truth.
And your absolutely right annarchy exists in all sorts of unpleasent situations. But that annarchy (or chaos) has nothing to do with the political belief system known as Anarachism which was under discussion. Same word but not the same thing.
Thank goodness we have you who know so much about socialism and teh political climate in England to protect us from the evils of Comunism. Between this and your tirade about Muslims in the other blog you really do seem to think we're under attack from evil on all sides.
I have seen much about how America's news sources have become increasingly sensationalist in their scaremongering over the years. Is ths the final result?
Would you actualy like to know a little something about socialism in the UK? Over a decade ago Tony Blair and some public relations advisors decided to rename it "New Socialism" when they changed their parties name to "New Labour". Most of us believed this was a cheap and cynical marketing ploy but it turned out they really were changing Socialism without anyone realising. Socialism in the UK has been moving further to the right and away from Comunism ever since.
So no.... your unpleasent scaremongering that my children will be enslaved by comunism because we allow socialism to exist still seems pretty far from the truth.
And your absolutely right annarchy exists in all sorts of unpleasent situations. But that annarchy (or chaos) has nothing to do with the political belief system known as Anarachism which was under discussion. Same word but not the same thing.
Posted by Catalyst32 on 2009-03-14 22:38:45
You are WRONG about the politcal belief system Anarchism and the unpleasant situations where Anarchy exists not being the same thing. If that belief were to win out Anarchy follows.
In fact, it is that belief of everybody can just join together and sing "KumBaya" because we can EVOLVE to this mythical state of enlightenment that allows Anarchy to exist where it does (at least in part). Because EVIL (like Genocide) can only exist when good men do NOTHING. And people that BELIEVE in Anarchy as a concept are no doubt good men that have convinced themselves to do nothing. Allowing Anarchy to reign.
Can you follow that?
And I do know that Europe is moving to the Right on most it's Economic fronts. But is still moving Left on education. And THAT is where you will LOSE your country. Because the pseudo-intellectuals you are creating will someday BLAME your economic leader once again for inequality. And a new generation trained on class envy will sweep aside your current changes. That's what Communism does, Paul.
It lies in wait for a crisis when it can grab another chunk of your freedom for it's own power. That's how you all became Socialist nations in the first place... Right? That is also EXACTLY what Obama and his handlers are doing to my country right now. His chief of staff has been quoted saying something like... "This crisis presents too great of an oppurtunity to push forward our agenda." (very poorly quoted)
And what is the agenda... Socialism.
Scaremongering and telling it like it is are NOT the same. I know who and what I am dealing with here. I have covered it for DECADES now as a vocation. This is how it happens every single time.
In fact, it is that belief of everybody can just join together and sing "KumBaya" because we can EVOLVE to this mythical state of enlightenment that allows Anarchy to exist where it does (at least in part). Because EVIL (like Genocide) can only exist when good men do NOTHING. And people that BELIEVE in Anarchy as a concept are no doubt good men that have convinced themselves to do nothing. Allowing Anarchy to reign.
Can you follow that?
And I do know that Europe is moving to the Right on most it's Economic fronts. But is still moving Left on education. And THAT is where you will LOSE your country. Because the pseudo-intellectuals you are creating will someday BLAME your economic leader once again for inequality. And a new generation trained on class envy will sweep aside your current changes. That's what Communism does, Paul.
It lies in wait for a crisis when it can grab another chunk of your freedom for it's own power. That's how you all became Socialist nations in the first place... Right? That is also EXACTLY what Obama and his handlers are doing to my country right now. His chief of staff has been quoted saying something like... "This crisis presents too great of an oppurtunity to push forward our agenda." (very poorly quoted)
And what is the agenda... Socialism.
Scaremongering and telling it like it is are NOT the same. I know who and what I am dealing with here. I have covered it for DECADES now as a vocation. This is how it happens every single time.
Posted by paulhicks on 2009-03-15 00:15:28
Catalyst32 wrote:
"You are WRONG about the politcal belief system Anarchism and the unpleasant situations where Anarchy exists not being the same thing. If that belief were to win out Anarchy follows.
In fact, it is that belief of everybody can just join together and sing "KumBaya" because we can EVOLVE to this mythical state of enlightenment that allows Anarchy to exist where it does (at least in part). Because EVIL (like Genocide) can only exist when good men do NOTHING. And people that BELIEVE in Anarchy as a concept are no doubt good men that have convinced themselves to do nothing. Allowing Anarchy to reign.
Can you follow that?"
Not easily no.... it's hard to follow your logic when it has holes in it so large an Elephant could fall in and break its neck.
