A very serious thread....

[Integritas0]

Hi Folks...

This is (potentially) a non-bubbly, non-inane discussion thread [gasps and looks of sheer horror abound!]...

I want to have a discussion on some very serious political issues [gasps and looks of sheer horror quickly fade away and are replaced by yawns, glazed over eyes, rolling of eyes, etc.!]

A political topic or subject matter should NOT be excluded from or even considered less relevant to a gay forum or the gay community in general because it is not apparently or explicitly all about gays!

The following is a doentary which was funded by a group within the European Union Parliament:


http://anonym.to/?http://www.wisevid.com/gateway.php?viewkey=nqovmz1wwmsdza166666

(There is a mature content warning, so click yes or no -some people get very upset watching a doentary like this, so if it's not for you that's understandable.)

'The Soviet Story' (2008) provides discussion and analysis of Communism in Russia, China, and various locations, past and present. Controversially, comparisons are drawn between Fascism (extreme right) and Communism (extreme left). Is it possible that the two kinds of extremism are not so different to one another?? If this is the case then why are Fascist symbols considered 'a bad joke' when touted by today's western youth (like when Prince Harry wore a Nazi uniform to a party) but Communist symbols (sickle and hammer) are utterly uncontroversial, are in actual fact fashionable, if you can believe that (the various t-shirts, hats, etc. we sometimes like to wear). Tens of millions of people were deliberately exterminated under Communism. Communism is not dead. The central ideological tenets of Communism are Darwinism, 'scientism' and materialism -and all of these also seem to be core aspects of western modernity.

-----

Praise for 'The Soviet Story':


"Soviet Story" is the most powerful antidote yet to the sanitisation of the past. The film is gripping, audacious and uncompromising. [...] The main aim of the film is to show the close connections—philosophical, political and organisational—between the Nazi and Soviet systems.
-The Economist :thumbs up:

It is a powerful message. Thank you for telling the truth. It will awaken people ... we cannot build a humanity if we close our eyes to this kind of massacres. Our possibility is to serve justice to those people.
-Ari Vatanen, MEP, representing Finland :thumbs up:

-----

Please have a look at the film when you can, or bookmark it. Please also bookmark and return to this thread if you have any comments to offer.

Life is not all Pepsi. Co., porn, Madonna and brightly lit shopping centres! But most of us do the best we can in this life, and while it's not easy we can at least discuss and express ideas about the world we live in...
:whew:

 

[sergie_sun]

Hmmm... I was born in USSR. I saw its collapse. I remember when new country was born aka Russia.
USSR collapsed when i was 12 years old. As a child i dont have any bad memories about that time. I was able to do whatever i wanted to do.
Communism in USSR is a quite complex thing. In historic context it is very hard to compary Stalins USSR and Gorby's USSR. All Soviet leaders had different approach in dealing with country ruling.

My grandmother told me that their family had a horse and they were considered unreliable because they had more. It was a horse. 5 chlidren, parents and granparents lived in the countryside and horse was essential for survival. But they had to give it up. Otherwise, who knows what would happen.

 

[newage]

One can't necesarrily rewrite history, however the history books could be rewritten...or a newer more accurate one could be produced. Many things written in the history books often don't tell the whole truth, i remember when i was learning about this my teacher had to make several additions to our text books. And as to the incorrections of the history books i feel ike its well over my head. Or perhaps I am a bit too preoccupied now to focus on such thoughts. I will give the movie a look see, and as much as i love consipiracy theoriees i feel as though Hitler's rise was seen by the whole world..but people just didn't realize the depth of his evilness! Even intelligence collected is often useless without hard proof....which many times is almost impossible to obtain..legally that is.

