FaSism... why can't anyone every spell that right?!
Don't make a fool out of youself.
Ouch...
FASCISM. S and C combine to spell correctly. Ya...
No.
Yeah, but the irony is you spelled fascism wrong when you were lecturing another about it.
It is neither fasism or facism, but you were both close.
Mine was a typo. Its fascism.
Matt Smith Admin Age: 32 Gender: Female Posts: 31134
May 12th, 2006 at 12:28pm
DistortedMorality:
Bloodraine:
DistortedMorality:
Bloodraine:
DistortedMorality:
Quote
He believed in facism
FaSism... why can't anyone every spell that right?!
Don't make a fool out of youself.
Ouch...
FASCISM. S and C combine to spell correctly. Ya...
No.
Yeah, but the irony is you spelled fascism wrong when you were lecturing another about it.
It is neither fasism or facism, but you were both close.
Mine was a typo. Its fascism.
Well perhaps she made a typo also.
And, you really should stop assuming we all know nothing in here, because there are some pretty smart people in here.
FaSism... why can't anyone every spell that right?!
Don't make a fool out of youself.
Ouch...
FASCISM. S and C combine to spell correctly. Ya...
No.
Yeah, but the irony is you spelled fascism wrong when you were lecturing another about it.
It is neither fasism or facism, but you were both close.
Mine was a typo. Its fascism.
Well perhaps she made a typo also.
And, you really should stop assuming we all know nothing in here, because there are some pretty smart people in here.
She did it at least twice and its incredibely common for people to spell fascism like that. And from what I've seen, most of those I've seen know little about anarchism, communism, or marxism.
I love it how you guys aren't techically aren't on topic, and yet only I get in trouble. Damn I must be a work of the devil. Heh.
Secondly, I shant involve myself in you're ongoing arguments as I have tried arguing with Mikard before, and all my attempts were definitely beyond the word "futile". Why? To be frank...He's a ruthless bitch. But a damn smart bitch at that. He knows what he's talking about. o_O I don't.
But yes, I'd have to agree, with my experiences at GSB, there aren't many people who'd even have heard of the word "Marxist". The only reason I do is because my dad has a friend who is one, and I know her too.
Anyways, BACK ON TOPIC... We need to be more organized...
NeoSteph Basket Case Age: 36 Gender: Female Posts: 16494
May 12th, 2006 at 03:48pm
I don't care if you have the nobel prize in spelling, keep on topic
and Billies own, sorry if it looked like a I was victimising but it was aimed at everyone one.
Kitti Falling In Love With The Board Age: 33 Gender: Female Posts: 5688
May 12th, 2006 at 03:58pm
DistortedMorality:
Bloodraine:
DistortedMorality:
Bloodraine:
DistortedMorality:
Bloodraine:
DistortedMorality:
Quote
He believed in facism
FaSism... why can't anyone every spell that right?!
Don't make a fool out of youself.
Ouch...
FASCISM. S and C combine to spell correctly. Ya...
No.
Yeah, but the irony is you spelled fascism wrong when you were lecturing another about it.
It is neither fasism or facism, but you were both close.
Mine was a typo. Its fascism.
Well perhaps she made a typo also.
And, you really should stop assuming we all know nothing in here, because there are some pretty smart people in here.
She did it at least twice and its incredibely common for people to spell fascism like that. And from what I've seen, most of those I've seen know little about anarchism, communism, or marxism.
The irony of the whole thing is that you ignore relevant content that does not support your ideas about communist rulers of the twentieth century. Hitler was not communist, so there was absolutely no reason for it to come up in the discussion.
Misinformation takes a good debate downhill fast. People assume Hitler was totalitarian so he must have been communist too.
Don't assume people are stupid. Especially not based on a common spelling error. (Technically "Marxism" is a proper noun, by the way.) Being wrong about another person's intelligence will make you look very foolish indeed.
She did it at least twice and its incredibely common for people to spell fascism like that. And from what I've seen, most of those I've seen know little about anarchism, communism, or marxism.
The irony of the whole thing is that you ignore relevant content that does not support your ideas about communist rulers of the twentieth century.
How so? And, there was little to no overt communism in the twentieth century. All I can think of would be tucked away villages in the Amazon and such.
Quote
Hitler was not communist, so there was absolutely no reason for it to come up in the discussion.
Misinformation takes a good debate downhill fast. People assume Hitler was totalitarian so he must have been communist too.
No one ever said Hitler was a communist, you invented that.
