Marxists Thread

[got tonkaed]

actually to be fair, my study deals with income not ownership, which deals a little more directly with some of the things everywhere and i were arguing earlier.


Ownership is much closer to the numbers that yeti presented.

[Neutrino]

beezer i would agree with you, no economic system without a human face can ever work. I really would not mind capitalism so much if there was more of an effort to be humanitarian. I mean i dont like a lot of the things about the system, but i really am a bit more of a realist than im coming off as in this thread. The fact of the matter is a communist system could be an alternative to the system we have know, which is exploiting a whole lot of people, and the fact that as an alternative communism, or even a more practical socialism is contiually shot down because people dont question some of the simple assumptiosn of capitalism is somewaht disappointing.

That is pretty much my opinion on this too.

[foolish_yeti]

When I talked to this guy from Michigan once about how communist states persecute their people (we were talking specifically about Daniel Ortega and the Sandinistas) he simply said, "mistakes were made". I was thinking to myself, "why isn't this guy morally outraged at the torture that was conducted against the Nicaraguan people?" He just simply chalked it up as "mistakes were made".

Probably for the same reason that the American people aren't outraged at their own countries treatment of people globally- they can easily ignore it. Nicaragua is actually a fine example, with the States being convicted of international terrorism by the World Court.

[cowshrptrn]

spurgistan brings up some good points....

To help with some of the global income numbers...from a un study on global income distribution, the top 15 percent of the world owns 62 percent of the worlds wealth while the bottom 85 percent owns about 38 percent. This is not a system that works. The bottom ten percent doesnt own a single percent and the top percent owns 12.

If those are the numbers your math skills are horrible.

No, the numbers are correct. His math is right. How can you debate that without even throwing up some contrived Fox News numbers?

Uh hu. If the top 15 percent own 62 percent of the wealth, divide both sides by 15 to get 1 percent of the population owns 4 percent of the wealth. Divide 85 by around 8 to get about 10 percent owning 38 divided by about 8 gives me 5. My math isnt skrewed up. And that link didnt lead me anyhwhere about global wealth distribution.

errm, its not like steps, on average they each own 4%, but if you were to look closer at it, the top one percent woudl probably own closer to around 10% (i'm just approximating these, i have no idea what the real numbers are) while the 15th percent owns around 1 or 2.

again, this is NOT the graph
_
..|_
....|

this IS (kinda, its probably concave up) the graph

\
..\
notice how the top chunk is a lot larger than the bottom most chunk, imagine its curved like a parabola so that its a LOT larger than the bottom.

(ignore the dots)

[everywhere116]

When I talked to this guy from Michigan once about how communist states persecute their people (we were talking specifically about Daniel Ortega and the Sandinistas) he simply said, "mistakes were made". I was thinking to myself, "why isn't this guy morally outraged at the torture that was conducted against the Nicaraguan people?" He just simply chalked it up as "mistakes were made".

Probably for the same reason that the American people aren't outraged at their own countries treatment of people globally- they can easily ignore it. Nicaragua is actually a fine example, with the States being convicted of international terrorism by the World Court.

What! Show me when the US was convicted of terrorism. When? Why?

[foolish_yeti]

Uh hu. If the top 15 percent own 62 percent of the wealth, divide both sides by 15 to get 1 percent of the population owns 4 percent of the wealth. Divide 85 by around 8 to get about 10 percent owning 38 divided by about 8 gives me 5. My math isnt skrewed up. And that link didnt lead me anyhwhere about global wealth distribution.

Your explanation of your math is confusing- could you clarify?

Here's a link that'll get you everything you need on the study- press releases, short version of it, the full report, etc.

http://www.wider.unu.edu/research/2006- ... 2-2006.htm

[cowshrptrn]

When I talked to this guy from Michigan once about how communist states persecute their people (we were talking specifically about Daniel Ortega and the Sandinistas) he simply said, "mistakes were made". I was thinking to myself, "why isn't this guy morally outraged at the torture that was conducted against the Nicaraguan people?" He just simply chalked it up as "mistakes were made".

Probably for the same reason that the American people aren't outraged at their own countries treatment of people globally- they can easily ignore it. Nicaragua is actually a fine example, with the States being convicted of international terrorism by the World Court.

