A week half back,we had all the leftwing media going into overdrive on the 17 year old Nigel Farage over concerns of his views at the time.
Good point well made. The left and double-standards are indeed constant bed-fellows.
My personal favourite is the way that it is OK on the Left to express hate. Imagine if you were to wear a T-shirt that expressed views on black scum or gay scum or Jewish scum. Inspector Knacker would come a-knocking. But "Tory scum" - to be worn with pride. The most popular party in the UK at the last democratic elections? And their voters? Scum. Nice. Real classy.
The Left - the last bastion of unlegislated hate in our society....
For some reason this whole Mailibandsmeargate yawnathon reminds me of this from General Melchett:
Well, I hope so, Blackadder. You know, if there's one thing I've learnt from being in the Army, it's never ignore a pooh-pooh. I knew a Major, who got pooh-poohed, made the mistake of ignoring the pooh-pooh. He pooh-poohed it! Fatal error! 'Cos it turned out all along that the soldier who pooh-poohed him had been pooh-poohing a lot of other officers who pooh-poohed their pooh-poohs. In the end, we had to disband the regiment. Morale totally destroyed... by pooh-pooh!
So nothing in there that he wanted Britain to lose. I'm amazed that our esteemed researcher into the Khmer Rouge, who discovered Bob Ainsworths complicity in Pol Pots crimes but who managed to miss the fact that Margaret Thatcher was arming and training the Khmer Rouge for a decade can't dig it up. If not Sean then who?
Ralph Miliband was "bitter and depressed" by the fact Britain had won the "f*cking Falklands" war and defeated Fascism. Don't know about you, but I have no need to hear any more; I now have a pretty firm opinion of this unpleasant man.
However if you can dig up something that proves Miliband Senior was even nastier than this - go ahead. Knock yourself out.
You have no idea whether he was unpleasant or otherwise - you have never met him. You'd come across as unpleasant to those who don't know you and take your rightwing rants on here as evidence of your nature. In real life, of course, you a nice guy. A good father. Enthusiast Primrose Hill resident and friend-at-large to a raft of London lefties.
It's entirely possible for someone to be perfectly pleasant on an interpersonal level while holding deeply unpleasant views.
I'd regard any Marxist - certainly any Marxist capable of reflection and thought rather than just repetitious spouting - as unpleasant simply on account of those views. A Marxist must disapprove of so many economic, political and social liberties that are widely cherished that they have to advocate a dictatorial kleptocracy. No freedom of speech, no freedom of association, no representative democracy, no freedom to own and develop property, businesses or ideas; just people as cogs in someone else's machine, allocated according to the greater good. That's unpleasant.
Clearly you have absolutely no idea what Marxism is.
Was anyone surprised at the revelations of Mili senior? I wasn't.
I wonder what Mili senior would have said about this?
Reacting to news of Hobsbawm's death, Ed Miliband called him "an extraordinary historian, a man passionate about his politics [...] He brought history out of the ivory tower and into people's lives
Makes what acceptable? I was pointing out there was no direct comparison between the Miliband Sr stushie and the slight puff of wind caused by what songs Farage sung when he was 17 (there was no leftwing media overdrive). Still, if you want to whip yourself up a Marxogasm, feel free.
So nothing in there that he wanted Britain to lose. I'm amazed that our esteemed researcher into the Khmer Rouge, who discovered Bob Ainsworths complicity in Pol Pots crimes but who managed to miss the fact that Margaret Thatcher was arming and training the Khmer Rouge for a decade can't dig it up. If not Sean then who?
Ralph Miliband was "bitter and depressed" by the fact Britain had won the "f*cking Falklands" war and defeated Fascism. Don't know about you, but I have no need to hear any more; I now have a pretty firm opinion of this unpleasant man.
However if you can dig up something that proves Miliband Senior was even nastier than this - go ahead. Knock yourself out.
You have no idea whether he was unpleasant or otherwise - you have never met him. You'd come across as unpleasant to those who don't know you and take your rightwing rants on here as evidence of your nature. In real life, of course, you a nice guy. A good father. Enthusiast Primrose Hill resident and friend-at-large to a raft of London lefties.
It's entirely possible for someone to be perfectly pleasant on an interpersonal level while holding deeply unpleasant views.
I'd regard any Marxist - certainly any Marxist capable of reflection and thought rather than just repetitious spouting - as unpleasant simply on account of those views. A Marxist must disapprove of so many economic, political and social liberties that are widely cherished that they have to advocate a dictatorial kleptocracy. No freedom of speech, no freedom of association, no representative democracy, no freedom to own and develop property, businesses or ideas; just people as cogs in someone else's machine, allocated according to the greater good. That's unpleasant.
Clearly you have absolutely no idea what Marxism is.
Will there be a PB Marxist of the year award this year ?