And yes, there was a reason for it to come up in the discussion, arguing about the Catholic Church being at fault. Both Hitler and the Church wanted communists and people holding similar ideologies done away with in one way or another. And, it wouldn't surprise me if many church officials were anti-semitic. So, is it not logical they would try to collaborate?
We were running a very legitamite debate line.
Quote
Don't assume people are stupid. Especially not based on a common spelling error. (Technically "Marxism" is a proper noun, by the way.) Being wrong about another person's intelligence will make you look very foolish indeed.
Did I ever accuse you or anyone of stupidity? Ignorance, yes. But ignorance and stupidity are two different beasts. I'm pretty sure I haven't been to incorrect about the ignorance of the debaters I've confronted. And fascism is just mispelled so often, its a pet peave.
She did it at least twice and its incredibely common for people to spell fascism like that. And from what I've seen, most of those I've seen know little about anarchism, communism, or marxism.
The irony of the whole thing is that you ignore relevant content that does not support your ideas about communist rulers of the twentieth century.
How so? And, there was little to no overt communism in the twentieth century. All I can think of would be tucked away villages in the Amazon and such.
Quote
Hitler was not communist, so there was absolutely no reason for it to come up in the discussion.
Misinformation takes a good debate downhill fast. People assume Hitler was totalitarian so he must have been communist too.
No one ever said Hitler was a communist, you invented that.
And yes, there was a reason for it to come up in the discussion, arguing about the Catholic Church being at fault. Both Hitler and the Church wanted communists and people holding similar ideologies done away with in one way or another. And, it wouldn't surprise me if many church officials were anti-semitic. So, is it not logical they would try to collaborate?
We were running a very legitamite debate line.
Quote
Don't assume people are stupid. Especially not based on a common spelling error. (Technically "Marxism" is a proper noun, by the way.) Being wrong about another person's intelligence will make you look very foolish indeed.
Did I ever accuse you or anyone of stupidity? Ignorance, yes. But ignorance and stupidity are two different beasts. I'm pretty sure I haven't been to incorrect about the ignorance of the debaters I've confronted. And fascism is just mispelled so often, its a pet peave.
Matt Smith Admin Age: 32 Gender: Female Posts: 31134
May 12th, 2006 at 05:28pm
You just said that.
Kitti Falling In Love With The Board Age: 33 Gender: Female Posts: 5688
May 12th, 2006 at 05:44pm
DistortedMorality:
Kitti:
DistortedMorality:
She did it at least twice and its incredibely common for people to spell fascism like that. And from what I've seen, most of those I've seen know little about anarchism, communism, or marxism.
The irony of the whole thing is that you ignore relevant content that does not support your ideas about communist rulers of the twentieth century.
How so? And, there was little to no overt communism in the twentieth century. All I can think of would be tucked away villages in the Amazon and such.
Quote
Hitler was not communist, so there was absolutely no reason for it to come up in the discussion.
Misinformation takes a good debate downhill fast. People assume Hitler was totalitarian so he must have been communist too.
No one ever said Hitler was a communist, you invented that.
And yes, there was a reason for it to come up in the discussion, arguing about the Catholic Church being at fault. Both Hitler and the Church wanted communists and people holding similar ideologies done away with in one way or another. And, it wouldn't surprise me if many church officials were anti-semitic. So, is it not logical they would try to collaborate?
We were running a very legitamite debate line.
Quote
Don't assume people are stupid. Especially not based on a common spelling error. (Technically "Marxism" is a proper noun, by the way.) Being wrong about another person's intelligence will make you look very foolish indeed.
Did I ever accuse you or anyone of stupidity? Ignorance, yes. But ignorance and stupidity are two different beasts. I'm pretty sure I haven't been to incorrect about the ignorance of the debaters I've confronted. And fascism is just mispelled so often, its a pet peave.
peEve.
Overt Communists of the 20th century (that's the nineteen hundreds, for anyone who doesn't know):
-Mao Zedong
-Pol Pot
-Lenin
-Stalin (later Khrushchev)
-Castro
-Kim Il Sung
-Ho Chi Mihn
If half of Southeast Asia is tiny villages tucked away in the Amazon to you, you've got no business saying other people know little about communism, buddy.
Ol' Blue Eyes. King For A Couple Of Days Age: 35 Gender: Female Posts: 4816
May 12th, 2006 at 05:45pm
DistortedMorality:
we_found_the_duck:
I've gotta go with six on this one.
When we were discussing this in my History class, it was said that Hitler didn't actually want to kill the Jews. He just wanted to make their life absolutely miserable so they would just leave Germany.
