I'm sorry, what's wrong with what I said? Did I say he helped Germany? No, I said he helped those he considered German citizens. In fact I said that specifically. He did not help communists, the disabled, the semetic, and political enemies. He also did not help Germany by doing such a horrible thing in history which has much of the world biased against Germans. Maybe you haven't seen such behavior, but in my country assholes talk about the barbaric Germans with their accents which always sound angry, and stupid shit like that. US Nationalism which was of course fueled by World War II has created a lot of racism and stupid bias; this is partially Hitler's fault, he gave Germany a bad name for his country for his atrocities. Of course we ignore the atrocities commited by the United States during the same time period, ie Japanese Prison camps, and the firebombing of Dresden, which can only be called an act of terrorism. So it's mostly stupid people who are the cause of all that bias and shit, not Hitler's fault =/ Hitler was an asshole yes, but he was a good ruler to those who he catored to. He just didn't serve all of the German population =/
2006, 10, 19 00:02
Oh and about your references about 'Rushia' which is spelled Russia, btw; The Soviet Union was not communist nor is North Korea.
Also about North Korea being so poor; no one trades with them (as a friend of mine was saying to me, so I will mention it here), so how can they have money and food? What country now a days is self sustaining. I don't know how things work in your guys' German countries, but in the US everythign here is made in China -.-
2006, 10, 19 00:17
"I think everyone would agree that a country where people starve while Kim Jong-il lives his decadent lifestyle and atomic bombs are built sucks"
The gaps in wealth between the US upper (which is mostly people in the government) and the poor (and the impoverished) is very great. And we build nuclear weapons and spend hundreds of thousands and millions on bombs. So did the Soviet Union, so does China, so do many countries. North Korea is not so different from many countries, both in the past and the present. Don't kid yourself, North Korea is not special, but people, our governments, and the media want us to think North Korea is revolutionary and really different and exceptional. You would do best to not be like king, and to not listen to everything you hear. In fact, question everything I've said also. I will do my best to back it up should you find it necessary, feel free to prove me wrong.
2006, 10, 19 00:28
lol this is dumber then me and holy)sin('s argument
2006, 10, 19 00:29
China can't grow all their food, and they're a lot more land for agriculture, they get most of their food from the US and other countries. North Korea is small and rocky, how can they be expected to feed their citizens without people trading with them? Iran is waiting for their nuclear technology to become more advanced to buy that shit off of them, and when they do trade I doubt it will be with food -.-
2006, 10, 19 00:38
Well, China DOES trade with North Korea; China is North Korea's most important trading partner. But I don't know what they trade... The USA also trades with North Korea, at least they still do. The UN wants to restrict trade with them now, but they said they want to try not to harm the poor population there. Well, we'll see.
I agree that there are big social gaps in many countries, but they are more drastic in North Korea, that's for sure...
About Hitler: Well, it SEEMED as if he helped the German citizens, and maybe we (I'm German) would be the most prospering nation in the world if WW2 had been "successful". But it was an impossible scenario right from the start and sooner or later the backfall HAD to come. Btw, I don't think that sending millions of men into suicide can be called "helping"...
@Panschk, I didn't mean to call you a racist or something. I just wanted to point out that it is not North Korea as the country that sucks, but the regime. You probably did mean it that way anyways, it is not rare that one just takes the name of the country for his critizism and means the respective administration.
Another thing: I'd bet North Korea had better trading connections if they had a different regime...
2006, 10, 19 08:11
lol yeah I'm not defending North Korea's fascist totalitarian government at all. As for Hitler, he was a decent civil ruler but was a horrible military leader. He could have won. In fact I wrote for myself an article on how he could have won, I'll go find that and post it here :) and for Hitler's mass murder, he was not being a good ruler then. A good ruler should not kill millions of their own people, that's just stupid. It makes the ruler not just feared, which is not a bad thing, but hated, which is a horrible thing. This guy obviously never read Machiavelli's The Prince^^
2006, 10, 19 22:38
wtf? so genocide is supposed to be "decent"^_^;
Well I'm not pursuing this argument any more, we are probably closer in our oppinions that it might seem, just looking from another perspective...
2006, 10, 19 22:45
So true, panschk ;)
Well, imo you can't call someone a good leader who plans on conquering the whole world from the very beginning. He could never have succeded with all of his goals (which included making Germany the reigning country over the whole world...)
