Communism: The Promise and The Reality - Red Flag [pt 2/6]

[genobeeno]

God. You people really are just all fucking idiots. the right wingers, the left wingers, the liberals... non of you have any damn idea what you're talking about. you just babble the firs thing that comes to you, and it's fucking pathetic. I look forward to my children ruling over a country full of your morlock offspring.

[genobeeno]

Listen, idiots. Marxism has nothing to do with fascism. What you are trying to say is that Marxism has lead to authoritarianism in every state which it has been implemented. That in itself is a fallacy. Almost no economies have been Marxist in implementation. Marx himself stated that the Russian economy could not successfully implement a socialist government without the prerequisite bourgeoisie revolution, as it was a nation of peasants basically.

[bbphnix]

Scandinavian countries, in particular Norway, have today

[bbphnix]

you can't have creativity or at least not as much as in capitalism where there's the incentive of getting rich of your invention -> thus the economic model, even if it would work, would still only work in the sense that it would have kept russia going forth but not progressing as much as western nations) a rational approach would have been taken, a few reforms implemented and mighty Russia would have just implemented a capitalist-socialist mixed society like the Scan

[bbphnix]

and the fact that Stalin, a murderous megalomaniac, took over that really corrupted the USSR turning it into the evil we remember it for today;

perhaps if Lenin had lived longer or if his successor was like-minded, Russia would have become communist, but not a war-mongerer, and when the economy would have started to stall (because let's face it, it's not a feasible economic plan -

[bbphnix]

I haven't finished the documentary but i'll make a prediction at this point: I don't think Lenin did bad… so he made a "one party one ideology", or whatever they said, state; well, that in and of itself is not necessarily a bad thing; it's how Mustafa Kemal Ataturk introduced secularism and modernism in Turkey; and it stuck and it worked; I think it was just Lenin's death before the end of his project

[JoeTube27]

communism can work under a high tech robotic/automation society, and end money

[D1lk]

@romanianday Political and economic dominance is always more powerful than virtue For several centuries the UK used "divide and rule" as a means to control the European continent. Now the US controls almost all Europe in a single province like the Romans, Debt, unemployment and emigration (including trafficking) become means of control. This is marginally better than being shot for disbelief in a social or religious system. But civilized social security has yet to come...

[a199215]

I really enjoy seeing all the die-hard Marxists and Communists talking against capitalism every time you mention the deaths in Communist countries. As if automatically you have become a pro-capitalist for criticizing communism.

Such stupidity and fanaticism is beyond debate.

[tomitstube]

i think the biggest mistake most people make when comparing communism, socialism, and capitalism is that they have all failed and and all lead to a consolidation of power that oppresses it's people. the difference in the west has always been democratic freedoms. a 3-branch government that balances power between legislatures, a president, and the courts. it's called a democracy people, the bill of rights guaranteeing citizens inalienable rights. capitalism has failed many times.

[Ghostski]

@tomitstube

It's called a Republic. Democracy is rule by the majority, not by the law. That is the key difference. A three branch government, where the law is not applied or adhered to, will fail as well. This is why we have the problems we have today.

[tomitstube]

@Ghostski ~ lol, you mean like the "republic" of (communist) china? you should really stop getting your info from beck and fox. republic is a generic word for government.

america is a democracy. of course right wingers have always hated a democracy, all that messy freedom and equality. ***the - bill - of - rights***. WHAT WERE THE FOREFATHERS THINKING!!!

[Ghostski]

@tomitstube

Nice job, accuse someone simply making a statement about the problem of the state violating it's own laws, using force to manipulate views and steal, while bribing "society" with it's own money. I don't need Cry Baby or Fox, and I'm not a right-winger in the sense you use it. One the classical, horizontal scale, I would be considered an anarchist or a xeerist.