 

[newage]

^^ ahh im sorry i forgot to address stalin. Um yes stalin was a Monster..that is well known, however during that time the world was a in chaos and for the most part selfish. People only really cared about their country and rightly so because everyone was devasted...except america....by the WW1 and even after Hitler was put down, the other countries were afraid of starting another war by challenging and arresting ruusia's government. Plus the fact that stalin helped defeat Hitler...made him ok in the minds of many. Just like when a drug dealer gives up more info on a bigger fish. It seems you think stalin is worse than Hitler....though the point may be mute...stalin's evil tendencies was directly mainly at Russia and his people..therefore Hitler's world domination took precedence. Even when hitler started exterminating Jews, no one declared war, hell it wasn't untill he attacked 2 countries back to back that an affirmative action was taken. The weakness in the treatment of the Hitler/Stalin phenomenon seems to lie in the lack of unity..even today the world countries are still fragmented...but it is getting better...baby steps i guess.

Edit: yes he was a psycopath....but one that could have been easily ignored due to the nature of the time. I don't think the deal they made necessary influenced the path of Europe for the next half century...Im sure it may have had some bearings...but i fear what the future held for Europe had the "pact" not been made.

 

[XMan101]

If this is the case then why are Fascist symbols considered 'a bad joke' when touted by today's western youth (like when Prince Harry wore a Nazi uniform to a party) but Communist symbols (sickle and hammer) are utterly uncontroversial, are in actual fact fashionable,

I haven't had chance to read the entire thread but will tomorrow.

I had to comment on the above - and agree with you 100% ! It's something I've never understood either.

I may reply more fully tomorrow, but what I will say is that there is nothing wrong with threads like this and I enjoy a good debate and we should have more of them - I know some won't agree As long as it doesn't get personal I love it. We all have views on things and I don't mind admitting I'm an opinionated bastard! I tend to back off a little being a staff member, but I certainly have no objection to views like this being expressed.

Stalin was a hideous individual! He had the guys in charge killed so they couldn't talk! The way Europe was carved up by these dictators is really awful. The back door deals etc.

Today's politics are no different - we have deals and deals behind the scenes and we think when we go to the ballot box we are voting for someone! No! Doesn't make a damn anymore who wins, change of face, but same shit!

More tomorrow maybe

 

[sergie_sun]

I would not assume that this doentary is correct. All those big numbers 7 million, 20 million seem to me not accurate. How was it calculated? Ukrainian and Russian history in my opinion is very hard to distinguish. Kiev is the mother of Russian cities as we say.

As far as Stalin and Hitler is concerned.

Hitler was democratically elected. Stalin was from Georgia who was lucky enough to be in the right place with Lenin who warned that Stalin could be dangerous as a leader.

Before the active military actions during WWII there is no one single country in Europe who could say that its actions were moraly correct. British, Soviet, Germans, etc played by the rules of that time. Good or bad? I dont know. The point is that Hitler triggered the conflict. So, Stalin is the winner and it is hard to judge winners.

Hard proof?

I have read and seen so many books that i am very sceptical about this doentary.

How about the 20,000,000 Russians and Eastern Europeans who died under Soviet rule?

Give me more? Lets say 40,000,000. I am not saying that it is not truth. Even 10,000 is a horrible number. But i think you cannot be accurate by throwing all those numbers. For example i have seen the list of people which was signed by Stalin for execution. It had 1,300 names in it. All dead for doing nothing. So, he is a horrible historical character.

Was Stalin (be honest with yourself) a psychopath? Yes or no?

I dont know. Not a doctor.

Was a deal made with Stalin after WWII that would impact on Europe for the next fifty years? Yes or no?

There was a deal. Stalin from one hand and Western countries from another. Everybody got what they wanted to get. Alternative? Another war i guess.

The point is Stalin is a bad guy and a criminal. The problem is he is a winner whether you like it or not.

 

[sergie_sun]

Two points Sergie (i) you make some interesting points (ii) your overall contention seems to be that we 'just' don't know or can't know all of the facts and that we must (or should?) stop asking?

Well, for sure i dont mean NOT TO ASK!

The following is a doentary which was funded by a group within the European Union Parliament:

and

I don't believe the 'official' line, what the politicians are telling us is the truth!

Yeah right! Politicians funded it and i dont trust them.

What about the video footage?