Oh, btw, I guess you heard of Bush who signed some document that said something like that every nation that is an enemy of the US will be prevented to access the outer space. He claimed the whole universe to be property of the USA, so to speak Oo
Now, what did you hear about that in the US? ;)
2006, 10, 19 22:54
lol panschk your second statement is likely true. I'm not sure where you got the decent genocide thing from; perhaps from my poor writing (I write fast and don't revise later, although I could and maybe should). I want to make it clear I believe Genocide to be inhumane, immoral, and unethical. I'll leave it there.
2006, 10, 19 22:55
Not much left to add to that ;)
2006, 10, 19 23:04
lol well you could call it efficient ><
2006, 10, 20 22:14
king of 8 plr maps
Im not wrong in saying N. Korea is comunist, I dont care for politics I just mention what i heard and researched.
You can also say its Totalitarian yes, because you have 1 Leader dictator ontop of Government. I can also say it has socialism, Even in USA you have socialism policies.
Here i copied some stuff i research, since you into political crap
As of 2006, parties that profess adherence to communist ideology govern Cuba, the People's Republic of China, Vietnam, Laos, and North Korea. In the case of the Communist Party of China (CPC), the adoption of a so-called "socialist market economy" — formally known as "socialism with Chinese characteristics" — has led many communists and communist parties worldwide to argue that it has either partially or completely abandoned communism for capitalism.
In North Korea, Marxism has been officially "superseded" by the ideology of Juche. In July 2002, North Korea started running an experiment with capitalism in the Kaesŏng Industrial Region. A small number of other areas have been designated as Special Administrative Regions, or regions where free-market policies are allowed, including Sinŭiju along the China-North Korea border. Meanwhile, in the former Soviet republic of Moldova, the Communist Party was elected back into power. However, as of 2004, this nominally communist government has not distinguished itself in any significant way from the capitalist government which preceded it.
modified by king of 8 plr maps
2006, 10, 21 06:06
ok... so what's your point? Your uncited information just illustrates my point that North Korea is not communist. You could have just said "Yes Nightmarjoo, everything you said is correct; I bow before your onmisciency"
2006, 10, 21 06:26
king of 8 plr maps
Your an idiot dude, look up comunism it list N. korea. Comunisms has differant doctrines all over world, in N. Korea its Juche, if you look up Juche theres refrence to Soviet Union, so all ive been saying is actually true, but your brain cant see it, because of your ignorance.
Just Today I read News papers it also referance N. Korea as comunist state.
I Also heard on TV saying its a Totalitarian, and they say its comunist in same prodcast.
Do you even have an enciclopedia, im giving you quotes from enciclopedia, are they wrong too.
The goal of revolution and construction under Juche is the establishment of socialism and communism within the national borders of North Korea; however, North Korean ideologists have argued that other countries should learn from Juche and adapt its principles to their national conditions. The North Korean government admits that Juche addresses questions previously considered in classical Marxism, but distances itself from and even repudiates aspects of this political philosophy. The official position is that Juche is a completely new ideology created by Kim Il-sung, who does not depend on the Marxist classics.
modified by king of 8 plr maps
2006, 10, 21 08:40
Wow, thanks for proving my theory that you're a dumbass. Do you know what communism is? It's the indoctination of Marxism. Totalitarianism is not Marxism, and therefore cannot be communism. Why do you think your sources are right? Have you ever looked up a real definition of communism, and compared it to these 'communist states'?
Since you like using outside sources:
"Communism is an ideology that seeks to establish a future classless, stateless social organization, based upon common ownership of the means of production. It can be classified as a branch of the broader socialist movement. Early forms of human social organization have been described as 'primitive communism' by Marxists.
Karl Marx held that society could not be transformed from the capitalist mode of production to the communist mode of production all at once, but required a transitional period which Marx described as the revolutionary dictatorship of the proletariat. The communist society Marx envisioned emerging from capitalism has never been implemented, and it remains theoretical; Marx, in fact, commented very little on what communist society would actually look like. However, the term 'Communism', especially when it is capitalized, is often used to refer to the political and economic regimes under communist parties that claimed to embody the dictatorship of the proletariat.
In the late 19th century, Marxist theories motivated socialist parties across Europe, although their policies later developed along the lines of "reforming" capitalism, rather than overthrowing it. The exception was the Russian Social Democratic Labour Party. One branch of this party, commonly known as the Bolsheviks and headed by Vladimir Lenin, succeeded in taking control of the country after the toppling of the Provisional Government in the Russian Revolution of 1917. In 1918, this party changed its name to the Communist Party, thus establishing the contemporary distinction between communism and other trends of socialism.
The Stalinist version of socialism, with some important modifications, shaped the Soviet Union and influenced Communist Parties worldwide. It was heralded as a possibility of building communism via a massive program of industrialization and collectivization. The rapid development of industry, and above all the victory of the Soviet Union in the Second World War, maintained that vision throughout the world, even around a decade following Stalin's death, when the party adopted a program in which it promised the establishment of communism within thirty years.
