robbo203
Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
“Blah, blah. I was using the term stormtrooper as in Star Wars. Dick.”
—————-No, you weren’t. You said and I quote “Lol. You’re saying the SS killed the Nazi stormtroopers? That’s whatever’s above God level stupid.” Yet again, you’ve been caught with your trousers down and exposed as an ignorant buffoon, feebly attempting to justify your vehemently anti-working class and fascistic pro-capitalist political outlook in the only way you know – by personal insult and not reasoned argument
TS: “Lol. You’re saying the SS killed the Nazi stormtroopers? That’s whatever’s above God level stupid. You get the world’s biggest participation trophy.”
_________
LOL yourself ….“RÖHM PURGE
The Röhm Purge was the murder of the leadership of the SA (Storm Troopers), the Nazi paramilitary formation led by Ernst Röhm. The murders took place between June 30 and July 2, 1934. The ruling elites and ultimately Hitler saw the SA as a threat to their hold on power. The purge demonstrated the Nazi regime’s willingness to go outside of the law to commit murder as an act of state for the perceived survival of the nation.Between June 30 and July 2, 1934, Nazi Party leadership purged the leadership of the Nazi paramilitary formation, the Sturmabteilung (Storm Troopers; SA). Nazi Party Leader and Reich Chancellor Adolf Hitler had ordered the purge. The Nazi leaders took advantage of the purge to kill other political enemies. Primarily, they targeted those on the German nationalist right. The purge is known as the “Night of the Long Knives” or “Operation Hummingbird.” These murders cemented an agreement between the Nazi Regime and the German army (Reichswehr). This enabled Hitler to proclaim himself Führer of National Socialist Germany and to claim absolute power.”
https://encyclopedia.ushmm.org/content/en/article/roehm-purge
“Lol. A Banderite fascist state commits a terrorist murder of a journalist and you blame the victim. Long and short of it.”
____________
Don’t be so bloody stupid TS. You’re a complete fantasist. When I have blamed the victim? I repeat what I said earlier in the perhaps forlorn hope that your tiny brain can comprehend it – I do not condone the use of violence even if you do – even to the extent of reveling in the idea of turning fellow workers into fertilizer.
As for your reference to the Banderite fascist state well, we’ve been here before – if that is an accurate description of the Ukrainian state then one can equally call the Russian regime a fascist regime given their remarkable similarity
———————-
“Lol. You think fascist stormtroopers are just “workers”. Hahahahahahahahahahah. Dumb ass.”
——————-Again, what percentage of the Ukrainian army do you consider to be “fascist” compared to the Russian military or the Wagner Group? Why do you ALWAYS run away from answering this question?
Do you think the little kids or old folk blown up by Russian missiles are fascists too? And just to make it clear that I am being even-handed here I would address exactly the same point to the Ukrainian military and their morally repugnant bombing and killing of civilians in Donbas since 2014. War turns everyone involved in it into sociopathic monsters
———————————–
“The Transparency Index? Who funds that? A bunch of right wing billionaires? I piss on em. Lol”
————————————
Yeah, you piss on anything and everything that inconveniently refutes your sick worldview. In fact, you seem chronically pissed by the looks of things. Your language reminds me of a 9-year-old sniffing glue or something.I do not know who exactly funds the Transparency Index. Maybe your own favourite rightwing billionaire, Vlad Putin, made a contribution at one time though I doubt it. Anyway, you might care to research for yourself if you are interested.
https://www.transparency.org/en/the-organisation/funding-and-financialsIncidentally, I’ve been to Russia and experienced corruption firsthand back in the 90s- a nice little scam operated by officials at Moscow airport. The bastards wanted me to hand over 80 dollars before I could enter the departure lounge. It was that or miss my flight back to the UK
The only one who is being “pathetic” here is your good self TS. Again and again and again. You are just a joke.
I have been pretty even-handed in condemning both the Ukrainian and Russian regimes. Both are disgusting far-right ultra-nationalist authoritarian regimes. I have also been pretty forthright in opposition to the war and to the use of indiscriminate violence for whatever cause.
I simply pointed out that being a journalist in both Russia and Ukraine is a risky business since these two countries top the league in Europe for journalists killed in the course of their work. That’s a fact. I also corrected the quotation that Lizzie chose to emphasize i.e. “America is nowadays clearly the world’s most dangerous continent for the media”. This is a misleading quote because people would normally associate the word “America” with the “United States” whereas the reference is obviously to the continent and to countries like Mexico.
