North Korea

[-:Undertaker:-]

Not at all. Socialism refers purely to the economy. One area of Communism. Communism is both economic and political which is EXACTLY what North Korea is. Socialism has nothing to do with a repressive state. Common misconception. Otherwise you must think that Tony Benn wanted Britain to become like North Korea?

I think you'll find I said that in the last thread. In reality they are nothing to do with each other.

Heres a nice quote a picked up:

Socialism is communism, as I said before; both are inseperable. On Tony Benn, the whole idea of communism/socialism in the first place was to 'free the workers' it was never intended to create regimes such as those of North Korea, the Soviet Union and the Peoples Republic of China but it did and thats exactly why socialism/communism/maoism/marxism - whichever term you prefer (with slight differences between them) all fail.

The only reason you wish to seperate them is because you yourself being left-wing and more-than-likely a socialist, you know the negatives the word communism has with it and anybody viewing your socialist/communist thoughts & ideas would look at them and just laugh.

It would be like me saying that Thatcherism, Capitalism and Conservatism are all totally different things which can be seperated on a political scale when they are in essence, more or less of the same thing with different variants. The quote you got, whats that from? Socialist International? :rolleyes:

Ontop of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics example and the Karl Marx example, you only have to read the quotes of Lenin (Founder & former Premier of the Communist Union of Soviet Socialist Republics), Mao (Founder & former Premier of the Peoples Republic of China and Communist Party of China) and many others. The list could go on with Pol Pot, Josef Stalin (former premier of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics) and the rest of them.

"If Socialism can only be realized when the intellectual development of all the people permits it, then we shall not see Socialism for at least five hundred years." - Vladimir Lenin

"The goal of socialism is communism." - Vladimir Lenin

"The socialist system will eventually replace the capitalist system." - Mao Zedong

"[After Communism succeeds] ...then, there will come a peace across the earth." - Josef Stalin

[MrPinkPanther]

Socialism is communism, as I said before; both are inseperable. On Tony Benn, the whole idea of communism/socialism in the first place was to 'free the workers' it was never intended to create regimes such as those of North Korea, the Soviet Union and the Peoples Republic of China but it did and thats exactly why socialism/communism/maoism/marxism - whichever term you prefer (with slight differences between them) all fail.

Well no. Lets take the largest Communist state, the Soviet Union. It was founded on the intention of not just a Socialist economy but a Communist government also, the "Vanguard of the proletariat" as they call it. They are completely separate things.

The only reason you wish to seperate them is because you yourself being left-wing and more-than-likely a socialist, you know the negatives the word communism has with it and anybody viewing your socialist/communist thoughts & ideas would look at them and just laugh.

Anything left of centre isn't socialist. I happen to think socialism is a fantastic idea in theory but would never work in practice. I don't think you can really call the liberal democrats left wing do you? They are centre-left at very most.

It would be like me saying that Thatcherism, Capitalism and Conservatism are all totally different things which can be seperated on a political scale when they are in essence, more or less of the same thing with different variants

Thatcherism and Conservativism are clearly the same thing but you have actually given me a fantastic example. Conservatism includes capitalism but just because you are a capitalist it doesn't make you Conservative. Just like Communism includes Socialism but just because you Socialist it doesn't make you Communist.

The quote you got, whats that from? Socialist International? :rolleyes:

No actually a respectable academics analysis of Soviet Russia which I am doing an item of coursework on.

"If Socialism can only be realized when the intellectual development of all the people permits it, then we shall not see Socialism for at least five hundred years." - Vladimir Lenin

"The goal of socialism is communism." - Vladimir Lenin

"The socialist system will eventually replace the capitalist system." - Mao Zedong

"[After Communism succeeds] ...then, there will come a peace across the earth." - Josef Stalin

Thank you. You have just backed up my quote of the historian. EVERY one of those leaders is a Communist but they like to appear as Socialists because it is more morally just.

Once again:

A common mistake is to confuse Socialism, the economic system, with Communism, the political system. Communists are "socialist" in the same way that Republicans are "compassionate conservatives". That is, they give lip service to ideals they have no intention of practicing.

[-:Undertaker:-]

Well no. Lets take the largest Communist state, the Soviet Union. It was founded on the intention of not just a Socialist economy but a Communist government also, the "Vanguard of the proletariat" as they call it. They are completely separate things.

