| you already know how I feel about neocons and their poison to the right. if you guys would have waited about a week and then made this thread I would've felt more compelled to join you and shit on mccain. |
 Oh maybe, maybe it's the clothes we wear The tasteless bracelets and the dye in our hair Or maybe, maybe it's our nowhere towns or our nothing places But we're trash, you and me We're the litter on the breeze We're the lovers on the streets Just trash, me and you It's in everything we do It's in everything we do |
| 4 days before his birthday.. |
| BAD VIBES FOREVER 💔 |
casual_filth said: There's nothing edgy about celebrating a murdering warmongerer neocon's death. I still remember when I created that thread that got deleted about how I was glad he got cancer. I'm not sorry, I meant all of what I said, and quite frankly I wish I believed in Hell so I could envision him being sodomized by Satan's pitchfork for an eternity. His death brings us even marginally closer to world peace.Lot of hardcore edgelording in this thread.  SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS |
 |
JohnviRomanum said: maluhia said: Obama actively supported them with his liberal government, while the GOP shouted he didn't do enough to support them. Hasn't America learned from WW2 and 9/11?He literally supports terrorists in Syria and neo-Nazis in Ukraine. So yes. But then again, most politicians do. I attacked Obama, Hillary, Trump, Bernie, etc. earlier in this thread. Don't like any of them. All guilty. |
  Crying doesn't mean you're weak. Enduring doesn't mean you're strong. |
honestly speaking i have no idea who he is, just wanted to post this |
  make yourself comfortable, i'll be done in just a few decades |
| @AIDSKrillex @Lost_Viking @Nyu   |
| Not all of them are dead, sadly, but they'll be someday. |
| @maluhia If you making arguments that were never there and me agreeing with half of what you said from the start is a debacle, then sure. Oh really?I said: Then again, this isn't what I came here to focus on, so I'll get on to the real subject:Had you been truly on-board with the idea of the Venezuelan government being a corrupt capitalist government whose members were using the black market from the very beginning, you would have stated it in your "food shortage" post, and you would have told me that you were fully aware of the government's capitalist practices. But that's not what happened, is it? You made no mention of the government, you told your opponent to go watch Abby Martin's pro-Maduro propaganda piece because it was a better representation of reality, you told me to "elaborate/[citation needed]" when I brought up their practices and then when link after link rained down on you and the indications that your original position was highly flawed grew more and more impossible to bullshit away, you tried to play it off as if "t-that's what I and the documentary were arguing all along!". I do not like being taken for a fool, so do not try to play any games with me. So now you are trying to switch to yet another opinional position by claiming that you never based all of your arguments relating to the situation in the Venezuela on what documentary was saying or that you never acted like your and the documentary's views on the subject were the same as mine. As consistent as anal leakage. So you have no idea what mainstream media's position on the subject are other than "Venezuela bad" or what the differences between their and my viewpoints are and yet you think you can freely accuse me of being a right wing U.S. media tool (that includes an earlier section of this post, to boot!) of the sole basis of me also criticizing the Venezuelan government, cracking jokes and calling it a regime, despite the fact that I am doing it from a different perspective than that of the Anglo-Saxon MSM, that not everybody has the same humor as you and that not everybody who calls it a regime is right-wing or worships American corporatist media. Once again, what the hell are you doing here? I like how this article proves my point more than it does yours. I'm sure you read it thoroughly. I have read it once, I have read it twice and I have read it thrice, and it does not prove your point. Neither being a former politician, a member of a former government (depending on the government), a member of a student organization, against the Soviet Union, a Russian émigré, a police officer, a representative of a foreign company, a person having contacts abroad, an entrepreneur, a banker, a member of the Clergy nor a member of the Red Cross are even remotely comparable to being a nazi, and the same can be said about being a mayor, an active member of the press, a member of [certain types of] right wing organizations, a relative of someone living abroad, an active member in a labor union or a person with anti-communist relatives http://www.lituanus.org/1988/88_3_01.htm :The final, and most devastating step of the terror were the deportations that occurred in June 1941. The NKVD realized that certain groups might pose a threat/in theory or in reality, to the communization and russification of Lithuania. A list of 23 different groups were considered a threat to the occupation: 1. Former