DebateGate

General Category => 3DHS => Topic started by: Christians4LessGvt on July 15, 2010, 04:40:12 PM

Title: Brought to you by Karl Marx!
Post by: Christians4LessGvt on July 15, 2010, 04:40:12 PM
Report: Amputations without anesthesia in NKorea
 
Jul 15, 4:50 AM (ET)

By HYUNG-JIN KIM

SEOUL, South Korea (AP) - North Korea's health care system is in shambles with doctors sometimes performing amputations without anesthesia and working by candlelight in hospitals lacking essential medicine, heat and power, a human rights watchdog said Thursday.

North Korea's state health care system has been deteriorating for years amid the country's economic difficulties. Many of its 24 million people reportedly face health problems related to chronic malnutrition, such as tuberculosis and anemia, Amnesty International said in a report on the state of the health care system.

A 24-year-old defector from northeastern Hamkyong province told Amnesty that a doctor amputated his left leg from the calf down without anesthesia after his ankle was crushed by a moving train when he fell from one of the cars.

"Five medical assistants held my arms and legs down to keep me from moving. I was in so much pain that I screamed and eventually fainted from pain," said the man, identified only by his family name, Hwang. "I woke up one week later in a hospital bed."

The report was based on interviews with more than 40 North Koreans who have defected, mostly to South Korea, as well as organizations and health care professionals who work with North Koreans. Amnesty researchers did not have access to North Korea, one of the world's most closed countries.

There was no immediate reaction from North Korea, which is sensitive to outside criticism and usually responds through its state-controlled media, though sometimes days or even weeks later.

North Korea says it provides free medical care to all its citizens. But Amnesty said most interviewees said they or a family member had given doctors cigarettes, alcohol or money to receive medical care.

Doctors often work without pay, have little or no medicine to dispense and reuse scant medical supplies, the report said.

"People in North Korea don't bother going to the hospital if they don't have money because everyone knows that you have to pay for service and treatment," a 20-year-old North Korean defector named Rhee was quoted as saying. "If you don't have money, you die."

Many interviewees said they had to walk as long as two hours to get to a hospital for surgery, said Norma Kang Muico, an Amnesty researcher and author of the report.

North Koreans are numbed to what was wrong with the health system, because "things keep progressively getting worse, or even staying the same but at that low level," she told reporters in Seoul on Thursday.

Amnesty blamed failed or counterproductive government policies and said North Korea should cooperate with aid donors to ensure transparency in the distribution of food assistance and guarantee that medical personnel are paid adequately.

The group also recommended that countries such as South Korea, the U.S., China, Japan and Russia ensure that humanitarian assistance in North Korea is based on need and is not subject to political conditions.

Associated Press writer Sangwon Yoon contributed to this report.

[urlhttp://apnews.myway.com/article/20100715/D9GVCNNO0.html][/url]
Title: Re: Brought to you by Karl Marx!
Post by: Plane on July 15, 2010, 06:46:09 PM
They have doctors?



Seriously can a doctor be a really good doctor without communication with the outer world and the later developments?
Title: Re: Brought to you by Karl Marx!
Post by: Michael Tee on July 16, 2010, 12:04:40 PM
Now that we've heard about medicine in the least developed Communist country, I am awaiting the report on medicine in the least developed capitalist country.  Haiti, anyone?  Or is it somewhere in Africa?
Title: Re: Brought to you by Karl Marx!
Post by: Xavier_Onassis on July 16, 2010, 01:30:28 PM
Well, it is true that North Korea is the least developed Communist country. It is also the poorest run Communist country.

The people of North Korea are not much different than the people of South Korea, which is no longer a Third World country. The form that Communism took in NK was perhaps as unsuited to the people as any government anywhere. It claims to be a Communist country, but in reality it is a militaristic hereditary monarchy. The first Kim was perhaps a good military strategist and propagandist. His son seems to be only good at the latter. Of course, military conquest of the South by the North is rather impossible with the US there, and the South well supplied with arms.

There is no excuse for starvation in North Korea. It is simply very poorly managed. Everyone would be better off if both countries were joined under the present South Korean system, EXCEPT, of course, for Kim and his military bureaucracy. If unification occurred, generals would have to resign themselves to driving cabs in Pyongyang or maybe teaching history courses about how bad and what diverse ways the North screwed everything up.