So as I said before, the socialist side is more economic but to seperate them doesnt work because socialism and communism are inseperable.

Anything left of centre isn't socialist. I happen to think socialism is a fantastic idea in theory but would never work in practice. I don't think you can really call the liberal democrats left wing do you? They are centre-left at very most.

Not everything is socialist no, and there are different degrees about it. Do I think the Liberal Democrats are socialist? Yes. You advocate the theft of private property, higher taxes and so forth - all traits of socialism and communism. Of course they are nowhere as near as socialist/communist as the CPC or the Khamer Rogue, that goes without saying.

Thatcherism and Conservativism are clearly the same thing but you have actually given me a fantastic example. Conservatism includes capitalism but just because you are a capitalist it doesn't make you Conservative. Just like Communism includes Socialism but just because you Socialist it doesn't make you Communist.

Of course it includes capitalism because to be a Conservative you have to believe in the freedom of the person to create their own business and to do their own deed, without government interference. That is why capitalism and conservatism are inseperable aswell.

You say they don't make you the same thing, but they pretty much do unless you are full of contradictions. How can you support a socialist economy without a communist social/political way of thought? - you can't. How can you support a communist country without the socialist economic side of things? - you can't.

No actually a respectable academics analysis of Soviet Russia which I am doing an item of coursework on.

Where is the quote from?

Thank you. You have just backed up my quote of the historian. EVERY one of those leaders is a Communist but they like to appear as Socialists because it is more morally just.

If they really were doing that then why would they belong to their parties, most of which actually have the word communist in their title! It would be like a cow claiming itself to be a sheep when it is clearly a cow. Those quotes have just shown how they are both the same, just differing stages. Infact the father of the whole idealogy said it himself.

[Jordy]

I haven't finished watching this guide yet but it's incredibly inaccurate so far, I've spent a lot of time in the past year researching North Korea and most of what he's said is just exaggerated to make it seem more dangerous and interesting.

Anyone can visit North Korea for starters, Americans are banned most the time however they allowed in once a year when NK is holding the Mass Games. Many american tourists go then.

[Jahova]

They are weird. That's my three words.

[Grig]

That is wrong! Communism is a utopia, there is no governmental hierarchy in Communism, everyone is equal. Socialism is a step below Communism as it has a hierarchy of government > people. This is exactly what Karl Marx stated in his analogy of 'Communism'.

In reality, Communism can never and will never work as there is NO government. The USSR was sucesful and it followed a similair system to North Korea, this is mainly because the two coutries operated differently in terms of social and economic policies, and the USSR had far more resources. I think it is the isolationist policy that is hindering North Korea.

They are the same, hence why the USSR which was a communist country was called the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics. As I have said before, socialism is considered to be the before-step to communism, as Karl Marx himself said. While socialism refers more to the left-wing economy and communism to the left-wing structure of a country, both are in reality the exact same.

North Korea is left-wing aka socialist and communist.

[-:Undertaker:-]

That is wrong! Communism is a utopia, there is no governmental hierarchy in Communism, everyone is equal. Socialism is a step below Communism as it has a hierarchy of government > people. This is exactly what Karl Marx stated in his analogy of 'Communism'.

In reality, Communism can never and will never work as there is NO government. The USSR was sucesful and it followed a similair system to North Korea, this is mainly because the two coutries operated differently in terms of social and economic policies, and the USSR had far more resources. I think it is the isolationist policy that is hindering North Korea.

I have said it is the step before in the idealogy of Karl Marx - and i'm not disputing that. The fact that 'Communist countries' were never truly communist and we have never seen true communism because its impossible to work points to me that socialism is communism, it is inseperable from communism. The USSR was not successful because millions died under the corrupt muderous leaders of the Soviet Union while its people were never free, and while they starved their leaders were too busy annexing eastern europe and building nuclear weapons.

You live in Hong Kong, one of the most prosperous places on earth thanks to the Anglo-American system of capitalism aka Thatcherism. To say North Korea is bankrupt, killing its own people and rattling its saber because its 'too closed' is absurd. North Korea like all socialist countries is a failure and the sooner its people become free the better. Socialists say power to the people, but they only mean power to the state (aka themselves, the ruling elite).

