: Lead is lead Farinata. Imperialistic communism is not democracy
: though. Maybe you don't value freedom as I do but whatever freedom
: you or I have was once fought for or defended by a soldier. Christ
: said that "Greater love has no man than this, that he lay down his
: life for his brother". Many soldiers have died defending our freedom
: against imperialistic communism.: Let us try to put this into very viceral terms.
: Communism is being indicted for the deaths of up to 100,000,000
: people as it is counted in "The Black Book of Communism" currently
: stirring up quite a pot in France at the moment.
: 100 million dead bodies.
: If you line them up head to toe it would wrap around the earth 4
: times. If you give them the dignity of an isolated grave, we could
: bury them in an area the size of 33,500 soccer fields. If you wish
: to bury them at sea and say one minute's worth of kindness about
: each one, it will take you 190 years to finish. If we use Frode's
: example, the Soviets would have to shoot one K.A.L. 747 out of the
: sky every day for 782 years.
: It is going to be very difficult for you to dispute the facts of
: this case. "The Black Book of Communism" was compiled by a very
: well respected group of six professors. The only quarrels seem to
: be whether it was 85 or 100 million. The Third Reich was responsible
: for a sum total of one quarter that of godless communism. Does the
: wishful accusation of capitalistic genocide really stack up to the
: realities of this world Farinata? Or are collectivists now, having
: suffered defeat, resorting to nonsense like this to generate support?
So what should Farinata's response be, Stu? Should Farinata follow the Stu Gort manual of debate, and brand this "wild rhetoric" because of the presence of sensationalism and inculpating venom, and respond with an ad hominem comment? In short, should Farinata refuse to take you seriously, because you refused to take Frode Areskjold seriously?
BTW, nobody here appears to be endorsing "communism" (as referred to above) anymore, because it's painfully obvious that "communism" was merely a precapitalist response to the onset of capitalist industrialization. Countries such as Russia, China, Cuba, Vietnam wanted to industrialize without leaving themselves open to plundering capitalists. Of course it failed; Vietnam, for instance, fought so hard to remove the capitalists from its shores, only to invite them back into the country in the form of NIKE with its well-known exploitation of teenage females. China is well-known for its slave labor gangs, Russia is a Mafia-run state, Cuba is in a transitional phase. The reason for this failure is that "communism" was just an advertising ploy to sell state capitalism to peasants with a history of communal interaction. Marx (the patron saint of these "communists"), on the other hand, theorized that communism would arise only in the technologically most advanced countries.
On the other hand, some of us have the intellectual acumen to distinguish phony "communism" from the "socialism" advocated by people like Barry Stoller, who operate with neither an advertising budget nor a plan to conquer the world, and so therefore are unlikely to kill millions.
None.