When they didn't leave, he started to panic, and people close to him, advisors, the S.S., other sadistic psychos around him, thought up the Final Solution and submitted it for his approval.
Thats plausible. The "purification of the Aryan race" didn't necissarily have to invovle the slaughter of "unpure" but just their deportation, which was the original plan, I believe.
Hitler really was a puppet, jsut a vessel to get the nazis in power and keep them there. Completely disposable, as was shown by the attempt on his life. He was an image, not a ruler.
There were definately other people invovled.
One man could not orchestrate all that himself.
She did it at least twice and its incredibely common for people to spell fascism like that. And from what I've seen, most of those I've seen know little about anarchism, communism, or marxism.
The irony of the whole thing is that you ignore relevant content that does not support your ideas about communist rulers of the twentieth century.
How so? And, there was little to no overt communism in the twentieth century. All I can think of would be tucked away villages in the Amazon and such.
Quote
Hitler was not communist, so there was absolutely no reason for it to come up in the discussion.
Misinformation takes a good debate downhill fast. People assume Hitler was totalitarian so he must have been communist too.
No one ever said Hitler was a communist, you invented that.
And yes, there was a reason for it to come up in the discussion, arguing about the Catholic Church being at fault. Both Hitler and the Church wanted communists and people holding similar ideologies done away with in one way or another. And, it wouldn't surprise me if many church officials were anti-semitic. So, is it not logical they would try to collaborate?
We were running a very legitamite debate line.
Quote
Don't assume people are stupid. Especially not based on a common spelling error. (Technically "Marxism" is a proper noun, by the way.) Being wrong about another person's intelligence will make you look very foolish indeed.
Did I ever accuse you or anyone of stupidity? Ignorance, yes. But ignorance and stupidity are two different beasts. I'm pretty sure I haven't been to incorrect about the ignorance of the debaters I've confronted. And fascism is just mispelled so often, its a pet peave.
peEve.
Overt Communists of the 20th century (that's the nineteen hundreds, for anyone who doesn't know):
-Mao Zedong
-Pol Pot
-Lenin
-Stalin (later Khrushchev)
-Castro
-Kim Il Sung
-Ho Chi Mihn
If half of Southeast Asia is tiny villages tucked away in the Amazon to you, you've got no business saying other people know little about communism, buddy.
All of those were nations, all of those leaders were NATIONALISTS. The ignorance is starting to stink. Communism doesn't happen with nations, it happens with COMMUNITIES. None of those people lead communistic societies. Just because some fascist in the government tells you so, doesn't mean they're communists.
Sure, they have called themselves communists, they have even dreamed of a communist world, but NOTHING they did was called for by Marx, whom they all claimed to follow. Maoism and Stalinism are in NO WAY communist.
They were nationalists.
Marxism is global.
They were elitists.
Marxism preaches equality for all.
They were totalitarian.
Marxism is democratic.
They committed racial genocides.
Marxism preaches no races.
They forced people to work.
Marxism is voluntary.
They are not marxists. They are not communists.
Matt Smith Admin Age: 32 Gender: Female Posts: 31134
May 13th, 2006 at 05:33am
DistortedMorality:
All of those were nations, all of those leaders were NATIONALISTS. The ignorance is starting to stink. Communism doesn't happen with nations, it happens with COMMUNITIES. None of those people lead communistic societies. Just because some fascist in the government tells you so, doesn't mean they're communists.
Sure, they have called themselves communists, they have even dreamed of a communist world, but NOTHING they did was called for by Marx, whom they all claimed to follow. Maoism and Stalinism are in NO WAY communist.
They were nationalists.
Marxism is global.
They were elitists.
Marxism preaches equality for all.
They were totalitarian.
Marxism is democratic.
They committed racial genocides.
Marxism preaches no races.
They forced people to work.
Marxism is voluntary.
They are not marxists. They are not communists.
YOUR ignorance is starting to stink, too.
How can you say communism doesn't happen with nations?. Ignoring the history.
What 'communities' are you talking about? Little amazonian villagers again? Its naivety to its purest to assume they are the only 'communists' living today.
You need to check your dictionary mate, because last time I did community meant a group of people living in the same locality and under the same government. Look up Nation and you're going to find a group of people organized under a single, usually independent government; a country.
Seems to me like you were just babbling for a bit there; it sounded good but was quite innacurate.