A week half back,we had all the leftwing media going into overdrive on the 17 year old Nigel Farage over concerns of his views at the time.
Good point well made. The left and double-standards are indeed constant bed-fellows.
My personal favourite is the way that it is OK on the Left to express hate. Imagine if you were to wear a T-shirt that expressed views on black scum or gay scum or Jewish scum. Inspector Knacker would come a-knocking. But "Tory scum" - to be worn with pride. The most popular party in the UK at the last democratic elections? And their voters? Scum. Nice. Real classy.
The Left - the last bastion of unlegislated hate in our society....
Can you imagine the storm if people went round saying that blacks, gays or Jews hate this country? But it's OK to say that left-wingers do.
Clearly you have absolutely no idea what Marxism is.
But an absolutely accurate appreciation of how it has been applied in power by every declared Marxist regime in the world thus far of whichever variant. Unless you and tim can find any excpetions?
And I doubt whether you, tim or I would like to live under the New Left (semi Trot...who knows?) paradise that Ralph Miliband would have thrust upon us on the forced demise of the despised "Parliamentary Socialism".
I had thought we'd done away with all this pb leftie/pb tory crap that posters use in the absence of reasoned argument. It got quite rampant for a time during tim's absence when the 'reserves' were struggling to make their mark but it seems to be back with a vengeance today from the master himself. It's almost as tedious as the extended miliwhine - multiple encores do not a diva make when the singing is third rate.
Can you imagine the storm if people went round saying that blacks, gays or Jews hate this country? But it's OK to say that left-wingers do.
Nice attempt to conflate the general with the specific.
But failed.
That makes no sense. I am afraid there are elements of the right that do exactly what they accuse the left of doing. The difference between you and I is that I recognise there are elements of the left that do what you say.
But an absolutely accurate appreciation (David Herdson) of how it has been applied in power by every declared Marxist regime in the world thus far of whichever variant. Unless you and tim can find any excpetions?
And I doubt whether you, tim or I would like to live under the New Left (semi Trot...who knows?) paradise that Ralph Miliband would have thrust upon us on the forced demise of the despised "Parliamentary Socialism".
But an absolutely accurate appreciation of how it has been applied in power by every declared Marxist regime in the world thus far of whichever variant. Unless you and tim can find any excpetions?
And I doubt whether you, tim or I would like to live under the New Left (semi Trot...who knows?) paradise that Ralph Miliband would have thrust upon us on the forced demise of the despised "Parliamentary Socialism".
No, you don't understand, Mr O. All those regimes have not implemented Marxism properly. And if only they did, well everything would be sunshine and kittens.
" Grant Shapps, the Conservative Party chairman, said he was "disappointed" that articles appearing in the newspapers had not provoked the same level of "outrage" as the Daily Mail's coverage of Ed Miliband's father.
He cited an investigation in The Guardian in April of last year claimed that David Cameron's father, Ian Cameron, built up legal offshore investment funds in Panama and Geneva.
Mr Cameron died in hospital in France in 2010 after suffering a stroke. Mr Cameron paid tribute to him as an "amazing" and "brilliant father" who never let his disability – he was born with both legs deformed – "get in the way of his incredible sense of fun and enjoyment".
You know sod all about Marxism. All the Spiked Online crowd, Brendan O'Neill, Frank Furedi, that Barrister who pops up on C4 News every month to go on about getting rid of the age of consent, they are all Marxists who never bloody shut up about freedom of speech. From what I can rember Raph Milibands protests against the Soviet union were very much centred around the freedom of speech. As ever a PB Tory simply makes the leap from Marxist to Stalinist without even thinking.
I suspect I know a damn sight more about Marxism than you do, you trolling turniphead, having studied Marxism as an ideology and as an economic theory as parts of my degree, as well as studying the closest case study we have of Marxism in action - the Soviet Union.
Marxists are very happy to promote freedom of speech when they are the opposition, as it quite clearly benefits them; it is a different matter in power. Indeed, Marx himself recognised the need for a dictatorship of the proletariat, though he envisiged it as an interim stage before the state withered away (quite how that was compatible with Marxist economics and managed production and investment isn't clear).
In reality, no communist system has ever been able to rid itself of counter-revolutionaries in terms of those who wish for a return to private property, and has only been able to suppress them through threatened or actual force. Let's also be clear: the usual Marxist apology that the USSR, China, Vietnam, Cuba and everywhere else didn't really persue Marxism but some distorted version doesn't hold water. The need to limit freedom of speech is inherant because the limiting of freedom of choice is inherant in any planned economy and the two go hand in hand.
So nothing in there that he wanted Britain to lose. I'm amazed that our esteemed researcher into the Khmer Rouge, who discovered Bob Ainsworths complicity in Pol Pots crimes but who managed to miss the fact that Margaret Thatcher was arming and training the Khmer Rouge for a decade can't dig it up. If not Sean then who?