[tomitstube]

@Ghostski ~3) now about china, republic, smeepublic, it's a name that means very little. and you're argument about who's more "capitalist" is semantics. what china has, and what america (by an unregulated free market) has lost, is a manufacturing base. good paying jobs for the majority of it's people. in america, conservatives have driven down the standard of living by scouring the world for cheap labor. the american economy be damned, we need more profit. unregulated again, it fails.

[Ghostski]

@tomitstube

Furthermore; China is a republic, more so than the US. It is also more capitalist than the US. The government functions primarily through business involvement, and system that resembles mercantilism to a particular degree. Eventually this will give way to more capitalism, a rise in the standard of living, a demand in wage increases as interference results in micromanagement that will not be cheap when facing expansion and jobs will move from China, as they have the US.

[tomitstube]

@Ghostski ~2) enter reagan, bush, and bush, (clinton balanced a budget but did little to alleviate union busting and corporate welfare) and once again the reaganomics of laissez faire collapses again. it amazes me that people are oblivious to the obvious failures of ayn rand libertarianism and laissez faire. it has never worked, and now america is forcing, and i do mean forcing, this failed model around the world. everywhere it's implemented, economies go into death spirals.

[Gnickk]

@tomitstube Are you suggesting that those freedoms can exist without respect for private property?

[tomitstube]

@Gnickk ~ i believe in private property. but not over social rights. i don't think a restaurant can hang a "whites only" sign on their door. and they should pay taxes. a proportional share.

are you one of those fake constitution teabaggers who's against a mosque three blocks from ground zero?

[Gnickk]

@tomitstube No, you asshole.

[Ghostski]

@tomitstube

IF you are speaking in a nationalist sense that it has failed, through the movement of jobs abroad and from a labor force that demands higher wages vise those desired by immigrants, then yes it has. If you're saying it's failed in growth and evolution of technology, in spite of intervention from states, then you are wrong. Try reading about the origination of various models, rather than watching TV specials espousing the opinions of others and getting information from Wikipedia.

[tomitstube]

@Ghostski ~1) what i mean by "capitalism has failed" is, left to it's own devices as in laissez faire, it collapses on itself every generation, like clock-work, then the gov't began to manage capitalism around the time of woodrow wilson. enter harding, coolidge and hoover, a free market bonanza and we get the '29 crash, guess who bails them out? tax dollars. enter fdr, the new deal, regulations, and workers rights, and we have the best expansion of the middle class in american history...

[banzostrummer]

@tomitstube

you're totally wrong!

1) Capitalism never failed simply because there has never been a free market

In '29 economy crashed as FED REGULATION imposed to block money flow and the new deal delayed economy regrowth

2) Reagan and Bush had high regulation

3) your arguments are very poor. You want more welfare but you like China system where workers have no rights at all. Citizens don't have rights to good education and health service.

4) a more free market always worked! just look at

[banzostrummer]

@tomitstube

conditions of citizens in non socialist economies compared to ones in socialist economies.

you're clueless

5) the good think about free market is that if you don't like your wage and job you can change it! and you can start a company. While in non free market you're stuck in your exploited condition!

[tomitstube]

@banzostrummer ~ it's that way in theory only. we don't have a free market, it's never existed, more people are squashed daily than make it in 10 years. and in democratic socialism you have democratic freedoms, the only difference is you won't have 400 people making more than half the country, or 155 million people, as we do in america today.

they tell you that b.s. to keep you plugging away thinking you're getting ahead and that there's fairness. you've been duped.

[Lopatesth]

@tomitstube Capitalism isn't a form of government. You speak of it as though it is.

[tomitstube]

@Lopatesth ~ i agree with that, capitalism is not a form of government. i was trying to define that most people seem to think it is. what the west invented was "democracy", that's been evolving. democracy, which can be socialist, communist, capitalist, etc., or combinations. my point is, that without a strong balanced democratic institution protected FROM monied power and interests, governments are doomed to fail no matter how you label, market, or propagandize them.

[BamFor07]

@tomitstube

The beauty of capitalism is that when it fails it doesn't round up people and put them in gulags, nor does it allow for the constant imprisonment of citizenry for political reasons, just saying.