However, under Stalin's leadership, evidence emerged that dented faith in the possibility of achieving communism within the framework of the Soviet model. Stalin had created in the Soviet Union a repressive state that dominated every aspect of life. Later, growth declined, and rent-seeking and corruption by state officials increased, which dented the legitimacy of the Soviet system.
Despite the activity of the Comintern, the Soviet Communist Party adopted the Stalinist theory of "socialism in one country" and claimed that, due to the "aggravation of class struggle under socialism," it was possible, even necessary, to build socialism in one country alone. This departure from Marxist internationalism was challenged by Leon Trotsky, whose theory of "permanent revolution" stressed the necessity of world revolution.
Trotsky and his supporters organized into the "Left Opposition," and their platform became known as Trotskyism. But Stalin eventually succeeded in gaining full control of the Soviet regime, and their attempts to remove Stalin from power resulted in Trotsky's exile from the Soviet Union in 1929. After Trotsky's exile, world communism fractured into two distinct branches: Stalinism and Trotskyism. Trotsky later founded the Fourth International, a Trotskyist rival to the Comintern, in 1938.
Most recently, Trotskyist ideas have occasionally found an echo among political movements in countries such as Venezuela, where the Committee for a Marxist International has had contact with President Hugo Chávez of Venezuela. Many Trotskyist parties are also active in politically stable, developed countries such as the United Kingdom, France, Spain, Germany, and Italy.
However, as a whole, Trotsky's theories and attitudes were never re-accepted in worldwide mainstream communist circles after Trotsky's expulsion, either within or outside of the Soviet bloc. This remained the case even after the Secret Speech and subsequent events exposed the fallibility of Stalinism and Maoism. Today, even given the fact that there are areas of the world where Trotskyist movements are rather large, the rest of the communist movement, and the working class as a whole, continues not to take Trotskyism seriously enough to coalesce in a mass movement around it or any of its offshoots. Thus, Trotskyism has never been successful in building a mass social movement capable of overthrowing a capitalist state apparatus" (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Communism).
Now to interpret that: Communism is marxism, every state that has declared itself communist has branched away from marxism, and therefore communism.
In communism there is no private property, there are no social classes, everyone is equal in status, and everyone knows their place in society. There are leaders. If there is a leader, it is not communist, but socialist. Or totalitarian, which is essentially capitalism furthest to the right on the political spectrum, "Conservative".
There has been no communist state on this planet. Not a whole country. There have been small sects of actual communism, such as the kubutzes of Israel. No state has ever been communist. Socialist, yes, capitalist, yes, communist, no.
King of 8 player maps, if you're going to argue a point please either think before you click 'post comment', or do some basic research if you are unfamiliar on the topic.
2006, 10, 21 18:19
Oh and for your encyclopedia post, which is uncited, it is not incorrect. You simply have read it wrong. (Perhaps English is not your strong point? You mispell many english words, and your grammar leaves much to be desired. If your english is not great, perhaps you are misreading the text here? If it is such a case I apologize for calling you an idiot, as your only 'fault' would be not knowing english, and I can hardly blame you for that assuming English is not your first language). What you pasted here simply states that North Korean Juche has some marxist points, but is not in fact marxism. Oh wait, that's what I said too. Funny huh. I don't care if a State has a couple communist ideals in effect, it is socialist then! Not communist.
I got this info from 4 sources, I cross refrence, 2 news sources, encarta, and A documentary I seen on tv and from yesterdays News Papers. Like I said before I dont care for Politics, Im more interested in study of people and their cultures. What I found is the old Label N. Korean was indeed Comunist but now label changed to A Totalitarianism. You cant count on Wikipedia to be accurate. I got most my info from a Ducumentary on CNN, The Media Reports alot of whats known but what really going on in that country it isnt all the time accurate becasue no one can 100% certain, no media allowed to go into that country. If you beleive the propaganda then you beleive Bush statement that N. Korea got nuke tech from Soviet Union, but who knows the real story, All its known is they had relations.
Why Newspapers and some Media still Call N. Korean a comunist state I dont know answer to, but they still saying it, while others From A Ducumentary Was calling N. Korea A Totalitarian Nation simular to Soviet Union of 1979.
modified by king of 8 plr maps
2006, 10, 21 21:27
king of 8 plr maps
Heres all facts in one post I read from 1 source microsoft encarta, nowhere does is say anything about Totalitarian, but makes refrence to Comunist Party.