members of legislative bodies and prominent members of political parties 2. Army officers from the Russian Civil War (1917-1921) 3. Prosecutors, judges, and attorneys 4. Government and municipal officials 5. Policemen and prison officials 6. Members of the National Guard 7. Mayors 8. Border and prison guards 9. Active members of the press 10. Active members of the farmers' union 11. Business owners 12. Large real estate owners 13. Ship owners 14. Stockholders 15. Hoteliers and restaurateurs 16. Members of any organization considered to be right wing 17. Members of the White Guard 18. Members of anti-communist organizations 19. Relatives of any person abroad 20. Families against whom reprisals had been taken during the Soviet regime 21. Active members in labor unions 22. Persons with anti-communist relatives abroad 23. Clergymen and active members of religious organizations.5 Under article 58 in the Soviet penal code, any relative or associate of a person charged with a political crime could be found guilty of that crime. Given these provisions, nearly the entire population of Lithuania was liable to be prosecuted, deported, tortured, or executed at the whim of the NKVD. From June 14 to June 21, 1941, the first wave of Soviet deportations occurred. In one week, 30,425 deportees in 871 freight cars were sent to various remote regions of the Soviet Union.6 According to Joseph Vizulis and the Estonian Information Center, at least 7,777 children under 18 were included in this deportation.7 It is an accepted estimate that approximately 75,000 Lithuanians were executed, imprisoned, deported, placed in internal exile, or simply disappeared during 1940-41. Given the population of Lithuania (more than 3 million in 1939), this number is more than two percent of the entire population. How dare those communists target.. *checks notes* ..exploiters such as wealthy families, entrepreneurs, bankers, clergymen and members of the Red Cross. As mentioned earlier, not all of the people deported and/or considered a threat would fall in the "filthy capitalist exploiter" category. And even if you want to make the argument that all of these people were exploiters, what exactly makes them more deserving of being deported from their country to the Gulag than the Soviet pigs that occupied countries that did not belong to them for fifty years?But I'm sure it's the same as literal Nazis targeting Jews for being Jews. iT's LiTeRaLlY tHe SaMe. It is undoubtedly a case of ethnic cleansing as the USSR then seeked to culturally enrich these countries by importing Russians while simultaneously attempting to rob them of their national identity during fifty years instead of leaving these countries alone once they were done purging "degenerates". In fact, thanks to the USSR's "liberating" policies, native Estonians and Latvians no longer were the majority they once had been by the end of the Soviet occupation (Lithuanians fared better because of reasons but were still affected by the USSR's cultural enrichment attempts) https://www.languagesoftheworld.info/russia-ukraine-and-the-caucasus/stalins-ethnic-deportations-gerrymandered-ethnic-map.htmlAnd you're still proving my point here. Again, how is this ethnic cleansing when there is legit proof it's about hierarchy? Altogether nearly 300,000 people are estimated to have been deported or sent to Gulag camps from the time the annexation of the Baltic Republics in 1940 to Stalin’s death in 1953. Roughly 10% of the entire adult population was expelled from the Baltic countries. As elsewhere, masses of ethnic Russians and members of other ethnic groups were resettled to take their places. Largely as a consequence of these policies, native Latvians represented only 52% of the population of Latvia in 1989, and Estonians comprised merely 62% of their country’s population (Laar 2009: 36). In Lithuania, the situation was not as extreme. Although many Lithuanians were deported, the corresponding Russians resettlement effort was focused on former East Prussia (now Kaliningrad District) which, contrary to the original plans, never became part of Lithuania (Misiunas and Taagepera 1983). Partly as a result of these policies, strong anti-Soviet and anti-Russian sentiment became especially widespread in the Baltic republics, which subsequently became the first parts of the Soviet Union to break away. Anti-Russian feelings are still evident in the region, reflected, for example, in the extremely divisive recent referendum of whether to make Russian a co-official language of Latvia. To claim that Estonians, Latvians and Lithuanians deserved being Russified and occupied for fifty years because some of the members of their populations were deemed infidels by the USSR is nothing more than blatant apologetism and also speaks of American privilege and narcissism (which is also one of the many reasons why nobody except for their European concubines likes the American left-wing).Why do you give me the link if you're just going to quote the entire thing anyway? So obnoxious. I quoted the entire thing because every single word in that post is of relevancy. (And no, your willful laziness is still not an excuse not to read anything)If you want to see real ethnic