[tomitstube]

@BamFor07 ~ "the beauty of *capitalism* is that when it fails it doesn't round up people and put them in gulags..."

america has the highest incarceration in the world. obama won't prosecute people who illegally torture suspects and has not closed so-called "black-sites", i.e. gitmo and and other torture and incarceration sites that america uses around the world.

just saying.

[BamFor07]

@tomitstube

I'm sorry is that anywhere even close to along the same lines as the gulags, the killing fields of Cambodia, the "cultural" revolution in China? You seem to mistake the limited shortcomings of the United States, which is only a part of the greater capitalist system, with the MILLIONS of people murdered by the Communist idea. You aren't very bright are you?

[BamFor07]

@tomitstube

Scratch that last piece; I just read your page and I was wrong about you. You aren't bright, you're a complete fucking moron.

"Workers Unite", to the tune of about 80 million murdered.

[tomitstube]

@BamFor07 ~ i don't care to hold your hand thru this, (you're obviously privy to propaganda) capitalism has killed by far more people on this planet than any fake totalitarian communism or socialism. read a book or two.

[BamFor07]

@tomitstube

You're pathetic, no wonder you're a liberal.

[tomitstube]

@BamFor07 ~ america is the reason pol pot gained control of cambodia, after we bombed the living hell out of it after seeing depots by satellites, america then supported pol pot because he was against vietnam. our bombing killed an estimated 750,000 innocent cambodian civilians and helped pol pot gain power who then murdered political enemies. just like america supported suharto in indonesia, bin ladin in afghanistan, pinochet in chile, hussein in iraq. stop being a brain washed idiot.

[hilletehnoob]

@tomitstube what failed in communism wasn't opression,it was it's economy and internationalism(multicultural­ism),they couldn't supress national feelings in soviet union,yugoslavia,czechslovakia­,all collapsed,communism is a failure,capitalism isn't great but it's 100 better economic system,proof is reality,i know commies don't like reality much and prefeer fantasy and to live in their dreams but reality shows that communist economy sucked hard,that's why it collapsed in almost every country.

[tomitstube]

@hilletehnoob ~ you have no idea what you're babbling about, our founders relied on socialism to write the constitution. democracy is steeped in socialist ideals, it's the robber barons and their fake "free market" who are the ones trying to suppress you. the soviet union, china, and other counties don't practice a democratic socialism, they are single party gov'ts that are totalitarian dictatorships. europe is a better example of democratic socialism, when not being robbed by capitalists.

[hilletehnoob]

@tomitstube democracy existed before socialism,get your facts right lol.Redistribution and equal opportunities have nothing to do with democracy,nor socialist monopoly.Socialism also fails,it's internationalist,it is islamifying europe and destroying european heritages,and will create ethnic conflicts like in Yugoslavia in near future because of black,asian and muslim immigrants,it's crazy.

[tomitstube]

@hilletehnoob ~ now you're talking like a xenophobic nationalist with "islamifying europe and destroying european heritages"... democracy is socialism, it goes back to the greeks and romans. capitalism is nothing but a money scheme, a ponzi scheme of robber barons to hoard money from the masses. "capitalism" is not in the constitution, it has nothing to do with democracy. democracy is about equality and fairness. it's called the bill of rights.

[hilletehnoob]

@tomitstube democracy isn't socialism,demography is the will of the people,it existed in ancient greece,were they socialists?of course not,i think you got your definition of socialism very wrong.Capitalism can be fair,look at sweden,norway,deenmark,etc... and it's a much better economic system than total state initiative,reality proves it,i don't care what economic system nations have as long as they serve the porpose and communism is a bad system.Again,you definition of democracy sucks.

[tomitstube]

@hilletehnoob ~ you realize those european countries you held up as good economic systems have much higher percentages of socialist programs in their countries right? universal health care, long vacations, transit systems, free education and and many other services... you really don't understand what it is you're against, it's the best part of america, social security, medicare, unemployment insurance, when the capitalists steal those things you will rue the day you believed those crooks.