Ralph Miliband was "bitter and depressed" by the fact Britain had won the "f*cking Falklands" war and defeated Fascism. Don't know about you, but I have no need to hear any more; I now have a pretty firm opinion of this unpleasant man.
However if you can dig up something that proves Miliband Senior was even nastier than this - go ahead. Knock yourself out.
You have no idea whether he was unpleasant or otherwise - you have never met him. You'd come across as unpleasant to those who don't know you and take your rightwing rants on here as evidence of your nature. In real life, of course, you a nice guy. A good father. Enthusiast Primrose Hill resident and friend-at-large to a raft of London lefties.
It's entirely possible for someone to be perfectly pleasant on an interpersonal level while holding deeply unpleasant views.
I'd regard any Marxist - certainly any Marxist capable of reflection and thought rather than just repetitious spouting - as unpleasant simply on account of those views. A Marxist must disapprove of so many economic, political and social liberties that are widely cherished that they have to advocate a dictatorial kleptocracy. No freedom of speech, no freedom of association, no representative democracy, no freedom to own and develop property, businesses or ideas; just people as cogs in someone else's machine, allocated according to the greater good. That's unpleasant.
Clearly you have absolutely no idea what Marxism is.
Will there be a PB Marxist of the year award this year ?
Let me know in plenty of time if so - I'd like to make sure I prepare my submission thoroughly.
But an absolutely accurate appreciation of how it been applied in power by every declared Marxist regime in the world thus far of whichever variant. Unless you and tim can find any excpetions?
Anyone can appropriate a term. I would not consider the Democratic People's Republic of Korea to be democratic, would you?
I am no Marxist, but the idea that Marx believed in the abolition of free speech or the negation of democracy is absurd. Marx did not believe in the state, he considered its demise inevitable. Where there is no state there can be no abolition of anything.
I suspect they do know what Marxist theory says but couldn't give a shit because they also know the way it works out in practice.
NPXMP said he is a Socialist. No doubt in his mind that means someone fighting to help the poor and bring society together and fill the world with fluffy bunny rabbits. When I hear the word Socialist I start thinking of price controls, shortages, Animal Farm, National Socialism, Soviet Socialism, Venezuela, Cuba and all the shitholes that have ever really tried it.
I've heard it joked the French elites don't care if something works in practice - they want to know if it works in theory. Bloody socialists!
PB lefites are defending Marxism the theory. PB righties denouncing Marxism the reality.
Hmm.....
It's more a case of pointing out that many right wingers who post on here clearly have absolutely no notion of what Marxism is.
Oh dear - I think the patronising tone there betrays some ruffled feathers. The prospect of being enlightened by the turgid regurgitation of dialectical materialism et al doesen't suit the Friday afternoon mood.
But an absolutely accurate appreciation (David Herdson) of how it has been applied in power by every declared Marxist regime in the world thus far of whichever variant. Unless you and tim can find any excpetions?
And I doubt whether you, tim or I would like to live under the New Left (semi Trot...who knows?) paradise that Ralph Miliband would have thrust upon us on the forced demise of the despised "Parliamentary Socialism".
No I would have hated it, which is why I am not a Marxist. But Ralph Miliband expressly opposed thrusting any system on anyone, which is why he never joined the Communist party and consistently denounced Stalinism throughout his adult life. To pretend otherwise is just to propagate a lie.
PB lefites are defending Marxism the theory. PB righties denouncing Marxism the reality.
Hmm.....
Well, there's 'Good Marxism', that one would learn about from your father whilst a young man, which ultimately shaped your politics and thinking. And 'Bad Marxism'.
PB lefites are defending Marxism the theory. PB righties denouncing Marxism the reality.
Hmm.....
It's more a case of pointing out that many right wingers who post on here clearly have absolutely no notion of what Marxism is.
Oh dear - I think the patronising tone there betrays some ruffled feathers. The prospect of being enlightened by the turgid regurgitation of dialectical materialism et al doesen't suit the Friday afternoon mood.
I have long since given up expecting certain posters on here to be interested in reality. I understand that they are entirely guided by a visceral hatred of Labour. I do not think David Herdson is one such, however; which is why I got involved ion the conversation. I was surprised to read that he would regard any Marxist as unpleasant.
But an absolutely accurate appreciation of how it been applied in power by every declared Marxist regime in the world thus far of whichever variant. Unless you and tim can find any excpetions?
Anyone can appropriate a term. I would not consider the Democratic People's Republic of Korea to be democratic, would you?
I am no Marxist, but the idea that Marx believed in the abolition of free speech or the negation of democracy is absurd. Marx did not believe in the state, he considered its demise inevitable. Where there is no state there can be no abolition of anything.