What! Show me when the US was convicted of terrorism. When? Why?

We may not have done suicide bombing IED style terrorism, but we have paid for people to do that kind of thing for us.

We have financed revolutions to oust democratically elected governments that are socialist and put in authoritarian governments (some of them have herrendous human rights violations) that are capitalist.

As far as Beezer's comments, that's more militant instilled communisms, and the human rights violations are essentially a byproduct of the military isntallation of the government. A lot of these, liek Russia adn China, were toppling another totalitarian government so there was no way for them to step back, tinhk and democratically elect a more moderate socialist government.

[beezer]

Nicaragua is actually a fine example, with the States being convicted of international terrorism by the World Court.

But realistically, how much stock can you put in an organization which doesn't like the US. What terrorist action did we commit according to the World Court? What were the specific atrocities that the World Court said we did?

[got tonkaed]

well to be fair the WTO an organization which is rather supportive of general us policy cites the united states for violations all the time. The us has hundreds of violations but they just choose to ignore the WTO when it tells them something they dont want to hear.

[Neutrino]

Nicaragua is actually a fine example, with the States being convicted of international terrorism by the World Court.

But realistically, how much stock can you put in an organization which doesn't like the US. What terrorist action did we commit according to the World Court? What were the specific atrocities that the World Court said we did?

How much stock would you put in one that supported the US? You'd have to be terminally insane to do so.

[foolish_yeti]

What! Show me when the US was convicted of terrorism. When? Why?

The actual wording is "unlawful use of force"- but the actions fall under what your country itself defines as terrorism.

Here's a wiki article on it: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nicaragua_ ... ted_States

Basically they were found guilty, then refused to acknowledge the court's jurisdiction and even vetoed a Security Council measure in which the global community tried to hold them accountable for their actions.

Ps- anyone else surprised that very few in the States actually know of this?

[everywhere116]

I am looking at that map, and I am laughing. Look at this! China, communist, is green and its one of the few communist countries they got data on! (In order from best to worst, red, orange, green, blue). That border of red Western Europe and Green Eastern Europe, that seems awfulally close to the iron curtain, doesnt it? Mabey those communist countries should turn capitalist.

[spurgistan]

Nicaragua is actually a fine example, with the States being convicted of international terrorism by the World Court.

But realistically, how much stock can you put in an organization which doesn't like the US. What terrorist action did we commit according to the World Court? What were the specific atrocities that the World Court said we did?

We mined Nicaraguan harbors, don't have any source right now, google something.

[beezer]

How much stock would you put in one that supported the US? You'd have to be terminally insane to do so.

I want to make sure I understand your point, if I put my confidence in a world organization that supports the US then I or others are insane. If I put my confidence in a world organization that does not support the US then I or others are sane? Is this the jist of what you are claiming?

[everywhere116]

What! Show me when the US was convicted of terrorism. When? Why?

The actual wording is "unlawful use of force"- but the actions fall under what your country itself defines as terrorism.

Here's a wiki article on it: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nicaragua_ ... ted_States

Basically they were found guilty, then refused to acknowledge the court's jurisdiction and even vetoed a Security Council measure in which the global community tried to hold them accountable for their actions.

Ps- anyone else surprised that very few in the States actually know of this?

What did those same courts have to say about Saddam and the torturing of his own people?

[got tonkaed]

i think his argument is that if your going to support an organization who basically operates at the "pleasure of the united states" to paraphrase, then you really arent going to get a very unbiased report, hes speaking out for independence.

[everywhere116]

i think his argument is that if your going to support an organization who basically operates at the "pleasure of the united states" to paraphrase, then you really arent going to get a very unbiased report, hes speaking out for independence.

Who is independent in your eyes?

[Neutrino]

How much stock would you put in one that supported the US? You'd have to be terminally insane to do so.

I want to make sure I understand your point, if I put my confidence in a world organization that supports the US then I or others are insane. If I put my confidence in a world organization that does not support the US then I or others are sane? Is this the jist of what you are claiming?

No. You said you cant trust anything that someone who dosent support the US says. I said you cant trust anything that someone who supports the US says.