[hilletehnoob]

@tomitstube it's not socialist programs,it's welfare programs,redistribution,it's not required to be socialist to support that,look at taiwan,singapure,etc...

[genobeeno]

@tomitstube Social welfare is not Marxist in nature. Socialism is public ownership of means of production. It has nothing to do with reformist welfare-state capitalism. This is a very simple premise that most people who lean right seem not to understand, which belies the other mistakes you make in your logic. If you don't understand this simple premise, how can you even enter the argument?

[tomitstube]

@genobeeno ~ well yes, socialism is a "horizontalism" as opposed to the top heavy hierarchy of capitalism, ownership and power is parceled among the whole as opposed to a few. in theory. so tell me, why did marxism fail in the soviet union?

[cooks1234]

yeah um who ever posted this vid you really need to do research cause everything communism is blame for is fault of socialism&statecapitalism theres never been communist society.also the part killing the most people is also false the ideal or movement to kill most is in fact and undisputidly CAPITALISM why. its been around longer and its still killing people today.from the euros who killed natives and enslaved them to the totalitarian dictatorship busineses like corporations mafias cartels etc

[genrail1]

I wonder how the "musician" escaped Comrade Stalin...

[comradericardo]

we always hear about the 'failure of socialism', but where is the 'success' of capitalism, especially in the third world? Not to mention, that capitalism has killed FAR more people than communism ever has!

[daisyyyx0x0]

haha... my social studies teacher made me watch this for hw lol interesting video... =D

[staples2704]

@daisyyyx0x0

Mr. cook??

[D1lk]

In literacy, respect for indigenous languages, women's rights and social mobility the USSR surpassed the USA.

But the captialist leaders would not cooperate with USSR, forcing communist leaders to impose harsh work-discipline on peasants.

QUESTION: Why wouldn't western leaders and financiers cooperate with communists in USSR?

Cooperation in 1920 would have prevented fascism and the Great Depression.

ANSWER; The USA+UK wanted total world control.

Now they got it. - Happy?

[am1966ath]

@D1lk What social mobility in the USSR??...look at Breshnievs imbecill in-laws or Krushievs family...do you think that any able peron could be anything in the USSR say pilot or diplomat without approval???

[D1lk]

@D1lk Do you think that Presidents and Senators don't reward family and friends with sweetheart deals? "Social mobility" refers to persons born outside these privileges but able to take advantage of opportunities built into a society by its values, procedures and incentives.

Once the U.S. offered the most wondrous model of social mobility. But that's disappearing as the society becomes more stratified, limiting opportunities, wages and entries into higher status-groups. Hence my concern.

[translationwiz]

Visiting learning about my roots throughout Arabia-I came along a band of Communists singing of freedom from the clutches of Imperialism&exploitation. They were dedicated young men. I wished them well. Later I learned the entire countryside yielded to this ideology. Until...bodies were being dragged behind trucks. Buried in shallow graves shepherds found them. What happened to the enemy? Oh, he was safe behind fortified walls. Its always the common ppl. that pay the price 4 revolution.

peace.

[ehunter2]

you still dont understand whats wrong with the forced equality of socialism..your only wish is that it was more successful

[CesarManiaX]

China is becoming more capitalist everyday

Vietnam and Laos are third world countries

Cuba looks like it's falling apart

North Korea is basically 1984 in which Big Brother really is watching you

[kchomer1]

communism did kill people because if you didn't believe in it you ended up getting shot in the head or worse.

[MementoMori425]

Communism did not kill people, Joseph Stalin did because he was a dictator! All dictators are the same, be it Hitler, Stalin, Pinochet, Franco, they are all the same scum. Stalin took communism as an excuse to do what he did FOR HIS OWN GAIN, not because he was acting on behalf of the revolution or the masses, which he failed to take into account!

[kchomer1]

communism did kill people because if you didn't believe in it you ended up getting shot in the head or worse.