cleansing, look at what Israel does to Palestine on a daily basis. Frankly, I do not give a shit about the Israel-Palestine conflict as it is of complete irrelevancy. Bibi could have nuked the whole of Pally land in this very second and it still wouldn't have proved nor not proved that the USSR was justified in trying to rob the Baltic nations of their national identity.You mean capitalists that want to keep their hoarded wealth. Since when does not wanting to be occupied by another country and robbed of your national identity make you a capitalist?It literally says "anti-Soviet sect of Jehovah's Witnesses and members of their families." "Anti-Soviet" could mean anything, from being the wrong type of communist (as mentioned in the Latvian info post) to not wanting to be annexed by said Soviet liberators. How does that prove they were on the same level as nazis?But nice propaganda. It's clearly about religion. Not. Golly gee, are we really going to act like the USSR (and communism) wasn't inherently anti-religious and that their religion may or may not have been a reason for them being considered "Anti-Soviet", as well as their reasons for being against the USSR in the first place?https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religion_in_the_Soviet_Union The Soviet Union was established by the Bolsheviks in 1922, in place of the Russian Empire. At the time of the 1917 Revolution, the Russian Orthodox Church was deeply integrated into the autocratic state, enjoying official status. This was a significant factor that contributed to the Bolshevik attitude to religion and the steps they took to control it.[1] Thus the USSR became the first state to have as one objective of its official ideology the elimination of existing religion, and the prevention of future implanting of religious belief, with the goal of establishing state atheism (gosateizm).[2][3][4][5] Under the doctrine of state atheism in the Soviet Union, there was a "government-sponsored program of conversion to atheism" conducted by Communists.[6][7][8] The Communist regime targeted religions based on State interests, and while most organized religions were never outlawed, religious property was confiscated, believers were harassed, and religion was ridiculed while atheism was propagated in schools.[2] In 1925 the government founded the League of Militant Atheists to intensify the persecution.[9] Accordingly, although personal expressions of religious faith were not explicitly banned, a strong sense of social stigma was imposed on them by the official structures and mass media and it was generally considered unacceptable for members of certain professions (teachers, state bureaucrats, soldiers) to be openly religious. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religion_in_the_Soviet_Union#Other_Christian_groupsThe March 1961 instruction on religious cults explained for the first time, that "sects, the teaching and character of activities of which has anti-state and savagely extremist [изуверский] character: Jehovah's Witnesses, Pentecostalists, Adventists-reformists" are not to be registered[19] and were thus banned. https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/download/Marx_Critique_of_Hegels_Philosophy_of_Right.pdfA number of congregations of Russian Mennonites, Jehovah's Witnesses, and other Christian groups existed in the Soviet Union. Nearly 9,000 Jehovah's Witnesses were deported to Siberia in 1951 (numbers of those missed[clarification needed] in deportation unknown). The number of Jehovah's Witnesses increased greatly over this period, with a KGB estimate of around 20,000 in 1968. Russian Mennonites began to emigrate from the Soviet Union in the face of increasing violence and persecution, state restrictions on freedom of religion, and biased allotments of communal farmland. They emigrated to Germany, Britain, the United States, parts of South America, and other regions. Religious suffering is, at one and the same time, the expression of real suffering and a protest against real suffering. Religion is the sigh of the oppressed creature, the heart of a heartless world, and the soul of soulless conditions. It is the opium of the people. You have read Marx, haven't you?The abolition of religion as the illusory happiness of the people is the demand for their real happiness. To call on them to give up their illusions about their condition is to call on them to give up a condition that requires illusions. The criticism of religion is, therefore, in embryo, the criticism of that vale of tears of which religion is the halo. Criticism has plucked the imaginary flowers on the chain not in order that man shall continue to bear that chain without fantasy or consolation, but so that he shall throw off the chain and pluck the living flower. The criticism of religion disillusions man, so that he will think, act, and fashion his reality like a man who has discarded his illusions and regained his senses, so that he will move around himself as his own true Sun. Religion is only the illusory Sun which revolves around man as long as he does not revolve around himself. From a military standpoint, they acted as a buffer zone. I literally said "Nazi Germany or liberation