Do you not find it at all perverse that, without exception (and you have not found a counter example) that there has never existed a Marxist regime - do you not think that Lenin, Mao, Fidel believed themselves to be genuine adherents to Karl's ideals - which has not resorted to the suppression of fundamental freedoms, perhaps not unrelated to full state economies?
I suspect they do know what Marxist theory says but couldn't give a shit because they also know the way it works out in practice.
NPXMP said he is a Socialist. No doubt in his mind that means someone fighting to help the poor and bring society together and fill the world with fluffy bunny rabbits. When I hear the word Socialist I start thinking of price controls, shortages, Animal Farm, National Socialism, Soviet Socialism, Venezuela, Cuba and all the shitholes that have ever really tried it.
I've heard it joked the French elites don't care if something works in practice - they want to know if it works in theory. Bloody socialists!
Well indeed. Socialism means something completely different to you than it does to Nick. That seems absolutely fair enough to me.
When I hear the word Socialist I start thinking of price controls, shortages, Animal Farm, National Socialism, Soviet Socialism, Venezuela, Cuba and all the shitholes that have ever really tried it.
Animal Farm? You mean the anti-totalitarian allegory written by life-long socialist Orwell?
I see Camerons speech went down well, that is one hell of a conference bounce.
You obviously missed today's You Gov. There is no evidence from any of the conference polling of any bounce of significance for any party. We may know more in a week or two if that changes.
But an absolutely accurate appreciation of how it been applied in power by every declared Marxist regime in the world thus far of whichever variant. Unless you and tim can find any excpetions?
Anyone can appropriate a term. I would not consider the Democratic People's Republic of Korea to be democratic, would you?
I am no Marxist, but the idea that Marx believed in the abolition of free speech or the negation of democracy is absurd. Marx did not believe in the state, he considered its demise inevitable. Where there is no state there can be no abolition of anything.
Do you not find it at all perverse that, without exception (and you have not found a counter example) that there has never existed a Marxist regime - do you not think that Lenin, Mao, Fidel believed themselves to be genuine adherents to Karl's ideals - which has not resorted to the suppression of fundamental freedoms, perhaps not unrelated to full state economies?
How do you account for that? Coincidence?
I believe that Franco thought he was a Christian and that Pinochet did too, as did those who ran apartheid South Africa and kept slaves in the US.
I see Camerons speech went down well, that is one hell of a conference bounce.
You obviously missed today's You Gov. There is no evidence from any of the conference polling of any bounce of significance for any party. We may know more in a week or two if that changes.
Felix, I was using the very same rules as the PB Hodges who used the very same poll last week to show Ed M's speech was a disaster.
But an absolutely accurate appreciation of how it been applied in power by every declared Marxist regime in the world thus far of whichever variant. Unless you and tim can find any excpetions?
Anyone can appropriate a term. I would not consider the Democratic People's Republic of Korea to be democratic, would you?
I am no Marxist, but the idea that Marx believed in the abolition of free speech or the negation of democracy is absurd. Marx did not believe in the state, he considered its demise inevitable. Where there is no state there can be no abolition of anything.
Do you not find it at all perverse that, without exception (and you have not found a counter example) that there has never existed a Marxist regime - do you not think that Lenin, Mao, Fidel believed themselves to be genuine adherents to Karl's ideals - which has not resorted to the suppression of fundamental freedoms, perhaps not unrelated to full state economies?
How do you account for that? Coincidence?
I believe that Franco thought he was a Christian and that Pinochet did too, as did those who ran apartheid South Africa and kept slaves in the US.
Nice try - but there are plenty of Christian countries which do uphold basic freedoms - still waiting for just one Marxist example.
But an absolutely accurate appreciation of how it been applied in power by every declared Marxist regime in the world thus far of whichever variant. Unless you and tim can find any excpetions?
Anyone can appropriate a term. I would not consider the Democratic People's Republic of Korea to be democratic, would you?
I am no Marxist, but the idea that Marx believed in the abolition of free speech or the negation of democracy is absurd. Marx did not believe in the state, he considered its demise inevitable. Where there is no state there can be no abolition of anything.
Do you not find it at all perverse that, without exception (and you have not found a counter example) that there has never existed a Marxist regime - do you not think that Lenin, Mao, Fidel believed themselves to be genuine adherents to Karl's ideals - which has not resorted to the suppression of fundamental freedoms, perhaps not unrelated to full state economies?
How do you account for that? Coincidence?
I believe that Franco thought he was a Christian and that Pinochet did too, as did those who ran apartheid South Africa and kept slaves in the US.
But there are probably millions of "Christian" politicians - left, centre and right - who have led or participated in pluralist democratic governments. But not one, not one democratic Marxist one. Funny that. Inexplicable.
I see Camerons speech went down well, that is one hell of a conference bounce.