And what about you? For you now to get on your high moral horse and complain about “fascist violence perpetrated against innocent civilians” makes me want to throw up. You are the one who supports a war that routinely kills innocent civilians every day. You are the one who expressed sociopathic fascist pleasure in turning fellow workers into “fertiliser”. How sick is that?
And you don’t even know how to read properly- no doubt a consequence of the red mist clouding your vision. Lizzie did not say anything about criminal gangs and corrupt business people murdering journalists in Russia. She explicitly said “If you care to re-read my post you will see that reference is made to the American continent as a whole” (I merely corrected the use of the term “America” which suggests the reference is to the United States which is wrong).
Russia has been called a “gangster state”, being, along with Ukraine, one of the most corrupt countries in the world according to the Transparency Index. So it is conceivable that some of the killings are related to criminal gangs. It is also conceivable that the state uses its contacts in the criminal underworld to order contract killings of its critics.
“America is nowadays clearly the world’s most dangerous continent for the media” (emphasis added)
———————
That’s true but I don’t think that refers to the “USA” but rather the “Americas” as a whole – particularly Mexico – and I suspect that is largely related to coverage of the drug cartels.
Russia and Ukraine with their appalling human rights record, top the list in Europe with the most journalists murdered, some very clearly for political reasons
“Whataboutism much? The Committee to Protect Journalists? Credibility- in the toilet. LOL”
______________________That doesn´t mean that the figures cited of journalists murdered in Russia is incorrect, does it now? There are plenty of other sources that come up with much the same figure.
Russia is a far-right authoritarian capitalist regime. So is Ukraine. Perhaps it’s not coincidental that these two repugnant regimes (one of which you bootlick for) are top of the list for the most dangerous countries in Europe to work in….
See this
“Ukraine is currently the most dangerous country in Europe for the media, after Russia itself, where 25 journalists have been killed over the past 20 years.
“Since (President) Vladimir Putin took over, Russia has seen systematic attacks on press freedom – including deadly ones,” the rights group said. “They include Anna Politkovskaya’s high-profile murder on 7 October 2006.” Politkovskaya was a fierce critic of Putin and had exposed high-level corruption in the country. She was shot four times in her apartment block after returning home from buying groceries.”
“Interesting take on the terrorist murder of a journalist.”
Yes indeed, Apparently its quite a dangerous profession to be in in Russia – being a journalist and writing critical stuff about the regime there…
Interesting commentary from an interview with an underground journal in Kharkov in Ukraine. Apart from socialists and a few others, there are not many who oppose this sordid capitalist war and its capitalist protagonists on both sides – imperialist Russia and its backers on the one hand and Ukraine and its own imperialist backers in the West. It’s encouraging to see that at least some people are questioning this state of affairs and hopefully also the BS ideology of putrid nationalism…
_________________________________-“Since the summer of last year, spontaneous anarchism has noticeably increased among the masses – many already believe that the choice between two right-wing Latin American dictatorships is not a choice. This has significantly increased the popularity of our website – news about military and police brutality is now easily gaining thousands and thousands of views.
…
What do you think about the Zelensky government?
We live in a military dictatorial regime, similar to Russia in the 2000s, but rapidly approaching the current one, therefore, in such conditions, the only real ways of social resistance remain mutual information and evasion or boycott (this is not only about mobilization, but also, for example, about companies that do not pay wages using the wartime conditions. The conscripts are now more and more behaving like street guerrillas: they saw a military patrol with subpoenas – they crossed to the other side of the road, lay down behind the curb, crawled under parked cars and left by the yards. It is sad that the whole city, where now there is about a million people, is afraid of several hundred camouflaged “postmen”, but until the Russian army turns its bayonets against own power, radical social struggle in Ukraine is practically suicidal. And everyone understands this.”
“Interesting that people in South Africa, on hearing the case for real socialism, should react by saying that that’s like how the Bushmen used to live”
_________________________________Talking of the San (“Bushmen” is regarded as a derogatory word these days) I came across this which is interesting
“Mutual Aid and the Foraging Mode of Thought: Re-reading Kropotkin on the Khoisan”
Robbo – I don’t know this guy’s work but his objections are probably ideological i.e. irrational. Scratch a liberal and you usually find a reactionary underneath.
—————————
Maybe so Wez but all the same, it is interesting this objection he raises – the so-called “scaling up” problem with the implication that while “socialism” can work on a small scale face-to-face basis (e.g. a commune) it cannot work for a large scale society. Frederich Engels cited the example of the religious communities of North America as proof positive of the practicality of communism (socialism). What this guy is saying and many others have said, is that on the contrary, socialism cannot be scaled up.