You make an excellent point about how NK should be compared with Haiti or Chad or some other backward place where capitalism has failed just as communism has failed in NK.
Title: Re: Brought to you by Karl Marx!
Post by: Christians4LessGvt on July 16, 2010, 05:32:31 PM
Now that we've heard about medicine in the least developed Communist country, I am awaiting the report on medicine in the least developed capitalist country.  Haiti, anyone?  Or is it somewhere in Africa?

The problem with the analogy is...where has communism ever made it to the top? All the countries at the top,
providing wonderful standards of living are democratic, free-market, pro-business. You and XO cling to lame logic.
You pretend because some corrupt supposed capitalist countries are failures that capitalism and communism
are morally relative....I realize moral relativism is the Left's best friend.....but....sure both leagues have some poor performers....but only one league enables it's society to propel it's citizens to very high standards of living across the board. Sure there is a mix at the bottom....but there is no mix at the top....it is all democratic countries at the top.

Read the list...it don't lie!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_Human_Development_Index (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_Human_Development_Index)
Title: Re: Brought to you by Karl Marx!
Post by: Plane on July 17, 2010, 01:11:50 AM
Has Hati been capitolist and free market?

Or have they labored under generations of bad government that was confiscatory?

Communism is not the only way to be bad , and some things that are not communism are also not capitolism.


Line up the most successfull socialist economys , from Northern Europe mostly .

Don't these economys have a history of growing up in a capitolist mode and converting partially to socialism?

Where is there a poor country that became socialist and did anything other than remain poor or grow poorer?

Is it wrong to call central planning for economys inflexable and inefficient in comparison to dispersed decision making power?

Why shouldn't power to the people mean that decisions are made at the lowest level that they cna be made at?
Title: Re: Brought to you by Karl Marx!
Post by: Michael Tee on July 17, 2010, 04:18:16 AM
<<...where has communism ever made it to the top? All the countries at the top,
providing wonderful standards of living are democratic, free-market, pro-business. >>

Communism, as in China, will top all lists.  Besides even today, the countries at the top of the list are "mixed economies," i.e. with some features of socialism and some of capitalism.

<<You and XO cling to lame logic.
You pretend because some corrupt supposed capitalist countries are failures that capitalism and communism
are morally relative>>

You are confused.  You claimed that North Korea was an example of communism's failure.  I normally don't speak for  XO, but in this case I think it's pretty obvious that both of us objected to your selecting the worst of all communist countries as an example of the failure of "communism" generally and suggested that it makes just as much sense to select the worst of all capitalist countries and point to it as evidence of the failure of capitalism generally.  That's a pretty simple argument and I'm kind of surprised that you don't seem to get it.

<<....I realize moral relativism is the Left's best friend.....>>

The argument had nothing to do with "moral relativism," but merely pointed out the absurdity of impeaching a system by using the example of its poorest performer.

<<but....sure both leagues have some poor performers....but only one league enables it's society to propel it's citizens to very high standards of living across the board. >>

But that is the whole point - - capitalism does NOT "propel its citizens to very high standards of living across the board."  The highest inequities and the deepest poverty is found in capitalist systems, not communism.  Haiti is the classic example but even the U.S. has plenty of evidence of its own citizens whose lives are pure shit and who live in shit-holes.

<<Sure there is a mix at the bottom....but there is no mix at the top....it is all democratic countries at the top.>>

That's just historical accident.  All those countries were around for hundreds of years, communist systems of government not even a hundred.  Considering the unprecedented progress of Communist China alone, it's obvious that the people at the top are more or less static, holding the places they've always held for hundreds of years, while China in only a few decades is rapidly catching up with all of them.   Besides you keep switching from "democratic" to "capitalistic" and back again.  While the countries at the top of the list are ostensibly "democratic" now, some of them were built on genocide and slavery, most prominently your own country, and how "democratic" are genocide and slavery?  Others may be "democratic" but are not purely "capitalistic."   

History is not static, it's dynamic, always in flux and you are like the guy at the track whose horse is ahead at the quarter-mile post, screaming, "We won!  We won!"  Sorry, but I just don't buy it.  My money's on the other horse.
Title: Re: Brought to you by Karl Marx!
Post by: Christians4LessGvt on July 17, 2010, 04:40:28 PM
"Communism, as in China, will top all lists"  

I agree the more and more China gets away from Communism it will prosper more and more.
The last decade is a perfect example of this....become pro-business and prosper...2+2=4
But Communism in China is doomed if progress continues....catch 22 for the Commies
Wealthy, high standards of living, business friendly nations just are not communist.

Besides even today, the countries at the top of the list are "mixed economies,"
 i.e. with some features of socialism and some of capitalism.