You obviously missed today's You Gov. There is no evidence from any of the conference polling of any bounce of significance for any party. We may know more in a week or two if that changes.
Felix, I was using the very same rules as the PB Hodges who used the very same poll last week to show Ed M's speech was a disaster.
But you demean yourself and your beliefs by the tit for tat approach - you'll be arguing for Labour to attack Cameron on the basis of his parentage next - surely you wouldn't be that hypocritical now would you?
"as well as studying the closest case study we have of Marxism in action - the Soviet Union."
And in one sentence you prove you know sod all about Marxism. Stalinism maybe, perhaps.
Stalinism didn't survive the man. There were nearly four decades of CPSU rule after that, and I don't see that much evidence of freedom of speech under Khrushchev, Brezhnev and the rest either and they - particularly Khrushchev - were very much fixated on delivering communism in action.
But be my guest: which was the closest case study we have of Marxism in action then?
Pursuing the Burns theme for a second. As the electorate is only Conservative MPs, I wonder if there is widespread support for his candidature precisely to send a not very coded message to Bercow.
One to watch for the entertainment value....I'd have though Eleanor Lang would be the favourite.
I'm sure this (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/ukip/10355351/Nigel-Farage-Tell-the-truth-Mr-Cameron.-Your-EU-strategy-is-doomed-to-fail.html) has been commented on already, but it seems the one flaw in the argument is that Mr Cameron isn't going to negotiate with Mr Barosso, he is going to negotiate with Angela Merkel and Mariano Rajoy and Enrico Letta. Mr Barossa may be head of the commission, but ultimately, it is the member states that decide how much power the centre has. Mr Barossa's views on the powers of the Commission are basically irrelevant to any repatriation of powers.
I believe that Franco thought he was a Christian and that Pinochet did too, as did those who ran apartheid South Africa and kept slaves in the US.
But there are probably millions of "Christian" politicians - left, centre and right - who have led or participated in pluralist democratic governments. But not one, not one democratic Marxist one. Funny that. Inexplicable.
Eh? There are loads of Marxists who have participated in pluralist democratic governments - in France, Italy, and numerous smaller countries (including, at the moment, Denmark, plus several German Laender). Arguably Allende formed a majority democratic Marxist government before he was shot by the Army for his pains, and the Republican coalition in Spain in the 30s was predominantly Marxist before they too were ejected by coup.
But it's all a bit moot these days. No major party within reach of leading a democratic government is Marxist AFAIK, anywhere in the world, and in Britain the proportion of people who claim to be Marxist must be well under 5%. The world has moved on. The most that can sensibly be said is that he had ideas (e.g. that people have class interests rather than only individual interests) which continue to influence aspects of modern debate.
But an absolutely accurate appreciation of how it been applied in power by every declared Marxist regime in the world thus far of whichever variant. Unless you and tim can find any excpetions?
Anyone can appropriate a term. I would not consider the Democratic People's Republic of Korea to be democratic, would you?
I am no Marxist, but the idea that Marx believed in the abolition of free speech or the negation of democracy is absurd. Marx did not believe in the state, he considered its demise inevitable. Where there is no state there can be no abolition of anything.
Do you not find it at all perverse that, without exception (and you have not found a counter example) that there has never existed a Marxist regime - do you not think that Lenin, Mao, Fidel believed themselves to be genuine adherents to Karl's ideals - which has not resorted to the suppression of fundamental freedoms, perhaps not unrelated to full state economies?
How do you account for that? Coincidence?
I believe that Franco thought he was a Christian and that Pinochet did too, as did those who ran apartheid South Africa and kept slaves in the US.
Nice try - but there are plenty of Christian countries which do uphold basic freedoms - still waiting for just one Marxist example.
There cannot be a Marxist state. It is an impossibility.
But an absolutely accurate appreciation of how it been applied in power by every declared Marxist regime in the world thus far of whichever variant. Unless you and tim can find any excpetions?
Anyone can appropriate a term. I would not consider the Democratic People's Republic of Korea to be democratic, would you?
I am no Marxist, but the idea that Marx believed in the abolition of free speech or the negation of democracy is absurd. Marx did not believe in the state, he considered its demise inevitable. Where there is no state there can be no abolition of anything.
Do you not find it at all perverse that, without exception (and you have not found a counter example) that there has never existed a Marxist regime - do you not think that Lenin, Mao, Fidel believed themselves to be genuine adherents to Karl's ideals - which has not resorted to the suppression of fundamental freedoms, perhaps not unrelated to full state economies?
How do you account for that? Coincidence?
I believe that Franco thought he was a Christian and that Pinochet did too, as did those who ran apartheid South Africa and kept slaves in the US.
Nice try - but there are plenty of Christian countries which do uphold basic freedoms - still waiting for just one Marxist example.