via USSR" earlier in the thread. You act like I didn't already point this out. Unless you are trying to make the argument that Nazi Germany was still a threat after the end of the war and that that pesky Adolf forced the Russians to remain in the Baltics until the 90s, you haven't pointed anything out, neither literally nor figuratively. Rather, you've only enforced the point that the reasons Russia had for invading and remaining in the Baltics were not solemnly that they wanted to defeat Hitler.And what does one economics professor - who probably isn't even a communist - The guy is a doctor of economics and a professor of the foreign relations department, actually. As for him being or not being a communist, Russian communists and right wingers are similar in that both of them fucking love Russia, so at the end of the day, it doesn't really change much.prove? He talks about Russia-Baltic relations and why they don't get along from a Russian perspective which further illustrastes my point about Russia not liking the Baltics. What's so hard to understand?The International Center of Nonviolent Conflict was founded by Peter Ackerman, a businessman on the fucking Council of Foreign Relations, and Jack DuVall, who was in the Air Force. The ICNC headquarters is in Washington, DC. Lmfao, nice propaganda. I'm laughing so hard because you honestly think this "nonviolent" nonprofit is "peaceful" when it was founded by a guy on a board of a warmongering think tank specializing in US foreign affairs. First of all, I don't understand why you completely ignored my question. It shouldn't be too hard for you to answer, after all:The biggest self own: Is that your argument? "Russia is diverse, so that means Estonians, Latvians and Lithuanians had no right to complain when they were ethnically cleansed and russified, sorry, culturally enriched and forced to become part of a nation they did not want to be part of"? or where your response to this is:Oh, and while you're at it, you should probably include this part the next time you want to quote that Wikipedia article: As for the oh-so-terrible source, I see you haven't learned from your mistakes in the Venezuela thread:Although discrimination on the basis of language was illegal under the Soviet Constitution, the de facto status of these languages differed. and this article as well, which was linked to in your article https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russification#Linguistic_and_ethnic_RussificationAlthough the USSR did not have de jure an official language over most of its history, until 1990,[1] and Russian was merely defined as the language of interethnic communication (Russian: язык межнационального общения), it assumed de facto the role of official language.[2] For its role and influence in the USSR, see Russification. Progress in the spread of Russian language as a second language and the gradual displacement of other languages was monitored in Soviet censuses. The Soviet censuses of 1926, 1937, 1939, and 1959, had included questions on "native language" (родной язык) as well as "nationality." The 1970, 1979, and 1989 censuses added to these questions one on "other language of the peoples of the USSR" that an individual could "use fluently" (свободно владеть). It is speculated that the explicit goal of the new question on "second language" was to monitor the spread of Russian as the language of internationality communication.[37] While formally all languages were equal, in almost all Soviet republics the Russian/local bilingualism was "asymmetric": the titular nation learned Russian, whereas immigrant Russians generally did not learn the local language. In addition, many non-Russians who lived outside their respective administrative units tended to become Russified linguistically; that is, they not only learned Russian as a second language but they also adopted it as their home language or mother tongue – although some still retained their sense of ethnic identity or origins even after shifting their native language to Russian. This includes both the traditional communities (e.g., Lithuanians in the northwestern Belarus (see Eastern Vilnius region) or the Kaliningrad Oblast (see Lithuania Minor)) and the communities that appeared during Soviet times such as Ukrainian or Belarusian workers in Kazakhstan or Latvia, whose children attended primarily the Russian-language schools and thus the further generations are primarily speaking Russian as their native language; for example, 57% of Estonia's Ukrainians, 70% of Estonia's Belarusians and 37% of Estonia's Latvians claimed Russian as the native language in the last Soviet census of 1989. Russian language as well replaced Yiddish and other languages as the main language of many Jewish communities inside the Soviet Union. I said: >Complains about muh propaganda outlets >Proceeds to tell her opponent to watch Telesur I said: As I have demonstrated on multiple earlier occasions, I have the ability to rely on different types of sources (from far-left to far-right) that convey whatever I want to be said in the moment, not just the ones that come from websites that always flicker my invisible ideological clitoris.Even if there are similarities