More relativsm....plus NONE in the Top 20 are anywhere close to being communist.
The countries at the top are much closer to the US in typical lives of citizens than they are to China/Cuba/North Korea.
It's just a fact...communist can not get there.....the Gold Medal never comes to that system.
Basically communism cant progress beyond shithole status in standards of living and capitalism & democracy can.
Communism is a dying theory....mainly because it doesn't work....it doesn't/cant produce top winning results.
Freedom is basic human need/desire....non-freedom can not sustain itself over time.

You are confused.  You claimed that North Korea was an example of communism's failure.  

It is one example of many. North Korea proclaims itself communist. And it is communist and it is a big big failure.

I normally don't speak for  XO, but in this case I think it's pretty obvious that both of us objected
to your selecting the worst of all communist countries as an example of the failure of "communism"
generally and suggested that it makes just as much sense to select the worst of all capitalist countries
and point to it as evidence of the failure of capitalism generally.  That's a pretty simple argument and
I'm kind of surprised that you don't seem to get it


I dont "get it" because it is faulty logic.
What you describe in Haiti & other "so called capitalistic" countries are fundamentally acts of government
enforced policy, which is not the free market capitalism. What you see as "capitalism" is actually a form of
state capitalism, mercantilism, Fascism, or oligarchic dicatatorship.You miss the fundamental point of capitalism
which is freedom.

The argument had nothing to do with "moral relativism," but merely pointed out the absurdity
of impeaching a system by using the example of its poorest performer.


What is absurd is dismissing the list that clearly shows what works best.

But that is the whole point - - capitalism does NOT "propel its citizens to very high standards of living across the board."  

When it is true capitalism, freedom, and democratic...yes it does.....LOOK AT THE LIST!
Standards of living are "across the board" measurements.
Because there are poor in so called capitalist societies & poor in communist countries
does not mean they are nearly the same or the misery is the same.

Is success 100%?....Obviosuly no.
But 80% success is a hell of a lot better than 10% success.

Where are the Communist on that list? Where?....Just "bad luck" for 100 years?.....LOL

The highest inequities and the deepest poverty is found in capitalist systems, not communism.  

LOL....there are almost no middle classes in Communist countries....
It's either a few elites at the top and then everybody else the peasant living a pathetic life.
All Poor and few elites vs huge middle class, small poor class, and rich.....ANY QUESTIONS?

Haiti is the classic example but even the U.S. has plenty of evidence of its own citizens whose
lives are pure shit and who live in shit-holes.


I guess "shit hole" is a relative term....I doubt many in Detroit would wanna trade
positions with a Haitian, but plenty of Haitains would gladly trade with a poor Detroit resident.

That's just historical accident.  

Funny how that works....that communism is ALWAYS the one with the "bad luck"

All those countries were around for hundreds of years, communist systems of government not even a hundred.

Whose fault is that they took the wrong route and lost several generations?

Besides you keep switching from "democratic" to "capitalistic" and back again.  

Yes exactly

While the countries at the top of the list are ostensibly "democratic" now, some of them were
built on genocide and slavery, most prominently your own country, and how "democratic" are genocide and slavery?
 

Almost all societies are built on "genocide".
Almost every nation of people "ran somebody off" that was there first.
Of course as usual you only see western so called "genocide".
But Russia, China, purged millions and millions.
There are many more million slaves today in 2010 that there ever was in the US....where's the outrage?...lol
It's nothing new or unsual in world history...
Except you always use it pretending it is the reason for the West kicking your ass up and down the court.
Cant win the game? Invent some excuse.

History is not static, it's dynamic, always in flux and you are like the guy at the track whose horse
is ahead at the quarter-mile post, screaming, "We won!  We won!"  Sorry, but I just don't buy it.


And your like the guy that keeps losing for decades and keeps saying "you just wait"...if...one day...blah blah blah

"My money's on the other horse"

My money is on the horse that as it becomes less communist it is becoming more successful.
China will not be Communist in 25 years for sure....maybe not in 10 years.

Title: Re: Brought to you by Karl Marx!
Post by: Michael Tee on July 17, 2010, 08:30:56 PM
<<I agree the more and more China gets away from Communism it will prosper more and more.
The last decade is a perfect example of this....become pro-business and prosper...2+2=4>>

No, you are first assuming that Communism has no flexibility to it at all, so when you see change, you see the beginning of a linear progression away from communism rather than a mere course correction.  The system of communism is still in place, the CP firmly in control, independent entrepreneurship operating under government control and with strict guidelines up to and including capital punishment for "businessmen" who cheat, take bribes or steal from the state.   In both Cuba and the U.S.S.R. the communist system was flexible enough to allow for limited entrepreneurship when the circumstances seemed to call for it, most notably Lenin's NEP (New Economic Policy) in the 1920s - - concessions that were limited and then cut back as soon as they no longer served their purposes.  Following the curtailment of the NEP in the U.S.S.R., the gross national product of the U.S.S.R. grew annually by double digits in the 1930s when the rest of the developed world was still in the grips of a depression.

