"The North Korean Nuclear Crisis What You Aren't being Told"

I get it, maybe you wanted the communists to win in your country during the cold war. ;-)

Share this post


Link to post

But KK, I thought that you were NOT trying to make people feel guilty by means of thinly veiled accusations of being communist sympathizers.

Share this post


Link to post
Maes said:

But KK, I thought that you were NOT trying to make people feel guilty by means of thinly veiled accusations of being communist sympathizers.


The guilt is all your own, I never said you should feel bad about it. It's like someone saying, "I don't believe in god", and then have sentiments towards people who call them Atheists, as having dubious intentions.

Share this post


Link to post

It might not be my own, but it sure will be someone else's guilt. In any case, strange that you keep playing that card (burnt as it may be).

Edit: NM, I had written a witty retort here, but know what you'd reply: that the damned Ivans are just pawns because of [blah blah blah insert Red Scare rhethoric here], and that GI Joe is instead proud to be soldier :-) Here, I'll throw in some Make Mine Freedom for good measure.



BTW, I like that short film, because it portrays a simplified, idealized Capitalism the likes of which never truly existed. RL Capitalism is neither that fair, nor "pure", nor free from skewings of various kinds. They simply aren't as bad everywhere. Also, no mention of the military-industrial complex in that film, which is one of the major skewing factor IRL capitalism.

Share this post


Link to post
Maes said:

It might not be my own, but it sure will be someone else's guilt. In any case, strange that you keep playing that card (burnt as it may be).

I’m not playing a card, and there is no mind game being played here.

Maes said:
Let's suppose -and not concede- that I'm indeed an Ivan from head to toe, the biggest and Redder you've ever seen. Kinda like a cross between Zanghief and Ivan Drago. What difference does it make to anything -besides your dubious red scare pseudo-rhethoric- said in this thread? [/B]


It wouldn't make a difference; I already told you radicals have a right to hold their views. Radical theory has a viable interpretation of International Relations. But there are other schools of thought that are equally viable, like Realism, Liberalism, and Constructivism. There is no one truth in these matters, only theories.

Share this post


Link to post
Kontra Kommando said:

I’m not playing a card, and there is no mind game being played here


That's a suspiciously specific denial there, mate ;-)

Also, strange that you keep using Radicalism as a synonym for Communism.

I may be biased because of the immediate association I make with the Italian Radical Party , but the formal definition of political radicalism does not paint any particular ideology, just highlights the "altering social structures through revolutionary means and changing value systems in fundamental ways" part. There seem to be radical parties from all accross the political spectrum, with no particular ideology prevailing (Edit: OK, there seems to be a historical association with extreme left, but where such extreme left actually took power, it automatically ceased being radical, no? )

Under that vague definition, you could lump Fascism, Nazism, etc. and even the American Founding Fathers, the Quakers, the USA movement for independence from England or the modern-day Tea Party. But nowhere, never, have I seen it as a synonym/equivalent/exclusive term for Communism.

My opinion? It's simply a convenience umbrella term that you use to signify anyone with different or inconvenient political -or otherwise- views compared to yours (compare e.g. reactionary/conservatory, but also "peacebreaker" or "troublemaker" and "mischief").

Share this post


Link to post
Maes said:

That's a suspiciously specific denial there, mate ;-)


Well, I can't help the fact that you're cynical towards others. That sounds more like a problem for you.

Share this post


Link to post
Maes said:

That's a suspiciously specific denial there, mate ;-)

Also, strange that you keep using Radicalism as a synonym for Communism.

I may be biased because of the immediate association I make with the Italian Radical Party , but the formal definition of political radicalism does not paint any particular ideology, just highlights the "altering social structures through revolutionary means and changing value systems in fundamental ways" part. Maybe it's not the same, I dunno.

Under that vague definition, you could lump Fascism, Nazism, etc. and even the American Founding Fathers, the USA movement for independence from England or the modern-day Tea Party. But nowhere, never, have I seen it as a synonym/equivalent/exclusive term for Communism.

My opinion? It's simply a convenience umbrella term that you use to signify anyone with different or inconvenient political -or otherwise- views compared to yours (compare e.g. reactionary/conservatory, but also "peacebreaker" or "troublemaker").


Actually Radicalism is considered far-left, it's Marxism. I didn't call it communist exclusively, Communism is an evolution of radical theory. It places the state at the center of the means of production. Mussolini was actually a Marxist before he helped to create fascism. It is the belief that the collective good of the nation is first and foremost, and the individual plays a subordinate role. One of the differences between Communism and fascism is that communist envision a one world government. Fascists on the other hand believe in their particular nation's success, even at the expense of other nations. The founding fathers of the United States had differing ideas for the country. Some believed that the federal government should be powerful, and promote the interests of powerful private elites. Others like Thomas Jefferson were pretty much libertarians.

Share this post


Link to post

Also the Tea Party is considered a reactionary movement, not a radical one. They seek to return the U.S. to a time before social welfare, and FDR.

Share this post


Link to post
Technician said:

I'm wondering if KK is a /pol/lock trying to be civil.


And I guess you're a bigot trying to be witty.

Share this post


Link to post
Technician said:

I'm wondering if KK is a /pol/lock trying to be civil.


What's a /pol/lock?

Share this post


Link to post
Maes said:

What's a /pol/lock?


A disparaging term for Polish people. I'm not even Polish.

If people want to insert themselves into a conversation, I'd advise against using racial or ethnic hatred to do so.

Share this post


Link to post
Kontra Kommando said:

If people want to insert themselves into a conversation, I'd advise against using racial or ethnic hatred to do so.


What about using it to one's advantage?

Share this post


Link to post
Kontra Kommando said:

What advantage?! what are you so paranoid about?


No, Kontra Kommando. You are the paranoid.
And then Kontra Kommando was an unnecessary minority in poor taste.

Share this post


Link to post
Maes said:

What's a /pol/lock?

The community that resides on 4chan's political board /pol/.

It's mainly composed of ultra-right conservatives, libertarians, white nationalists, and sharia sympathizers. Basically political cartoon characters.

Share this post


Link to post

That's sexist, you puritan. But no hard feelings, lol. ;-)

But seriously, this whole 'conversation' has gone so far afield as to be almost without hope of ever getting back on topic.

Share this post


Link to post
Technician said:

The community that resides on 4chan's political board /pol/.

And what does the /lock "suffix" stand for, then?

Share this post


Link to post
printz said:

And what does the /lock "suffix" stand for, then?

I think they're just trying to be edgy.

Share this post


Link to post
This topic is now closed to further replies.