There cannot be a Marxist state. It is an impossibility.
"Where would such a list be without Comrade Bob? Zimbabwe's 89-year-old autocrat believes that his, and his nation's, woes spring largely from the efforts of a cabal of homosexuals organised by "the gay government of the gay United gay Kingdom". Plus, he once proclaimed himself "the Hitler of the time" – not really a mantle that anyone else would want to pick up. Oh, and he's killed tens of thousands of his own citizens, and ruined his country's once-prosperous economy. Still, it's not all bad news. In 2000, the Zimbabwe Banking Corporation launched a prize lottery for its customers. The first winner: Robert Mugabe. What are the chances?"
@Nick Palmer - Just for the record, Allende's government never had a majority of any kind, in the Presidential election or in the Chilean Congress. That doesn't justify Pinochet's evil regime.
I hope we don't get any more discussions on the true inheritors of Marxist thought - it always reminds me of the "Life of Brian" splitters. When I were a lad, I was bored to tears by the Trots and Stalinists arguing among themselves, They hated each other more than the Tories.
At least, Marx made some predictions ... not very good one, though.
But an absolutely accurate appreciation of how it been applied in power by every declared Marxist regime in the world thus far of whichever variant. Unless you and tim can find any excpetions?
Anyone can appropriate a term. I would not consider the Democratic People's Republic of Korea to be democratic, would you?
I am no Marxist, but the idea that Marx believed in the abolition of free speech or the negation of democracy is absurd. Marx did not believe in the state, he considered its demise inevitable. Where there is no state there can be no abolition of anything.
Do you not find it at all perverse that, without exception (and you have not found a counter example) that there has never existed a Marxist regime - do you not think that Lenin, Mao, Fidel believed themselves to be genuine adherents to Karl's ideals - which has not resorted to the suppression of fundamental freedoms, perhaps not unrelated to full state economies?
How do you account for that? Coincidence?
I believe that Franco thought he was a Christian and that Pinochet did too, as did those who ran apartheid South Africa and kept slaves in the US.
Nice try - but there are plenty of Christian countries which do uphold basic freedoms - still waiting for just one Marxist example.
There cannot be a Marxist state. It is an impossibility.
Silly me. We'll just have to be content with the Dictatorship of the Proletariat. LoL.
Pursuing the Burns theme for a second. As the electorate is only Conservative MPs, I wonder if there is widespread support for his candidature precisely to send a not very coded message to Bercow.
One to watch for the entertainment value....I'd have though Eleanor Lang would be the favourite.
On a related note, I see that Nigel Evans' trial has been fixed for 10th March 2014.
When I hear the word Socialist I start thinking of price controls, shortages, Animal Farm, National Socialism, Soviet Socialism, Venezuela, Cuba and all the shitholes that have ever really tried it.
Animal Farm? You mean the anti-totalitarian allegory written by life-long socialist Orwell?
Do you know why Orwell wrote Animal Farm during the war? A huge disillusionment with what the USSR had become and a realisation that his cherished theory of socialism had turned dictatorship in practice. I'd put Orwell firmly in the "naive good guy who believed very much in the theory of 'nice guy' socialism who could never quite reconcile himself to the way it worked out in practice'.
BTW his real name was Eric Arthur Blair and he and my grandfather were best friends right through their school years. There's a photo somewhere.
"Where would such a list be without Comrade Bob? Zimbabwe's 89-year-old autocrat believes that his, and his nation's, woes spring largely from the efforts of a cabal of homosexuals organised by "the gay government of the gay United gay Kingdom". Plus, he once proclaimed himself "the Hitler of the time" – not really a mantle that anyone else would want to pick up. Oh, and he's killed tens of thousands of his own citizens, and ruined his country's once-prosperous economy. Still, it's not all bad news. In 2000, the Zimbabwe Banking Corporation launched a prize lottery for its customers. The first winner: Robert Mugabe. What are the chances?"
Apropos of the discussion regarding Christian/Marxist governments, Comrade Bob is both a Catholic and a Marxist.
I'm sure this (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/ukip/10355351/Nigel-Farage-Tell-the-truth-Mr-Cameron.-Your-EU-strategy-is-doomed-to-fail.html) has been commented on already, but it seems the one flaw in the argument is that Mr Cameron isn't going to negotiate with Mr Barosso, he is going to negotiate with Angela Merkel and Mariano Rajoy and Enrico Letta. Mr Barossa may be head of the commission, but ultimately, it is the member states that decide how much power the centre has. Mr Barossa's views on the powers of the Commission are basically irrelevant to any repatriation of powers.
Correct, except that what Barosso is saying is all obviously correct. Revising treaties unanimity, in 28 countries, each with multiple veto points. It's very hard to do even if everybody basically agrees, and hardly any other government agrees with Cameron, to the extent that we know what Cameron actually wants.