between the things I and the American mainstream media are saying there are also some big and glaring differences and the fact that the United States undeservingly talks shit about some of its enemies does not mean that you have to become the opposite side's concubine every single time just because they are anti-American. The Estonian National Independence Party is a literal center-right party that later merged with Pro Patria to form the Pro Patria Union, a national-conservative party. Suddenly we're back to capitalists. The. Irony. And the re-emergence of capitalism in Estonia proves that the USSR didn't invade the Baltic States and attempt to rob them of their national identity how exactly? Oh wait, it doesn't, but if you want to fly to Estonia and explain to those pesky Estonians why the Soviet trying to culturally enrich them, the Latvians and the Lithuanians was totally okay because there now is a political party you don't like in their country, be my guest. That being said, you're probably going to have to eat up your own words and shit all over those oh-so-glorious ideals you once claimed you had, because they might take it as you not respecting their autonomy as a nation (then again, you have already proven yourself not to respect the autonomy of the Baltic states many times over):You said: Any communist respects the autonomy of other nations. This article falsely thinks the economy is doing well, therefore the people are doing well. The article mentions that people were about 20 % wealthier in general in 1938 than the pre-war period, so no, not really. I also see you ignored this article as well:https://www.ttu.ee/public/k/karsten-staehr/011_2004-CC20in20Estonia.pdf Estonia remained poorer than most Western European countries, but the difference in production levels and living standards was not striking. In the early 1930s, per capita national income in Estonia was approximately 60% of that in Sweden (Central Statistical Bureau of Latvia 2002: 19).3 The difference was even less obvious in comparison to Finland, Estonia’s northern neighbour. Household income and living standards in Estonia were only slightly lower than those in Finland, or possibly at the same level (Hagfors & Kuus 1993). The living standard in Estonia was only slightly lower than or possibly on the same level as the Finnish one. Did Finland collapse after WW2?I say bullshit, and just look at America: wealthiest nation in the world with high level sof poverty. Much like the Israel-Palestine conflict, the United States is of as much relevancy as this clip from the film "Sunes sommar"i.e. it is of complete irrelevancy because it doesn't say anything about poverty and wealth in Estonia before comrade Stalin took over. "Before the reform, 1,149 large households owned more than 2.4 million hectares (58%) of land and 51,600 privatised farms a little less than 1.8 million hectares, while about half a million of the 864,000 people who lived in rural areas and made their living from farming were landless." Lol. Should I also mention Estonia has high levels of poverty now? https://borgenproject.org/the-deeply-rooted-causes-of-poverty-in-estonia/ And where, exactly, does the article make mention of the Baltic countries specifically or prove that the quality of life in the Baltic States wouldn't have improved and/or that they would have been far worse off had it not been for the "liberating" claws of the Soviet Union? This still applies. The fact that the quality of life improved during the Soviet period and that Estonia has a problem with poverty today does not prove that they wouldn't have been better off with a different economic model than that of the USSR, that this improvement would never under any circumstances have happened if the USSR hadn't invaded them or that the USSR's attempt to ethnically cleanse, russify and occupy the Baltic nations for fifty years was justified. Hell, the very article you linked to suggests that despite their problems, the percentage of people living in poverty has decreased and they are doing better now than a few years ago (even without the help of the mighty savior Russia putting those filthy Finno-Ugrics and Balts in their place, who would've thought?):Your article said: While these figures on the causes of poverty in Estonia sound disheartening, the percentage of people living in relative and total poverty have actually decreased from previous years. As of 2014, the total income increased from the year before, and the gap between the rich and poor decreased. With increased foreign aid and governmental efforts to improve education and support for the poor elderly, the former USSR republic will be well on its way to eliminating the causes of poverty in Estonia. Should I also mention Estonian World is a global independent online magazine, founded in London in 2012? We can play this little "Whose source is the baddest terriblest disgustingest" game how much you want (although I'm not even sure what the devastating piece of information is supposed to be, most of the staff members are Estonian) but frankly, it doesn't really matter in the long run, given that you yourself have already shown that you have no qualms linking to regime-sponsored propaganda videos and swallowing it all as long as it fits your agenda. What matters to me is that you explain in what way the Sovietization and fifty-year-long occupation of the Baltic nations and robbing them of their national identity was in any way justified, and so far, you have yet to offer me any justifications aside from some vague conspiracy theory about Nazi Germany being a threat until the early 90s and "B-but the bourgeoise". Fuck that shit, I say; USSR bootlickers were better well off compared to the rest of the population due to the sole fact that they were regime leechers, so what made them so different from the "exploiters" they had purged decades earlier (look, another article you ignored!)