Why did the Soviets have to put up a wall? - to keep their people in and to keep the prosperous capitalist system out.

[Grig]

Why then was the USSR a superpower, have you not read the history? I shall tell you this fact, Russia today is far worse of than it was under the USSR Stalinist regime. He killed people to stop the corruption, the corruption in Russia now is staggering, there is little progress etc. He shot people to make the USSR into a superpower, it was your own fault by being shot, you were commiting a crime and got the punishment. Sure, I disagree with how he murdered the inteligensia within the country. However, one can surely not doubt its progress. Many in the country now are living on the poverty line, this was not true before. The country has had NO major breakthroughs since 1991.

I could ask you the same question my friend, why did America go to war in Vietnam and Korea? To stop its precious little ideology from falling in another country, like a domino effect.

Power to the state works in China . No matter what you say about China, get into the knitty gritty of things, the bulk of it's system is still Socialist. Even America had to take some banks into state control during the economic crisis, this is clear proof of capitalism failing big time! If one of the most Capitalist countries in the world does that, then surely it is not a flawless system.

I have said it is the step before in the idealogy of Karl Marx - and i'm not disputing that. The fact that 'Communist countries' were never truly communist and we have never seen true communism because its impossible to work points to me that socialism is communism, it is inseperable from communism. The USSR was not successful because millions died under the corrupt muderous leaders of the Soviet Union while its people were never free, and while they starved their leaders were too busy annexing eastern europe and building nuclear weapons.

You live in Hong Kong, one of the most prosperous places on earth thanks to the Anglo-American system of capitalism aka Thatcherism. To say North Korea is bankrupt, killing its own people and rattling its saber because its 'too closed' is absurd. North Korea like all socialist countries is a failure and the sooner its people become free the better. Socialists say power to the people, but they only mean power to the state (aka themselves, the ruling elite).

Why did the Soviets have to put up a wall? - to keep their people in and to keep the prosperous capitalist system out.

[Jordy]

Why then was the USSR a superpower, have you not read the history? I shall tell you this fact, Russia today is far worse of than it was under the USSR Stalinist regime. He killed people to stop the corruption, the corruption in Russia now is staggering, there is little progress etc. He shot people to make the USSR into a superpower, it was your own fault by being shot, you were commiting a crime and got the punishment. Sure, I disagree with how he murdered the inteligensia within the country. However, one can surely not doubt its progress. Many in the country now are living on the poverty line, this was not true before. The country has had NO major breakthroughs since 1991.

I could ask you the same question my friend, why did America go to war in Vietnam and Korea? To stop its precious little ideology from falling in another country, like a domino effect.

Power to the state works in China . No matter what you say about China, get into the knitty gritty of things, the bulk of it's system is still Socialist. Even America had to take some banks into state control during the economic crisis, this is clear proof of capitalism failing big time! If one of the most Capitalist countries in the world does that, then surely it is not a flawless system.

The proof that capitalism is working is that we're all better off than people living under social/communist regimes. Ask anyone in the world whether they'd rather be an average american on the average wage or an average chinese man on the average chinese wage. The outcome is you'd rather be American than Chinese. That enough is proof that capitalism is working.

Okay so maybe capitalism does bust occasionally (hence the term term boom & bust). Some people have endured some hard years because of the economic downturn with the inflation and lack of jobs, however people aren't dieing in large scale famines like they did under Mao, Stalin and Kim Sung Il. Capitalism isn't perfect, but it's the best we've got.

Russia may well not be succeeding now, however it wasn't under the USSR either, infact it hasn't done since the tsar! Russia can't move on straight away from a brutal communist regime which lasted 80 years, it simply can't wave good bye to it's past and become a capitalist haven, especially as the country is riddled with corruption. The USSR was a super-power because it was such an enormous collaboration of resources and manpower. Their military spending was colossal and the military was the only good thing about the USSR, they were good at nothing else. They couldn't even feed their own people because they were more concerned in fighting the cold war. What's the point in fighting for your own country when they're already dieing? The UK could of been a world super-power if it wanted to, so could of France. However I don't think becoming an obsolete country and having your own citizens dieing in famines is worth becoming a super-power? Everything was focused around the military in the USSR and everything else suffered as a result.