It does not make it an absolute truth. For example: I have seen the peace of NAZI propaganda made entirely in Russian language about how awesome rulers are they. That doentary were filmed specificaly to target people on occupied territiories. Fascinating video footage with fascinating voices.
From another hand i just bought a DVD called "Our Russian Front" which is entirely in English. Is it true? Probably at the time it was.

The truth is Ribbentrop-Molotov Non-Aggression Pact was signed in 1939 which devided Eastern Europe.
Hitler launched Operation Barbarossa in 1941.
USSR + USA + UK are allies and we won.

What about the survivors being interviewed?

I am not telling that Soviets are nice. I know that we did awful things in Poland (Khatyn).

What about the doents?

It is a very interesting peace of history. Lots of doents were revealed. I read that at one point Stalin was drinking for Hitler genius mind when Soviet and Germany were allies. But i also read that UK were discussing with Hitler the possibility of allies against USSR. It is so complex.

There are so many innocent victims here so it is impossible to label someone as an absolute evil. Stalin is responsible for what he did and he did horrible things. The concept of nation relocation was executed in USSR under Stalin and it is one the reason why we had conflicts in ex-USSR era. Those people are victims themself.

How can we learn from the past unless we at least question mainstream perceptions?

History has never taught us. I think that globalization despite its controversy is the only thing that could stop us from self-destruction.

 

[ritsuka]

The 20th century was a very violent time; this violence was not unique to the Soviet Union. The combined forces of anti-communism and free market capitalism killed millions of people themselves--from attacks on Vietnam, Korea, Cuba, Iraq, from CIA-sponsored coups against leftist Latin American governments that propped up right wing military dictatorships that slaughtered the opposition into silence. They also, obviously, made an extremely repressive US state especially during the Mccarthy era--the same time Stalin was in power, their were lynchings of African Americans in the US. But indeed, it seems that to some people there were communist states, and everyone else, who had no economic underpinnings to their violence that need be mentioned.

The opposition to the Soviet Union, Cuba, and China (which of course is now a sweatshop-capitalism hell, not communist) was never about supposed oppression or human rights abuses, it was always about economics--that these countries didn't allow a small rich elite to profit off the millions trapped in wage slavery or starving in homelessness. The death count of free market capitalism can also be seen in the way the Soviet Union was dissolved, and how it involved millions of people dying because their social welfare state had been taken away, and the public companies built up over decades by the public trust were privatized, sold to the lowest bidder. We can also see the violence of this economic system in how a few US hedge funds destroyed the "asian tiger" economies--causing millions in Korea to lose their livelihoods, and sparking a suicide epidemic that rages until this day.

The sickle and hammer, likewise, for many people refers back to the central ideas of economic equality that are inherent to marxism. If we are talking about symbols, it should be the American flag that is a better symbol for being, as MLK said, the "greatest purveyor of violence in the world." What the European parliamentarians want to say with their video, clearly, is that they are still fighting the cold war--against their own people who still might believe, not merely in a form of socialism, but in social democracy as of the type practiced in Scandinavia in recent decades, where human rights to housing, education, food, are fully recognized and enshrined in law and progressive taxation. Barefoot poor peasant marxists in places like Nepal and India call themselves Maoists not because they want the cultural revolution or some such shit, but because they admire the accomplishment of the Chinese revolution.

I'm not a marxist, personally; I actually dislike those old ideologies and forms; I make up my politics from new, 21st century forms, and they do include economic equality and economic democracy. Unfortunately, fascist iconography is shunned, but corporations taking over the government (the dictionary definition of fascism) is well-accepted into the status quo. I don't believe in globalization as a cure-all--specifically, I have no problem with open borders for people and ideas, but linking up the world economies into one has not brought good results--especially not for poor peasant farmers who are forced out of business by foreign subsidized commodities. Indeed, free trade and the global stock market are complete trash.

 

[ritsuka]

Thanks ritsuka for your intelligent and well thought out response.