? http://www.truelithuania.com/tag/life-in-the-soviet-lithuaniaThe Soviet economy was plagued by the popular belief that “Everything belongs to everybody, and therefore everything belongs to nobody” and stumbled well behind the Western European one. People were widely stealing from their workplaces and this was regarded as a normal practice by the society, therefore condoned by the peers and even many CEOs. Few people (if any) were rich in terms of money but the community was far from egalitarian because it was who you knew that mattered the most: the people who had important friends also had access to many things that were inaccessible to most others, e.g. better cars, larger apartments, modern TV sets or warm-climate fruits (these things were inaccessible to many partly because they used to be taken by those who had important “relationships”). https://www.rbth.com/history/326255-goldfinger-communist-money-ussrWhen the Soviet Union collapsed in 1991 there were many rumors about the fate of the Communist Party's “gold reserve.” Some historians and journalists believe that those Party officials who had accumulated enormous sums of money secretly transferred it to foreign bank accounts. >Claim to be against capitalismThe Communist Party of the Soviet Union (CPSU) was always more than a political party. Enjoying a monopoly on power until the end of the 1980s, the CPSU's upper echelons - the Central Committee and Politburo - existed as a separate state, and many of these officials enjoyed privileges that were not always legal. In the early 1990s, soon after the Soviet Union had collapsed, several sources claimed that around $10 billion from Party’s treasury had disappeared without a trace, and a majority of Russians were certain that the money had been stolen. Viktor Mironenko, former head of the Komsomol, the Party’s youth organization, mentioned in an interview that just before the Soviet Union's demise the CPSU had $10 billion on its books. The sources for such wealth were various, ranging from the monthly dues of ordinary Party members (the CPSU had about 19.5 million members in 1990), and including the state-funded Foundation for the Protection of Peace with its approximate 4.5 billion rubles ($2.6 billion) in cash assets. It’s hard to tell exactly if Mironenko was right about the amount. Party archives were separate from the government's budget, and only high-ranking officials had access to the data. Answering the question: “Who stole all this money?” Mironenko shrugged: “No idea. Not me.” Viktor Gerashchenko, the former director of the State Bank of the USSR, confirmed in 2011 that there was a lot of money in the Central Committee’s cash accounts, but all of it mysteriously disappeared in 1991. >Defend capitalist exploiters because they call themselves communist/socialist Now where have I seen this before? Good talk. ألوها سناك بار |
Comic_SansAug 28, 2018 6:29 AM
 Nico- said: Conversations with people pinging/quoting me to argue about some old post I wrote years ago will not be entertained@Comic_Sans oh no y arnt ppl dieing i need more ppl dieing rly gud plot avansement jus liek tokyo ghoul if erbudy dies amirite |
| Holy shit I didn't realize how derailed this thread has become kek |
Comic_SansAug 26, 2018 2:17 PM
Nico- said: Conversations with people pinging/quoting me to argue about some old post I wrote years ago will not be entertained@Comic_Sans oh no y arnt ppl dieing i need more ppl dieing rly gud plot avansement jus liek tokyo ghoul if erbudy dies amirite |
| This has gone to hell and its been amusing to see tbh. |
JohnviRomanum said: Hopefully they have slow and painful deaths tooNot all of them are dead, sadly, but they'll be someday. |
|
Lost_Viking said: Hopefully they have slow and painful deaths too becareful what you wish for. I generally would avoid wishing death on people. especially as it can come back to bite you. and i don't think anyone deserves to die from cancer. |
| "among monsters and humans, there are only two types. Those who undergo suffering and spread it to others. And those who undergo suffering and avoid giving it to others." -Alice “Beauty is no quality in things themselves: It exists merely in the mind which contemplates them; and each mind perceives a different beauty.” David Hume “Evil is created when someone gives up on someone else. It appears when everyone gives up on someone as a lost cause and removes their path to salvation. Once they are cut off from everyone else, they become evil.” -Othinus  |