[kchomer1]

Lenin was a dictator to. the Chinese people are still suffering from it. the cubans are too

[estrada1234]

All I can say is that while everyone is debating history, the communist struggle is still marching on and has worked its way our back yard with new vigor. Look at Hugo Chavez, that fat pig. He is trying to be the new Castro. Those poor venezualian citizens are paying the price. So are our business that do business there. So be very careful who you vote for. It does not matter about the party, do your research. Study their programs, look for comparisons. Be aware.

[guerrillamaab]

He's the most popular president of Venezuela ever! What are you talking about?

An expose on anti-Chavez propaganda:

fair . org / index . php ? page = 13

write without spaces!

[kchomer1]

that's propaganda

[MementoMori425]

If it wasn't I wouldn't be wasting my time typing it.lol

[kchomer1]

are you pro or against communism? it did destroy many people.

[MementoMori425]

I am communist.

[kchomer1]

ya i see. are you communist in the marxist way or in the christian way?

[MementoMori425]

I am not religious or believe in a god. Nevertheless I am a Marxist, but do not believe in overthrowing governments that are already established; much less support dictators, racism, repression, or wars, discrimination, or worker exploitation for meager wages. I have an extensive knowledge of the capitalist system because I live in a couple capitalist countries myself. Nevertheless I expect both to become more socialistic in the future.

[kchomer1]

well then more rights will be taken from you and less freedom related rights will be given to you. maybe you should look at the Mennonite version of communism. Lenin was a dictator to he just didn't live long enough to reach the heights of Stalin. and this Chavez guy already denied his country term limits he is establishing himself as a dictator. how are people so sure he is well loved when he controls the media there?

[sebidelpi]

@kchomer1 i am a comunst but comunism wasnt really comunism in rusia and eastern europe was all a big lie i dont even know if real comunism is posibile but one think i am sure capitalism isnt the answer even if is better then the so called comunism of rusia isnt the answer we must find something new that have the socialist values but do not efect freedoom of the people

[kchomer1]

@sebidelpi i said Marxism.

[sebidelpi]

@kchomer1 ok i can accept that but the ideas of marx were made in the 19 century and there was a difrent reality back then..i think you mus be crazy to be a blind marxist today but we can take some thinks from the marxist ideology like his main goal the power to the people and no class exploatetion...like i told you before in some kind of new society a democratic one.i dont know if this is an utopia but at some point we must evolved our society in a better one

[kchomer1]

@sebidelpi any nation who adopted marxs ideals became, soviet Russia, Castro Cuba, mouist china. and all the other failures

[sebidelpi]

@kchomer1 yes because they didnt recongnize what wemt wrong.cuba could learn from the soviet union mistakes give freedom of speach and all that stuff that went wrong in the soviet union but for some reason they are afraid to do that they are afraid to give to the people the real power and build a real socialist state the people does not have the power does not own the economy is all a big lie so they are not trully socialist

[kchomer1]

@sebidelpi no such thing as freedom of speech intodays world. we all are slowly gonna be like soviet russia. the only socialism ive seen that ever worked was christian socialism

[Alkarin11]

so did capitalism and fascism.

[kchomer1]

heh marxisim has proven to be fascism in every nation its taken over.

[FreeEdgarJSteele]

@kchomer1

Except that fascism worked for the people and the economy whereas communism destroyed both.

[kchomer1]

@FreeEdgarJSteele lol no, Stalinist communism was the ultimate fascism. over state and people

[kchomer1]

the chinese people have no freedom of speach. only a few hundred thousand people are aloud to leave each yea out of 1.3 billion. there is no freedom in china. and dont believe what comes from there media or any for that matter.

[MrsSolidarity]

you are right...they never gave up..its like an ugly cancer that spreads from one body to the next

[Suomipanzerdiv13]

Communism: good ideas abaout equality and peace. But the big problem is: IT WONT WORK!

btw, im not a communist.