Superficially you appear to be on the left and I appear to be on the right, but really we converge and bolster each other in the sense that it is acknowledged that while there are various ideals and popular concepts being used (i.e. abused) by both sides --clear likable concepts like 'individual freedom' (right) and 'equality' (left). But the left/right paradigm breaks down because (i) two broad theoretical sets cannot, logically, represent or serve the diversity that exists in the world and (ii) materialism fails to provide a basis for any ideology or politics purporting to serve humanity and human beings. From the point of view of the individual, materialism holds (at its philosophic core) that human beings are mere workers, producers, who exist to serve an ideology and not the other way around. For the left, materialism is a complicating factor in the context of capitalism, or a capitalist-communist hybrid society, or in terms of potentiality and utility (think Mill, or Nietzsche's uber-man). In truth, the real enemy is extremism -fascist and communist are not all that different, they are two sides of the same coin, the same alluring charm. However --and this is the epitome of deception-- a third possibility is the worst of both worlds, a combination of fascism/communism that is contained with a capitalist (think transnational corporations -those enticing brands of unreality)/socialist (think 'governance' -relax, play, enjoy -for the 'experts' will take care of you) hybrid system.

Did you have a look at the film? What did you think?

I've never agreed with the philosophy of "extremism" personally--aren't all ideas "extreme" from some other point, some other angle? And is not something that is "moderate" often sickeningly repulsive? Certainly in the way the terms are conventionally used, especially via the 'war on terror' where poor civilians in the middle east upset about the drone and bombs attacks, the illegal occupations, the genocidal sanctions imposed by the US are simply called "extremists" while people basically supporting America's view 100% are "moderate," as is a war criminal such as Obama (certainly I've been called an extremist by many people who supported heinous things themselves.) There is also the false supposition in America that the media has to be "moderate" and that generally means broadcasting only the status quo center-right political/corporate elite's view 24/7.

Beyond all of that I think it is possible to see when someone has transcended to the dogma of ideology and can only see things through that lens, can only identify people through that lens, which also provides them with a certain, rigidly defined group to scapegoat. Those people are not trying to bring some "good" changes to the world, but are simply in thrall. Better to state all of your political beliefs at the outset than hide most of them (especially the violent ones) behind some abstract ideology. And I agree with you about the strong dichotomies not really reflecting public opinion--which is why I support direct democracy, in which every person could have their say on each separate issue instead of having them lumped into one or more increasingly vague sets and then electing a "representative" who will serve the status quo.

The corporatist government I live under is certainly a lot scarier than a revival of a 1930's retro fascism.

The video doesn't load for me--probably because my ISP is imposing very slow (like 5kb) download speeds on my account right now.

 

[garth33]

Great thread guys! (You know there's free porn here right? JUST KIDDING!)

In the US, our Supreme Court recently ruled corporations have NO LIMITS on how much they can spend to support a political campaign or candidate - THAT IS SCARY AS F*CK for exactly the reasons 'Teg pointed out...ANY company can just open their checkbook and basically buy what they want because people who've lived in a democracy their entire lives are woefully SPOILED and don't appreciate their freedom as they should! They get lazy and don't want to have to think or analyze or even study something because it might cut into watching "American Idol" or some other stupid brainless entertainment on television. If I get a free cup of Beer that says SARAH PALIN - yeah, maybe I'll vote for her next time - what the fuck!! The beer was good....BBBUUURRRPPPP!!!!!

(PS - Somewhere Thor is pondering the composition of his own POO and feeling left out of "important forum topics":x)

 

[sergie_sun]

This seems to block your mind from making a real judgement against him?

What is a real judgement? By what standard? I can recall a debate I had regarding to bombing of Cologne during WWII. Was it necessary or not? Most people had this modern idialistic approach that it was a war crime. Really? Back then it was necessary. Every particular reason to do so would be enough to justify such actions. It is enemy. Done!

Yes Stalin was a horrible dictator. But Nazi Germany was officially guilty.

I don't agree, I still believe in good and evil and frankly that Stalin was an evil person.

Ok. He is an evil person. What difference does it make? He is with those guys at the end

P.S. Gays used to be considered as evil people and that tendency does exist in modern world. Sodom, not natural and stuff.