Lost_Viking said: SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS You really know how to drive a point into the ground. I don't understand why you think one small, sarcastic comment deserves so much of your emotional energy, though. Save your sperg-attacks for someone who cares more than I do about how genuinely "happy" you are right now. |
| John McCain was a honorable soldier. But he was a shitty elected official. If he had it his way we would have given amnesty to illegals and we would be involved in half a dozen more wars. If elected officials wore their sponsors names on them like NASCAR drivers he would probably have every military equipment manufacture and arms maker on his suits. Democrats seemed to like him when he was bashing republicans but hated him when he was running for office. I just hope another war mongering neocon doesn't take his place.He started that mess in Ukraine and who knows what other dirty shit he done during his tenure in office. I am somewhat a conservative person but I am glad he did not win the 2008 presidency. |
ezikialrageAug 27, 2018 4:15 AM
| McCain was not a proper Klingon, he did not fight to the death and surrendered, therefore Sto'Vo'Kor is denied him. However, at least he didn't die to dildo bayonets, that really had to suck tbh. |
 |
AIDSKrillex said: talk about karma. nicethings said: and him warmongering in the middle east wasnt? He indirectly caused the rise of ISIS, destabilized the region in the name of zionism, and the destruction of historical artifacts in that fucking region. fuck him cancer is a really horrendous thing to die from... Indirectly? Lol. More like directly. |
 Three things cannot be long hidden.. ...the s u n, the m oo n, and the tr u th. |
| Couldn't care less about him. Especially after all the war and destruction he caused in other countries. Zelev said: Indirectly? Lol. More like directly. This shows that people with influence will always be referred to as "heroes", no matter how evil they may be. |
swirlydragonAug 26, 2018 11:52 PM
 Join Emilia's self-proclaimed knights club if you are a fellow Emilia fan |
Lost_Viking said: They do deserve to suffer, but if it's long then they could do much damage. Look at McStain, he was dying, but in the last years he continued warmongering and even made the possibility of a war with Russia bigger.Hopefully they have slow and painful deaths too |
hazarddex said: I don't wish people to die from cancer and I respect McCain's fighting on through it, but I won't miss him and think the world will be a better place without him. The same goes for the other people: the world would have been a much better place without them.becareful what you wish for. I generally would avoid wishing death on people. especially as it can come back to bite you. and i don't think anyone deserves to die from cancer. |
maluhia said: Almost the entire establishment supports the Neonazis in Ukraine. Even most European countries do it, while they should know better because they have suffered most from Nazi Germany.@Nyu The Ukrainian Freedom Fighters would've been betrayed by the US after they win the War, so McCain didn't support Freedom Fighters in Ukraine. Right. He just associates with neo-Nazis, then.   And the NeoLiberal Establishment supports rebels in Syria, not just McCain. I stated that before in this thread, yes. NeoLiberals are not Centrists, they are Far Left on Social Issues, for example I am Far Left on Economics and Far Right on Social Issues, but people consider me Far Right politically, so Far Left is not just Economics. Let's call it what it is. Neoliberals are Democrats. Democrats don't give a damn about social issues. Their platform is literally, "Well, we're not Trump." If they were "far left," which apparently you think is anyone to the left of you, then they would be fighting for marginalized people (but they don't). It's all empty platitudes. The only politician(s) that are even considered left on social issues are Bernie Sanders and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, but even then both of these tools are still capitalist imperialists. They're not allies of the left - they're allies of the center. If you're far right on social issues, you're not on the left. If you're far right on economic issues, you're still not on the left. At best, that would be center. |
| I love how you weirdos managed to turn this thread into Capitalism v Communism Part 999999999 so quickly. Y'all need to go outside. |
Take care of yourself |
Soverign said: McCain was not a proper Klingon, he did not fight to the death and surrendered, therefore Sto'Vo'Kor is denied him. However, at least he didn't die to dildo bayonets, that really had to suck tbh. Best post in the thread |
| WASHINGTON (AP) — Flags at the White House were back at full-staff Monday, even as Senate leaders of both parties formally requested American flags at government buildings stay at half-staff to honor Sen. John McCain. https://apnews.com/f49d0e43bbaf455b94f9d834ffa9b6cc/Flags-at-White-House-back-at-full-staff-after-McCain's-death |