<<But Communism in China is doomed if progress continues....catch 22 for the Commies>>

I guess that depends on what you call "progress" - - I'd say Communism would be doomed in China if the current system did not produce a tide that lifts all boats and merely produces a small commercial-industrial class that grows powerful enough to subvert the CP and the role of Marxist-Leninist theory in the Party.  What you treat as an absolute certainty, I only recognize as a threat needing to be guarded against and contained.

<<Wealthy, high standards of living, business friendly nations just are not communist.>>

I don't see any incompatibility between high standards of living and communism.  Communism aims to lift all citizens out of poverty, so that each has decent living quarters, food, medicine, education and employment.  That is something that I would consider a "high" standard of living in comparison with the misery that envelopes most of the capitalist-ruled world today.  "Wealthy" is a concept that embodies exploitation of the many by the few - - what is "wealth" when all are "wealthy?"  "Wealth" would always mean a division between rich and poor, so that some are driven by desperation to work in the fields to feed those who do not work at all; some are forced to become servants or build luxury products for those who don't need to work.  So "wealthiness" in fact does not go with communism, but I don't think a society that produces "wealth," i.e., economic equality, is anything to be aimed for.

<<More relativsm....plus NONE in the Top 20 are anywhere close to being communist.
<<The countries at the top are much closer to the US in typical lives of citizens than they are to China/Cuba/North Korea.>>

They are all "democratic" in that they do not overtly penalize individuals for the expression of their ideas, but in terms of their economies they have clearly adopted socialist ideas and practices, which is the essence of a "mixed economy."  The more socialism they have adopted, the more they cluster near the top of the list.

<<It's just a fact...communist can not get there.....the Gold Medal never comes to that system.>>

BFD.  The Communist system was not designed to lift any country to the top of some think-tank's list.  It was devised to end poverty and the exploitation of man by man.  It was devised to lift countries out of the worst conditions of capitalism, which it has almost always done.

<<Basically communism cant progress beyond shithole status in standards of living and capitalism & democracy can.>>

Obviously the examples of the U.S.S.R., Cuba and China are just buried so that such a statement can be made.  The U.S.S.R., China AND Cuba were all lifted out of shit-hole status, Cuba to a probably best-in-region status, Russia from nothing to a leading military-industrial power and China half-way to being a world-beater.  That progress, of China, was more or less steady almost from the beginning of the Communist system there.   In the early 1950s, they drove the U.S. Army from the North Korean border all the way back into South Korea, in the Sixties, they took some false steps under Chairman Mao but regained the path and followed under CP leadership to the position they now enjoy.  When they need flexibility, they are flexible, when that flexibility has served its purpose, they straighten out the bends.  If it were otherwise, the CP could say at this point, OK, our business class have brought us this far, now let's turn it over to them to finish the ride to the top.   That is NOT going to happen.  It is not the businessmen who control China, it is the CP.  The businessmen work UNDER the CP and it is the CP and their skillful use of permitted entrepreneurship when required, that has caused China's success.

<<Communism is a dying theory....mainly because it doesn't work....it doesn't/cant produce top winning results.>>

Ha ha ha!!!  Two words:  China.  Cuba.  THOSE are "top winning results."  Not "Norway."  Not "Sweden."  Those are temporary results of the accidents of history.

<<Freedom is basic human need/desire....non-freedom can not sustain itself over time.>>

Who knows?  This may be right.  Maybe at some future point men will want to be free when their economic problems have been solved by the application of the Communist system and all men and women truly have become economic equals.  In the meantime, Communists know that it is the leadership of the Party under Marxist-Leninist principles that will provide the surest path out of capitalist exploitation and inequities and that saboteurs of the Revolution will abuse "freedom" in any way they can to bring down the Revolution. 

For sure the capitalists do NOT believe in "freedom" - - they buy up all the media of communication, consolidate them and have worked out a system of perfect thought repression in which all important media purvey the same message with very careful control over dissenting voices, allowing only enough dissent to enable them to deny accusations of media control of the message.