Lucifers Angel King For A Couple Of Days Age: - Gender: Female Posts: 4751
May 13th, 2006 at 11:07am
Bloodraine:
DistortedMorality:
All of those were nations, all of those leaders were NATIONALISTS. The ignorance is starting to stink. Communism doesn't happen with nations, it happens with COMMUNITIES. None of those people lead communistic societies. Just because some fascist in the government tells you so, doesn't mean they're communists.
Sure, they have called themselves communists, they have even dreamed of a communist world, but NOTHING they did was called for by Marx, whom they all claimed to follow. Maoism and Stalinism are in NO WAY communist.
They were nationalists.
Marxism is global.
They were elitists.
Marxism preaches equality for all.
They were totalitarian.
Marxism is democratic.
They committed racial genocides.
Marxism preaches no races.
They forced people to work.
Marxism is voluntary.
They are not marxists. They are not communists.
YOUR ignorance is starting to stink, too.
How can you say communism doesn't happen with nations?. Ignoring the history.
What 'communities' are you talking about? Little amazonian villagers again? Its naivety to its purest to assume they are the only 'communists' living today.
You need to check your dictionary mate, because last time I did community meant a group of people living in the same locality and under the same government. Look up Nation and you're going to find a group of people organized under a single, usually independent government; a country.
Seems to me like you were just babbling for a bit there; it sounded good but was quite innacurate.
Kitti Falling In Love With The Board Age: 33 Gender: Female Posts: 5688
May 13th, 2006 at 11:17am
DistortedMorality:
All of those were nations, all of those leaders were NATIONALISTS. The ignorance is starting to stink. Communism doesn't happen with nations, it happens with COMMUNITIES. None of those people lead communistic societies. Just because some fascist in the government tells you so, doesn't mean they're communists.
Sure, they have called themselves communists, they have even dreamed of a communist world, but NOTHING they did was called for by Marx, whom they all claimed to follow. Maoism and Stalinism are in NO WAY communist.
They were nationalists.
Marxism is global.
They were elitists.
Marxism preaches equality for all.
They were totalitarian.
Marxism is democratic.
They committed racial genocides.
Marxism preaches no races.
They forced people to work.
Marxism is voluntary.
They are not marxists. They are not communists.
Never mind that communism is the antithesis of democracy.
Never mind that the genocides weren't ever entirely racial-- usually not even a little.
Never mind that communism is controlled economy along with Maoism and Stalinism.
Never mind that communism requires the support of the whole which is definitive nationalism.
Never mind the statement you have previously made about communism NOT being limited to Marxism and Leninism.
Meg's right-- a nation IS a community.
Do you know why Americans are not allowed to go to Cuba?
It's COMMUNIST.
Do you know what the Korean War was? That it ended in a stalemate where North Korea is Communist and South Korea is Capitalist?
All of those were nations, all of those leaders were NATIONALISTS. The ignorance is starting to stink. Communism doesn't happen with nations, it happens with COMMUNITIES. None of those people lead communistic societies. Just because some fascist in the government tells you so, doesn't mean they're communists.
Sure, they have called themselves communists, they have even dreamed of a communist world, but NOTHING they did was called for by Marx, whom they all claimed to follow. Maoism and Stalinism are in NO WAY communist.
They were nationalists.
Marxism is global.
They were elitists.
Marxism preaches equality for all.
They were totalitarian.
Marxism is democratic.
They committed racial genocides.
Marxism preaches no races.
They forced people to work.
Marxism is voluntary.
They are not marxists. They are not communists.
YOUR ignorance is starting to stink, too.
How can you say communism doesn't happen with nations?. Ignoring the history.
Just because you've been told they're communists, doesn't mean they are.
Quote
What 'communities' are you talking about? Little amazonian villagers again? Its naivety to its purest to assume they are the only 'communists' living today.
I didn't say they were the only ones, I said they were the only ones I was aware of.
Quote
You need to check your dictionary mate, because last time I did community meant a group of people living in the same locality and under the same government. Look up Nation and you're going to find a group of people organized under a single, usually independent government; a country.
You made sure to exclude the "a relatively large group of people" part that is in the definition of nation, but not community. A nation is larger, and has different goals than a community. If you continue to read the definitions of community...
a unified body of individuals: as a : the people with common interests living in a particular area; broadly : the area itself <the problems of a large community> b : an interacting population of various kinds of individuals (as species) in a common location c : a group of people with a common characteristic or interest living together within a larger society
3: common ownership
These are the communities of communism. If you read some actual communist literature you may know that.
We need to be more organized...