The USA, probably the best example of Capitalism in the world, however was a world super-power and throughout the cold world, it dominated the world in economics, technology etc. And above all, it's people were far better off than the Soviets people who were dieing in famines.

[-:Undertaker:-]

Why then was the USSR a superpower, have you not read the history? I shall tell you this fact, Russia today is far worse of than it was under the USSR Stalinist regime. He killed people to stop the corruption, the corruption in Russia now is staggering, there is little progress etc. He shot people to make the USSR into a superpower, it was your own fault by being shot, you were commiting a crime and got the punishment. Sure, I disagree with how he murdered the inteligensia within the country. However, one can surely not doubt its progress. Many in the country now are living on the poverty line, this was not true before. The country has had NO major breakthroughs since 1991.

From your reply I can see you do not read history, because you bring up the USSR being a superpower in such simple terms. I'll define it clearly for you then why the Soviet Union became a superpower and I can tell you now that it wasnt because it was socialist - anyway; after WW2 the British Empire was feeble and weak, brought down by the costs of a world war. Meanwhile the USSR occupied half of Europe, developed an atomic bomb and gained a seat on the United Nations Security Council for being a victor. The poverty caused by WW2 turned people to socialism, because it is only when there is nothing else left that people turn to socialism which is far from the reality of the second Russian revolution where it was only a minority (the Soviets) who took power, not the people.

Stalin killed people to stop corruption? - am I actually seeing this right now that someone on Habbox Forum is actually defending a mad-man who killed more than Adolf Hitler and who was clearly and totally insane. The man killed the educated who were a threat to the communist regime because the very fact they were educated, he stamped out opposition and sent the KGB to go after Trotsky in Mexico who ended up with a pick axe in his head. The very fact Stalin sent the KGB after Trotsky on the other side of the world I think shows how much of a deluded pyschopath he was.

I find it distasteful to those who died at the hands of Stalin and the USSR regime how you can even defend him killing these people, there was no justification in the killing of these people and he only removed people because of the simpe fact he was paranoid. Did he not kill something like 97/98 of the Generals leaving only one general left alive, himself?

I could ask you the same question my friend, why did America go to war in Vietnam and Korea? To stop its precious little ideology from falling in another country, like a domino effect.

To stop the communists taking over which would of ment more influence in the world for the Soviet Union, infact had it not been for the British and Americans the city in which you now live would be under communuism and wouldn't resemble the high-tech modern city it is now, it would be a complete and utter dump just like most of Russia is now (because of it being held back for a period of around 70 years under communism).

Talking about going around the world to protect your idealogy/establish it, is that why the Soviet Union also was doing the same in Korea through China, Vietnam through China and Cuba which nearly resulted in the end of the world?

Power to the state works in China . No matter what you say about China, get into the knitty gritty of things, the bulk of it's system is still Socialist. Even America had to take some banks into state control during the economic crisis, this is clear proof of capitalism failing big time! If one of the most Capitalist countries in the world does that, then surely it is not a flawless system.

China is nowhere near socialist economically. Infact it was only since the founder of socialism in China (Mao Zedong) died and the new era of Chinese leadership came in that China has grown. There is a quote by one member of the Chinese leadership (Deng Xiaoping) who had internal wars with Mao who said "No matter if it is a white cat or a black cat; as long as it can catch mice, it is a good cat." - meaning that is economic prosperity is to be achieved it doesnt matter how you do it, aslong as you get it aka via capitalism.

Of course capitalism isnt flawless, but capitalism needs a downturn to survive and continue and as does any economic system. Let us look at it in simple terms, Habbo Hotel. A rare can not keep on rising forever and they dont, eventually what goes up always comes down. Each time it goes back up, the standards are raised higher (aka living standards in the real world).

I find it incredibly interesting how you live in one of the most capitalist and beautiful cities in the world based on that very system where you are far luckier than those in countries which has been ravaged by socialism, yet still seem to have some crazy notion that socialism is fantastic and capitalism is bad.

You/your family is Russian is it not and one member of your family was a Russian diplomat? - which again shows how far your family would of been removed from the realities of Soviet Russia. Russia is still a hard place to live, granted. But that is only because socialism has held it and Eastern Europe back by a period of 60 odd years.