You yourself ARE interested in politics because you read the books and watch the doentaries. But, surely you must look around you, at others, and see that the overwhelming majority 'go with the flow', are passive and accepting, subscribe to the dictates of the modern-day experts? Why is this? How did this come about yet again? Is it not important to think as an individual --to make up your own mind, to formulate your own understandings and to make your own (value) judgements --again, as an individual? But how people in our supposedly advancing world think as individuals? Or is the group mentality still very much alive and kicking? Does the group mentality just spring up out of the ground, is it natural and organic? Or might big corporations and equally governments/governing structures be interested in this 'group mentality' -perhaps power are big money are to be made through this interest in managing, shaping and controlling how social groups think and therefore behave?

That is not new opinion and by your logic i should also disregard it. We do rely on the information and opinions we get from different sources/ The most important issue is to be critical to that information and not to build artificail walls which would prevent you from futher analysis

 

[sergie_sun]

You have very good points Integritas0. Stalin is a very controversial character in Russia. I have downloaded one of the recent TV programm from Russia with the very hot debate about him. One group was very protective of him by keep saying that Stalin won the WWII and USSR became a superpower and it is a nonsence (?!) that he was responsible for lifes of so many people. The second group was very emotional on the personal level. One lady told the story that her dad was sent to the labour camp for 15 years after he hit the ball during soccer game and the ball hit the photo of Stalin(?!). How people were forced to move from their land because of Stalin decision that the particular ethnic group was considered unreliable. It is a disgrace and a crime. No doubts. Personally, i do think that Stalin and Hitler are on the same page. In the way Stalin was even worse by killing his own people. All of that creates a problem. Nazi Germany was guilty in the court of law. Stalinism was not. It will never happen. It means that the current state of mind about Stalin will be the same. Controversial and that is it.

About West comments. It is called politics. The more influence you have the less likely to be on the other side of the law (whatever word is appropriate). It happens everywhere during the whole history of mankind. Tools might be different but it is the same principles. British invasions of the Río de la Plata is a good example.

 

[ritsuka]

Totally agree -direct/participative democracy (think French Revolution) at the very least. But that can be corrupted too. In Ireland we had a referendum on the Lisbon Treaty -we voted no. But then the big boys in Europe acted all shocked and basically replied that we had given the wrong answer! So then we had a second referendum... it was appalling and shocking for me. ALL of the corrupt political parties bar one got on board with the yes campaign. Companies like Ryanair (airline) and Intel Computers were allowed to fund the yes campaign. Intel spend 500,000 (a lot when you consider that donations to political organisations on either side is curtailed). The airline plastered 'vote yes' on there planes and got their hostesses out with the little flags and low cut tops. A regulation which compelled the state TV and Radio broadcaster to give equal time to no and yes sides was abruptly withdrawn. We were then told in no uncertain terms that there was no prospect of economic recovery in the event of voting no (again). Once is naughty and you get spanked, twice apparently is a bullet in the skull (metaphorically speaking, of course). The time allowed to pass between referendums was a matter of mere months.

That is not participative democracy.

So even if a western country purports to have some form of direct democracy, in reality it doesn't. Very wealthy bankers and corporations clearly wanted a yes result at all costs -we are led to believe it is all for the benefit of the working classes, for equality... but I simply cannot accept this. That is why I've been driven over to a hard-to-define non-partisan version of the right. You just have to make up your own mind and cling to whatever good remains on whatever side feels best.

Oh yes, I agree that a large, closed institution deciding what will be voted on and what the result will be is certainly not direct democracy--the lisbon treaty was a sick, despicable game. I don't think we can simply keep the institutions we have now and add direct participatory democracy to them--we have to pull out the top of the rich and powerful (the career politicians and big corporate interests) and reorder political power from the bottom, starting at the local level. While I still believe strongly in taking direct action for social justice and an end to war, I have become convinced that elections in a broken system are useless and reactionary but a broad campaign for real democracy can give us a different world.