[xymbaline]

Well. let's see ... It looks pretty well documented that the Cheka actually DID kill people. Millions of people, and the purges of Stalin's enemies were gruesome.

So, they killed people (their own population) and they didn't prevent the greatest war of all time. Moreover, they killed so many of their own generals that the Germans were able to push past the feeble Russian Army and were only stopped by bad winter and supply-lines that were stretched too far.

You lose on every point.

[xymbaline]

Doofus, none of what you say is fact.

[dong604]

im not joking. Lenin looks eerily like G.G. Allin.

[Alexiytag]

Communism is a Zionists invention. Christian Tzar Empire in Russia was ruined by Zionists with a help of communism.

[IWWXno]

FUCK GOVERNMENTS!

[R3DF4C710N]

This is a surprisingly balanced documentary on the Russian Revolution. Thanks for posting it.

[OgienSS]

USSR was the bigest crimes country in all world history!!! DEATH FOR COMMUNISM!!!

[Losertarian]

I do agree that the Soviets were mainly responsible for destroying Nazi Germany. As to the truth of it being 4 times bigger all in all? I don't agree. We fought two major powers on two fronts and won decisievly in both theaters. Yeah We shit all over Normandy, thats why the French cheered everywhere we went. All of this is moot however. The Soviet Union is dead. Thank God (literally).

[Losertarian]

Its true that the Soviets took the brunt of the Nazis. Heres what you DIDN'T say. The U.S. supplied the Soviets and kept them from starving and running out of military hardware BEFORE Pearl Harbor. Also, ever heard of Japan? The Soviets didn't do shit there, We did all of it, as well as help them in Europe and at a litlle place called Normandy. The Soviets would of never beat the Axis alone. Sorry but what you said isnt realistic or true. You would of done well writing for "Pravda", "Comrade".

[Losertarian]

You keep writing about the Soviets stopping the Nazis. The only reason the Soviets fought the Nazis in the first place was because Stalin took the Eastern oil fields after he sign a NON-AGRESSION pact with Hitler. It was trash on trash. The U.S. is the reason you arent a bar of soap, not the USSR.

[ricardas83]

Yeah, i'm fucking nazi :D. All we, oposing comunism are nazists.

[ricardas83]

Sorry, but i have no arguments, if you have such excuse like war for comunists to terror their own (or other) people... And i dont like nazi world as well as comunist world. If we would make body count, then all could see, that comunism killed much more people than nazism. So meaning that, i should choose nazism. Comunists look better only becouse they are winners. If winners would be nazis, then we know would discus how it would be bad in cuomunism world. BTW, Nazis are inspired by Marx too...

[ricardas83]

Your last sentence opens the roots of comunism: FEAR!!! This is what you call paradise???

[ricardas83]

I see this film as critic to comunism, not anti. Anti is something like propaganda, when you hear only one opinion. Anyway. YOu are comunist not becouse you have chance to evaluate all opinions. You are dreamer. If you would live in comunist country, and you would not be in goverment, you wouldnt thing that comunism is good. There is no lot of space to discus it why. And i did not red Marx, but i know essence of it. For example to destroy other nations, wich are two steps back... God...

[ricardas83]

Deporting children and woman was only made to prevent the soldiers deserting? WTF :D? Can you explain this?

[ricardas83]

This video is not anti or something. It is about history. It is objective. It lets people talk freely about what they liked or not. Something diferent? You got used only hear what government aproves, and it looks strange, when we dont just cut off what looks not comfortable to us. And you are very wrong that noone cant say nothing nagative. You should hear more opinions. There where many good will idealists, but they where WRONG. Communism is crime. Just admit it, like germans admited hitler.

[ricardas83]

What you expect from old comunist people :)? Saying something bad about their beloved young life? Russian as many other nations have very big problem with recognizing their own criminals. You say it was good to establish Cheka? To prevent war? Maybe war preventing war to exil my people to sibir: children, women... Yeah, comrade. That what was your beloved country's enemies...

[lesmcluffalot]

Kewlios