If they obviously support someone, then they are very unlikely to give unbiased advice.

[cowshrptrn]

What! Show me when the US was convicted of terrorism. When? Why?

The actual wording is "unlawful use of force"- but the actions fall under what your country itself defines as terrorism.

Here's a wiki article on it: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nicaragua_ ... ted_States

Basically they were found guilty, then refused to acknowledge the court's jurisdiction and even vetoed a Security Council measure in which the global community tried to hold them accountable for their actions.

Ps- anyone else surprised that very few in the States actually know of this?

What did those same courts have to say about Saddam and the torturing of his own people?

Why are we hung up on Saddam, he's one of the tamer dictators we've had. Just because he has oil we're railing on him. What about Darfur or cote de voire (i think it's settled a bit more in the past year or so), the instabiltiy there is causing more damage than Saddam ever did. Also, thee are more people dieing there now than under Saddam, the palce is in utter chaos because we opened this floodgate which saddam was holding closed and allowed a civil war to spring up. Not that i compeltely approved of his regime, but i tihnk we are a lot worse than him as far as scurity and freedoms right now.

[got tonkaed]

while i dont really know if we can get independent truly, since lets fact it everyones going to be influenced one way or the other. I would argue if we were going to get indepenednet it would have to be on a wider global level with organizations like the UN. As far as research goes, i think we can get fairly unbiased information from larger groups like that. As far as political/policy, im not sure thats really all that practical.

[beezer]

The actual wording is "unlawful use of force"- but the actions fall under what your country itself defines as terrorism.

Ps- anyone else surprised that very few in the States actually know of this?

Thanks for providing the link.

No, I remember it. But Nicaragua was allying itself with Cuba, Algeria, and the Soviet Union against the US. Were we seriously not supposed to support a regime (the Contras) that would have overthrown the Sandinistas? And why would we adhere to a decision that declares us guilty of trying to destroy those who would harm us.

Does anybody seriously think that Cuba, Nicaragua, Algeria, and the Soviet Union wanted to "peacefully" co-exist with the United States. The whole communist empire was bent on eliminating us because they saw us as an imperialistic threat. I'm glad we stood up to them.

[foolish_yeti]

What did those same courts have to say about Saddam and the torturing of his own people?

I'm guessing you are not familiar with the World Court (International Court of Justice in The Hague).

You should probably look into it before making arguments about it.

The case of Saddam is actually an interesting one. As the international human rights community was pressuring for a case against Saddam for a long time. The problem is only governments can bring charges to the court, and for various reasons nobody was doing so. Just as with any legal system, the courts do not go out and find criminals, they deal with the ones that are brought to them.

[everywhere116]

What did those same courts have to say about Saddam and the torturing of his own people?

I'm guessing you are not familiar with the World Court (International Court of Justice in The Hague).

You should probably look into it before making arguments about it.

The case of Saddam is actually an interesting one. As the international human rights community was pressuring for a case against Saddam for a long time. The problem is only governments can bring charges to the court, and for various reasons nobody was doing so. Just as with any legal system, the courts do not go out and find criminals, they deal with the ones that are brought to them.

Well then its a good thing his own government found him guilty then. so much for the World Court.

[everywhere116]

The actual wording is "unlawful use of force"- but the actions fall under what your country itself defines as terrorism.

Ps- anyone else surprised that very few in the States actually know of this?

Thanks for providing the link.

No, I remember it. But Nicaragua was allying itself with Cuba, Algeria, and the Soviet Union against the US. Were we seriously not supposed to support a regime (the Contras) that would have overthrown the Sandinistas? And why would we adhere to a decision that declares us guilty of trying to destroy those who would harm us.

Does anybody seriously think that Cuba, Nicaragua, Algeria, and the Soviet Union wanted to "peacefully" co-exist with the United States. The whole communist empire was bent on eliminating us because they saw us as an imperialistic threat. I'm glad we stood up to them.

Posted better than I could.

[got tonkaed]

although i dont disagree it certainly bears just as much mentioning that we were bent on destroying them, and didnt really have very many notions of peacefully coexisting, i think the Mccarthys witchhunts prove that just as much as anything else. Im happier the world wasnt blown up more than that any side won over one another.