Ne93 said: WASHINGTON (AP) — Flags at the White House were back at full-staff Monday, even as Senate leaders of both parties formally requested American flags at government buildings stay at half-staff to honor Sen. John McCain. https://apnews.com/f49d0e43bbaf455b94f9d834ffa9b6cc/Flags-at-White-House-back-at-full-staff-after-McCain's-death i guess McCain hurts Trumps feelings very bad |
| I'm not sure if he would have made a much better president than Obama, but he would have been much better than Trump to some extent. More of a mainstream conservative....a dying breed nowadays. Ted Kennedy also died of brain cancer. |
ThatRazorGuy said: I love how you weirdos managed to turn this thread into Capitalism v Communism Part 999999999 so quickly. Y'all need to go outside. The capitalists were greatly offended in this thread. |
Three things cannot be long hidden.. ...the s u n, the m oo n, and the tr u th. |
| McCain was a polarizing man honestly....but still sad. |
| BTW.....once again, look at how PATHETIC Trump has handled this situation. He has REFUSED to acknowledge McCain’s death or say anything even remotely nice about a man who was in HIS OWN PARTY! A man who regardless of political party is regarded as a military hero. And yet the sitting President can’t say a single nice word...why? Because McCain openly opposed Trump on SOME issues! Trump is just a loathsome human being...a narcissistic piece of shit with NO redeeming qualities. Even if I disagreed with 99% of McCain’s politics....and I probably did. At least McCain had SOME class and acted respectful...and thus even Democrats and liberals and other political opponents can respectfully say RIP or give some sort of condolences. When Trump dies....it will NOT be like that...you will see literal cheers and people joyful that the world has been rid of such a terrible person. You reap what you sow. |
--ALEX-- said: I think the late Senator would be proud of you. Even beyond the grave, the warmonger's corpse has been weaponized as a tool for conflict.BTW.....once again, look at how PATHETIC Trump has handled this situation. He has REFUSED to acknowledge McCain’s death or say anything even remotely nice about a man who was in HIS OWN PARTY! A man who regardless of political party is regarded as a military hero. And yet the sitting President can’t say a single nice word...why? Because McCain openly opposed Trump on SOME issues! Trump is just a loathsome human being...a narcissistic piece of shit with NO redeeming qualities. Even if I disagreed with 99% of McCain’s politics....and I probably did. At least McCain had SOME class and acted respectful...and thus even Democrats and liberals and other political opponents can respectfully say RIP or give some sort of condolences. When Trump dies....it will NOT be like that...you will see literal cheers and people joyful that the world has been rid of such a terrible person. You reap what you sow. |
 |
| Sometimes good things still happen in this world. |
--ALEX-- said: You're seriously defending a warmongering war criminal who plenty in this thread were celebrating his death (including me) just because you don't like Trump? McCain's the one with no redeeming qualities. How is being responsible for the deaths of millions in Afghanistan/Iraq/Libya/Syria/Ukraine and cheerleading for more dead in Russia/China/Iran (he literally made a song about bombing Iran) "classy or respectful"? Are you legitimately retarded? Democrats and liberals are cucks who are too afraid to spit on this war criminal's corpse like I and millions others around the world would do. Fuck off Alex, you're a brain tumor upon this site and I hope you get permabanned.BTW.....once again, look at how PATHETIC Trump has handled this situation. He has REFUSED to acknowledge McCain’s death or say anything even remotely nice about a man who was in HIS OWN PARTY! A man who regardless of political party is regarded as a military hero. And yet the sitting President can’t say a single nice word...why? Because McCain openly opposed Trump on SOME issues! Trump is just a loathsome human being...a narcissistic piece of shit with NO redeeming qualities. Even if I disagreed with 99% of McCain’s politics....and I probably did. At least McCain had SOME class and acted respectful...and thus even Democrats and liberals and other political opponents can respectfully say RIP or give some sort of condolences. When Trump dies....it will NOT be like that...you will see literal cheers and people joyful that the world has been rid of such a terrible person. You reap what you sow. |
Lost_VikingAug 27, 2018 9:32 PM
|
More topics from this board
Sticky: » The Current Events Board Will Be Closed on Friday JST ( 1 2 3 4 5 ... Last Page )Luna - Aug 2, 2021 |
272 |
by traed
»»
Aug 5, 2021 5:56 PM |
|
» Third shot of Sinovac COVID-19 vaccine offers big increase in antibody levels: study ( 1 2 )Desolated - Jul 30, 2021 |
50 |
by Desolated
»»
Aug 5, 2021 3:24 PM |
|
» Western vaccine producers engage in shameless profiteering while poorer countries are supplied mainly by China.Desolated - Aug 5, 2021 |
1 |
by Bourmegar
»»
Aug 5, 2021 3:23 PM |
|
» NLRB officer says Amazon violated US labor lawDesolated - Aug 3, 2021 |
17 |
by kitsune0
»»
Aug 5, 2021 1:41 PM |
|
» China Backs Cuba in Saying US Should Apply Sanctions To ItselfDesolated - Aug 5, 2021 |
10 |
by Desolated
»»
Aug 5, 2021 1:36 PM |