We started out this thread on the US, and I was bitching about the US's failure to reform its constitution, but that's actually very hard to do beyond a certain size, even with the much lower hurdle the US has. It may be that the EU never again manages to pass a substantial treaty, and instead proceeds as the US has, through institutional mission creep. But it's certainly not going to pass a substantial treaty to do something hardly anybody wants, and they idea that it will do it in two years isn't plausible.
"as well as studying the closest case study we have of Marxism in action - the Soviet Union."
And in one sentence you prove you know sod all about Marxism. Stalinism maybe, perhaps.
The Marxist-Leninist regime that preceded Stalinism wasn't all sweetness and light either
True, however, the difference between that and the post-Stalin era is that the Civil War communism was to a large extent government by necessity; the USSR of the 1960s and 1970s was a mature state with a functioning bureacracy, no counter-revolutionaries from the previous and which had had a significant time to recover from the massive social disruption that was almost constant from the outbreak of WWI through to more-or-less the end of Stalin's rule. It did still exist in a hostile world but even that had reached a farily stable position compared with Stalin's era, never mind Lenin's.
Comments
My personal favourite is the way that it is OK on the Left to express hate. Imagine if you were to wear a T-shirt that expressed views on black scum or gay scum or Jewish scum. Inspector Knacker would come a-knocking. But "Tory scum" - to be worn with pride. The most popular party in the UK at the last democratic elections? And their voters? Scum. Nice. Real classy.
The Left - the last bastion of unlegislated hate in our society....
Well, I hope so, Blackadder. You know, if there's one thing I've learnt from being in the Army, it's never ignore a pooh-pooh. I knew a Major, who got pooh-poohed, made the mistake of ignoring the pooh-pooh. He pooh-poohed it! Fatal error! 'Cos it turned out all along that the soldier who pooh-poohed him had been pooh-poohing a lot of other officers who pooh-poohed their pooh-poohs. In the end, we had to disband the regiment. Morale totally destroyed... by pooh-pooh!
Time for the Mail do some pooh-poohing!
That time will come.
Manna from heaven this fluff stuff.
PB righties denouncing Marxism the reality.
Hmm.....
What a stupid charge to make.
But failed.
But an absolutely accurate appreciation (David Herdson) of how it has been applied in power by every declared Marxist regime in the world thus far of whichever variant. Unless you and tim can find any excpetions?
And I doubt whether you, tim or I would like to live under the New Left (semi Trot...who knows?) paradise that Ralph Miliband would have thrust upon us on the forced demise of the despised "Parliamentary Socialism".
But an absolutely accurate appreciation of how it has been applied in power by every declared Marxist regime in the world thus far of whichever variant. Unless you and tim can find any excpetions?
And I doubt whether you, tim or I would like to live under the New Left (semi Trot...who knows?) paradise that Ralph Miliband would have thrust upon us on the forced demise of the despised "Parliamentary Socialism".
No, you don't understand, Mr O. All those regimes have not implemented Marxism properly. And if only they did, well everything would be sunshine and kittens.
" Grant Shapps, the Conservative Party chairman, said he was "disappointed" that articles appearing in the newspapers had not provoked the same level of "outrage" as the Daily Mail's coverage of Ed Miliband's father.
He cited an investigation in The Guardian in April of last year claimed that David Cameron's father, Ian Cameron, built up legal offshore investment funds in Panama and Geneva.
Mr Cameron died in hospital in France in 2010 after suffering a stroke. Mr Cameron paid tribute to him as an "amazing" and "brilliant father" who never let his disability – he was born with both legs deformed – "get in the way of his incredible sense of fun and enjoyment".
In 2007 the Sunday Mirror reported on the contents of Mr Cameron's bin, and criticised him for using non-biodegradable nappies. Mr Cameron's son, Ivan, was severely disabled and passed away in 2009 at the age of six." http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/labour/10355500/Guardian-accused-by-Tories-of-smearing-David-Camerons-father.html
Marxists are very happy to promote freedom of speech when they are the opposition, as it quite clearly benefits them; it is a different matter in power. Indeed, Marx himself recognised the need for a dictatorship of the proletariat, though he envisiged it as an interim stage before the state withered away (quite how that was compatible with Marxist economics and managed production and investment isn't clear).
In reality, no communist system has ever been able to rid itself of counter-revolutionaries in terms of those who wish for a return to private property, and has only been able to suppress them through threatened or actual force. Let's also be clear: the usual Marxist apology that the USSR, China, Vietnam, Cuba and everywhere else didn't really persue Marxism but some distorted version doesn't hold water. The need to limit freedom of speech is inherant because the limiting of freedom of choice is inherant in any planned economy and the two go hand in hand.