I strongly disagree with garth--I don't look around and see people who are somehow "stupid" "lazy" or "spoiled"--but I do see an extremely arrogant, deceptive, consolidated political/corporate/media elite who works tirelessly to disenfranchise good people and who have so co-opted the system in place and lowered the quality of life for most people in the past forty years that it might really be impossible to stop them at this point. No, indeed, when I connect with fellow citizens I find they are very open to discussing broad new changes and ideas that are completely locked out by the system. And they know we don't live in a democracy--that they aren't given a say in what happens.

 

[garth33]

I strongly disagree with garth--I don't look around and see people who are somehow "stupid" "lazy" or "spoiled"--but I do see an extremely arrogant, deceptive, consolidated political/corporate/media elite who works tirelessly to disenfranchise good people and who have so co-opted the system in place and lowered the quality of life for most people in the past forty years that it might really be impossible to stop them at this point. No, indeed, when I connect with fellow citizens I find they are very open to discussing broad new changes and ideas that are completely locked out by the system. And they know we don't live in a democracy--that they aren't given a say in what happens.

WHERE do you live Rit? SERIOUSLY - because everyone I run into can't talk sh*t about politics but they know ALL ABOUT what happened on American Idol last night and about that meaningless drivel - oh yeah THEY have an opinion!

What you call the "CONSOLIDATED" political/coporate/media elite is anything BUT consolidated - there is significant disagreement among these a-holes where greed is their only bottom line but MY POINT was normal citizens let themselves get run over by these jerks then lifted themselves up on their elbows asking...'what happened??" when all they have to do is turn off the idiot tube, read a bit and get involved but I'd say 80% of the people I know don't want to "work that hard" for their own freedom and that's sad!

 

[Shadow]

God damn it! How long do we have before the next scam of an election?!

Within the next four months in the UK

 

[ritsuka]

Integritas0, To be honest, I never experienced the more 'kind, empathic' style of policing, so I'm not sure it really existed--certainly all the ones I encountered as growing up tended to be egotistical blowhards who liked to bully people and tended to have a very cartoonish morality (i.e. that they were there to catch the "bad guys,") I always watch democracy now!, and saw the segment where Amy, along with many others, were arrested and roughed up for no reason whatsoever--I think it is sick the way the olympics, the wto, G8, etc. tend to wander around the world, unpopularly excluding the majority of people, who are beaten, harassed, and have their cities militarized to protect these s. On that note, it disturbs me that the supposed mission for the US in Iraq and Afghanistan right now is to "train the police force." Anyway, I see what you were trying to express--it would take a very big upheaval, and lots of outreach, dialog, to bring about a massive change as large as trying to unearth the current bankrupt form of 'democracy' that reigns in the west--to actually fix social problems instead of criminalizing them via a corrupt police force. But it is very possible and in my view needs to get started now. We do have many places in the world we can look at where reforms in this direction have started.

And yes, whether it is Palin or Obama, the rhetoric will change, but the policy will stay the same--for the last forty years, there has been continuity between administrations--changes made are never rolled back, and the path continues in the same direction, gradually worsening and intensifying regardless of which party it is in power--and of course it is the same in many other parts of the world. With the terrible supreme court ruling, Obama's legacy as having the most expensive advertising campaign in history bring him to power is likely to be eclipsed very soon. And while these politicians are criminals and that needs to be pointed out, it is systemic.

Garth, the mainstream media certainly is consolidated and is only willing to broadcast certain ideas, certain points of view, certain political campaigns--as was seen with the nearly 97% pro-war peices aired in the lead up to the war against Iraq. It is something, just like falling wages and increasing privatization, that has happened over the last forty years in this country. Perhaps we move in very different social circles, but I maintain my confidence that people can catch up and overall that a) it is not the fault of most people, especially those of us who are still young that the political/media/corporate elite have committed these crimes, and b) what is needed is systemic change to make things easier, not insulting and blaming people for not doing better in a terrible system. That is all I will say about that.

 

[garth33]

gee Wally....THIS IS HEAVY! I could sure use some free gay porn right now...

 

[sergie_sun]

has just one eye. He is blind because of the uncontrolable porn usage and subsequent self pleasuring exposure.