Where exactly did we move from your belief that Anarchism was at the core of all cnflicts to it not being full of hippy steareotypes who are doing nothing while people get tortured. I think maybe its best that we leave the subject of Anarchism as a political belief system alone now since you apear to be completely incabable of
a) seperating it from anarchy/ chaos
b) seperating it from boy scouts singing KumBaya bizzarely
Catalyst32 wrote:
"And I do know that Europe is moving to the Right on most it's Economic fronts. But is still moving Left on education. And THAT is where you will LOSE your country. Because the pseudo-intellectuals you are creating will someday BLAME your economic leader once again for inequality. And a new generation trained on class envy will sweep aside your current changes. That's what Communism does, Paul."
Well i'm not sure at all that Europe as a whole is moving right politicaly (and i never said that.... i mearly talked about the main "socialist" party within England) as to me the impression is that Europe is becoming more Liberal in general as time passes.
However that is just an impression i get. Clearly you know more about it than I do so I will bow to your knowledge on this one (after all you don't seem the kind of person to make broad sweeping generalisations without any solid facts to back them up [/end sarcasm]).
I would be very interested to hear your views on how England's (or Europe as a whole if you prefer) educational system is moving to the left and encouraging "a new generation trained on class envy" as you put it since i work in the education system and was blissfully unaware that this had become my new mandate. Like you said... it's amazing how comunism creeps in. Apparently i'm teaching it now and i never even realised.
"You are WRONG about the politcal belief system Anarchism and the unpleasant situations where Anarchy exists not being the same thing. If that belief were to win out Anarchy follows.
In fact, it is that belief of everybody can just join together and sing "KumBaya" because we can EVOLVE to this mythical state of enlightenment that allows Anarchy to exist where it does (at least in part). Because EVIL (like Genocide) can only exist when good men do NOTHING. And people that BELIEVE in Anarchy as a concept are no doubt good men that have convinced themselves to do nothing. Allowing Anarchy to reign.
Can you follow that?"
Not easily no.... it's hard to follow your logic when it has holes in it so large an Elephant could fall in and break its neck.
Where exactly did we move from your belief that Anarchism was at the core of all cnflicts to it not being full of hippy steareotypes who are doing nothing while people get tortured. I think maybe its best that we leave the subject of Anarchism as a political belief system alone now since you apear to be completely incabable of
a) seperating it from anarchy/ chaos
b) seperating it from boy scouts singing KumBaya bizzarely
Catalyst32 wrote:
"And I do know that Europe is moving to the Right on most it's Economic fronts. But is still moving Left on education. And THAT is where you will LOSE your country. Because the pseudo-intellectuals you are creating will someday BLAME your economic leader once again for inequality. And a new generation trained on class envy will sweep aside your current changes. That's what Communism does, Paul."
Well i'm not sure at all that Europe as a whole is moving right politicaly (and i never said that.... i mearly talked about the main "socialist" party within England) as to me the impression is that Europe is becoming more Liberal in general as time passes.
However that is just an impression i get. Clearly you know more about it than I do so I will bow to your knowledge on this one (after all you don't seem the kind of person to make broad sweeping generalisations without any solid facts to back them up [/end sarcasm]).
I would be very interested to hear your views on how England's (or Europe as a whole if you prefer) educational system is moving to the left and encouraging "a new generation trained on class envy" as you put it since i work in the education system and was blissfully unaware that this had become my new mandate. Like you said... it's amazing how comunism creeps in. Apparently i'm teaching it now and i never even realised.
Posted by paulhicks on 2009-03-15 00:22:44
My second sentence should have read "When exactly did we move away from your belief that Anarchism was at the core of all conflicts to it now being full of hippy stereotypes who are doing nothing whilst people get tortured?"
The rest of my gramatical and spelling nightmare you will have to work through on your own :D
The rest of my gramatical and spelling nightmare you will have to work through on your own :D
Posted by Catalyst32 on 2009-03-16 04:58:10
Anarchist ideals are also Hippie Commune/Leftist ideals... hence Kumbaya instead of actually doing something. By doing nothing out of their warped idealism they allow those that create the chaos to go unchecked. And what's more they oppose anyone that tries to bring an end to that Chaos. THAT is how the two are connected.
Europe as a whole is currently moving to the Right politically and economically.
You prove my point about how you have been spoon fed a belief system. You don't even know that you are teaching it to a new generation. But rest assured you will wake up one fine morning many years from now and wonder. How did we get here? Why do I have to stand in line for toilet paper and bread? Hey at least you'll have Fine English Beer and Gin to wash down your misery instead of Nasty Vodka.
But go ahead and just keep attacking the messenger. That is how Leftists debate at all times in my experience. Because their own ideas don't pass the smell test and are easily dispatched.
Europe as a whole is currently moving to the Right politically and economically.
You prove my point about how you have been spoon fed a belief system. You don't even know that you are teaching it to a new generation. But rest assured you will wake up one fine morning many years from now and wonder. How did we get here? Why do I have to stand in line for toilet paper and bread? Hey at least you'll have Fine English Beer and Gin to wash down your misery instead of Nasty Vodka.
But go ahead and just keep attacking the messenger. That is how Leftists debate at all times in my experience. Because their own ideas don't pass the smell test and are easily dispatched.