Anyone can appropriate a term. I would not consider the Democratic People's Republic of Korea to be democratic, would you?
I am no Marxist, but the idea that Marx believed in the abolition of free speech or the negation of democracy is absurd. Marx did not believe in the state, he considered its demise inevitable. Where there is no state there can be no abolition of anything.
I suspect they do know what Marxist theory says but couldn't give a shit because they also know the way it works out in practice.
NPXMP said he is a Socialist. No doubt in his mind that means someone fighting to help the poor and bring society together and fill the world with fluffy bunny rabbits. When I hear the word Socialist I start thinking of price controls, shortages, Animal Farm, National Socialism, Soviet Socialism, Venezuela, Cuba and all the shitholes that have ever really tried it.
I've heard it joked the French elites don't care if something works in practice - they want to know if it works in theory. Bloody socialists!
Con 33 -3
LibDem 11
UKIP 10 +3
I see Camerons speech went down well, that is one hell of a conference bounce.
http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/edwest/2013/10/ukips-supporters-are-anxious-not-awkward/
I am no Marxist, but the idea that Marx believed in the abolition of free speech or the negation of democracy is absurd. Marx did not believe in the state, he considered its demise inevitable. Where there is no state there can be no abolition of anything.
Do you not find it at all perverse that, without exception (and you have not found a counter example) that there has never existed a Marxist regime - do you not think that Lenin, Mao, Fidel believed themselves to be genuine adherents to Karl's ideals - which has not resorted to the suppression of fundamental freedoms, perhaps not unrelated to full state economies?
How do you account for that? Coincidence?
We can almost imagine he and Hobsbawm debating that point in Primrose Hill over a decent white Brugundy, the adoring little ed on daddy's knee.
While countless thousands died in the gulags.
How do you account for that? Coincidence?
I believe that Franco thought he was a Christian and that Pinochet did too, as did those who ran apartheid South Africa and kept slaves in the US.
Nice try - but there are plenty of Christian countries which do uphold basic freedoms - still waiting for just one Marxist example.
But there are probably millions of "Christian" politicians - left, centre and right - who have led or participated in pluralist democratic governments. But not one, not one democratic Marxist one. Funny that. Inexplicable.
No...I see he wants to be Deputy Speaker. He cannot abide John Bercow: his election would highly amusing.
Trying to distance herself from Cam and co....good move.
But be my guest: which was the closest case study we have of Marxism in action then?
Tweet from Waugh implies limited changes. @ paulwaugh 14m
Simon Burns' departure will not spark a wider reshuffle today, No.10 tells me.
Labour thinking of reshuffle, good thinking by Ed.
http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/coffeehouse/2013/10/the-knives-are-out-for-andy-burnham/
In a parallel universe, Britain under a Miliband government.
One to watch for the entertainment value....I'd have though Eleanor Lang would be the favourite.
But it's all a bit moot these days. No major party within reach of leading a democratic government is Marxist AFAIK, anywhere in the world, and in Britain the proportion of people who claim to be Marxist must be well under 5%. The world has moved on. The most that can sensibly be said is that he had ideas (e.g. that people have class interests rather than only individual interests) which continue to influence aspects of modern debate.
There cannot be a Marxist state. It is an impossibility.
Agreed.
"Where would such a list be without Comrade Bob? Zimbabwe's 89-year-old autocrat believes that his, and his nation's, woes spring largely from the efforts of a cabal of homosexuals organised by "the gay government of the gay United gay Kingdom". Plus, he once proclaimed himself "the Hitler of the time" – not really a mantle that anyone else would want to pick up. Oh, and he's killed tens of thousands of his own citizens, and ruined his country's once-prosperous economy. Still, it's not all bad news. In 2000, the Zimbabwe Banking Corporation launched a prize lottery for its customers. The first winner: Robert Mugabe. What are the chances?"
I hope we don't get any more discussions on the true inheritors of Marxist thought - it always reminds me of the "Life of Brian" splitters. When I were a lad, I was bored to tears by the Trots and Stalinists arguing among themselves, They hated each other more than the Tories.
At least, Marx made some predictions ... not very good one, though.
Silly me. We'll just have to be content with the Dictatorship of the Proletariat. LoL.
YouGov @YouGov
Cameron not alone: 68% of voters don't know the price of a value loaf of bread - y-g.co/1hpR2SD
BTW his real name was Eric Arthur Blair and he and my grandfather were best friends right through their school years. There's a photo somewhere.
We started out this thread on the US, and I was bitching about the US's failure to reform its constitution, but that's actually very hard to do beyond a certain size, even with the much lower hurdle the US has. It may be that the EU never again manages to pass a substantial treaty, and instead proceeds as the US has, through institutional mission creep. But it's certainly not going to pass a substantial treaty to do something hardly anybody wants, and they idea that it will do it in two years isn't plausible.