I would like to know what is it that lies behind this argument that leads people like him to come to this conclusion. What is it about socialism that they think prevents it from being implementable on a large scale?
Dealing with this argument effectively I think involves developing a kind of anthropology of a future socialist society. Sometimes we tend to send out mixed messages. Is establishing and operating a socialist society a question of self-interest? Or altruism? Or both? I think it is both myself (you cannot logically talk about the self-interest of the working class since “self-interest” pertains to particular individuals, not collectivities, so to that extent, class solidarity entails altruism).
In clarifying this we might better be able to get to grips with the “scaling up” objection to socialism which ranks alongside the economic calculation argument and the human nature argument as the principal objections to socialism
“The closest society to true socialism then was the ancient San of the Kalahari. There was no private ownership for example of say an ostrich egg or anything else. One took what one needed ( a gazelle) without over consuming. If one needed something you crafted it, for example a bow and arrow, which then was shared when others needed it. So it can and did work for 10 000 years or more with small clans of 10 or 20 people. What it lacks is progress though. And it could never work with 60 million people.”
_________________________
Well, clearly, Ivo cannot then use the argument that socialism is “against human nature” because if hunter-gatherer groups like the San are representative of our paleolithic past – that is to say, over 95% of our existence – then you could argue that if anything socialism is the expression of our human nature, far more so than say capitalism which is only a few hundred years old. Except, of course, we don’t really say “socialism is just human nature” like the exponents of “capitalism say is in our human nature”. What we do say is that our human nature shows us to be a highly adaptable species capable of living under a wide variety of social arrangements including capitalism and socialism and much more besides…
Which begs the question – why then does Ivo say socialism cannot work for 60 million people?
This refers to what is called the “scaling up” problem. Socialistic or communistic relations are feasible on a small scale characterized by face-to-face interactions – like the family unit or a commune – but not, goes the argument, on a large scale among complete strangers. I have never really understood what it is about the fact that socialism is a large-scale society that makes it impractical. What are the people who make this kind of argument actually assuming about socialism? Are they saying for socialism to work relations between members of a socialist society have to be face to face – or direct – otherwise society will simply collapse? But the argument doesn’t really stand up to scrutiny.
People who argue along these lines fall back on concepts such as Dunbar’s number named after the British anthropologist, Robin Dunbar, who are argued that there cognitive limit to the number of people with whom one can maintain stable social relationships – about 150. Beyond that, you need more impersonal mechanisms – like the market – to mediate and coordinate large numbers of people.
Granted a socialist society, being a global society, will be one in which everyone in that society will be technically a “stranger” to almost everyone else. But why is this a problem? I don’t see this as being a problem at all. If we can characterize a socialist society as a system of generalized reciprocity without any quid pro exchanges then are plenty of examples of large-scale pro-social behaviour involving strangers.
The Internet itself has been compared to a gift economy. There are other examples such as the custom of hospitality towards strangers such as practiced by people living in harsh environments like the Bedouin or the Inuit. This is not entirely altruistic. There is an element of enlightened self-interest involved insofar as you never know when you might have to rely on the hospitality of strangers next time you find yourself stuck in a desert running out of water. You will thank your lucky stars that the local culture is one that values hospitality towards strangers.
It does not really matter whether the population is 6 million, 60 million, 600 million, or 6 billion. It’s the principle that counts. Are you willing to in effect cooperate with complete strangers you will never get to meet to provide for your and their means of subsistence? Of course, you will. Gawd, if people today succumbing to the mental disease of nationalism are willing to give their lives for the “imaginary community” that is the capitalist Nation State, they sure as hell won’t have any problem cooperating with each other globally to sure their own mutual benefit!
Protests against plans to reform the Judiciary in Israel
Lizzie
I am not taking it upon myself to chastise others on this forum. I am merely pointing out that the time has perhaps arrived for the moderator himself now to do some chastising in the case of this particular individual whose behaviour is completely unacceptable
Well, I guess it’s probably not worth trying to get into a debate with this individual, TS, whoever he is. I’m not quite sure why he is even on a socialist forum anyway seeing as he is so hostile to socialism.
I would only add that if you are going to make some outrageous claim about an individual the onus is on you to prove it, not the individual who the claim is about it. TS has said “Notice All-in hasn’t denied his friendship with the CIA” but is not willing to provide any supporting evidence to back up this slur. Quite rightly it needs to be treated with the contempt it deserves – like a lot of other things this individual has said