<<What you describe in Haiti & other "so called capitalistic" countries are fundamentally acts of government
enforced policy, which is not the free market capitalism. What you see as "capitalism" is actually a form of
state capitalism, mercantilism, Fascism, or oligarchic dicatatorship.You miss the fundamental point of capitalism
which is freedom.>>

LOL.  Haiti and other countries like it are in fact perfect examples of capitalism in action.  There is no state alternative to the provision of the basic necessities of life to the population, all of whom are forced to deal with various profit-making entities for their food, shelter, health-care and education.  An enforced poverty ensures an endless supply of cheap labour for whatever private enterprise chooses to produce, including servants and menials to serve the rich.  Capitalism has nothing to do with freedom.  Capitalism can thrive side-by-side with slavery, and has done so.

<<What is absurd is dismissing the list that clearly shows what works best.>>

No, the list shows what has produced a certain kind of society that you and others like you appear to like; it does not show what produces the most egalitarian society, one with the fairest and most equal distribution of the national wealth.

<<Standards of living are "across the board" measurements.>>

No they are averages.  As you yourself probably realize, an average can be "weighted" by very high scores at one end of the scale, which pull up the national average without indicating the true index of misery at the bottom of the society.

<<Because there are poor in so called capitalist societies & poor in communist countries
does not mean they are nearly the same or the misery is the same.>>

The fact is that the gap between rich and poor is highest in the capitalist countries and lowest in the communist countries.  The whole aim and purpose of Communism is that NOBODY at the bottom should be miserable.  The aim of capitalism is that anyone who wants to should be free to pursue the top end of the scale without any limits, regardless of what happens at the bottom end.

<<But 80% success is a hell of a lot better than 10% success.>>

ROTFLMFAO.  80% success?  Success for whom?  Are you joking?  HERE is the real story of what works in America:

<<There is very little data about the distribution of wealth in America.  There is one source, the Survey of Consumer Finances, sponsored by the Federal Reserve Board,  that does provide data from 1983.
<<These data suggest that wealth is concentrated in the hands of a small number of families. The wealthiest 1 percent of families owns roughly 34.3%  of the nation's net worth, the top 10% of families owns over 71%, and the bottom 40% of the population owns way less than 1%. >>
http://www.faculty.fairfield.edu/faculty/hodgson/courses/so11/stratification/income&wealth.htm (http://www.faculty.fairfield.edu/faculty/hodgson/courses/so11/stratification/income&wealth.htm)

<<LOL....there are almost no middle classes in Communist countries....>>

No, because most are in "worker" status or equivalent - - even medical doctors are salaried on a par with more conventional "workers."

<<It's either a few elites at the top and then everybody else the peasant living a pathetic life.>>

Sorry that is exactly capitalism, that is the Congo Republic, that is Honduras, that is Haiti, that is . . . just about every capitalist country that is NOT on your "list."

<<All Poor and few elites vs huge middle class, small poor class, and rich.....ANY QUESTIONS?>>

Yeah, sure I've got a question, which country has the "small poor class," the one where 40% of the nation own less than 1% of the wealth?  BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!

<<I guess "shit hole" is a relative term....I doubt many in Detroit would wanna trade
positions with a Haitian, but plenty of Haitains would gladly trade with a poor Detroit resident.>>

Yes, there is that difference between rich nation and poor nation.  Population, huge land area, natural resources etc. still count for something, don't they?  But the slums of capitalist America are still shit-holes just like the slums of capitalist Haiti.

<<Funny how that works....that communism is ALWAYS the one with the "bad luck">>

Hear any Chinese complaining recently about their country's "bad luck?"

<<Whose fault is that they took the wrong route and lost several generations?>>

Yeah?  Which route did the U.S.A. take that resulted in 1% of the people owning over a third of its wealth?  Was that the right route?  LOL.

<<Almost all societies are built on "genocide".>>

Nonsense.

<<Almost every nation of people "ran somebody off" that was there first.>>

True but that's not genocide.

<<Of course as usual you only see western so called "genocide".
<<But Russia, China, purged millions and millions.>>

That's not genocide, it's class war.  And the "millions and millions" are just bullshit Cold War propaganda.  If you want to start calling every war "genocide" then we have to add the total number of victims of U.S. wars to the toll that they already racked up from real genocide.

<<There are many more million slaves today in 2010 that there ever was in the US....where's the outrage?...lol>>

I dunno - -maybe first you better show me, where are the slaves?  lol

<<Cant win the game? Invent some excuse.>>

What are you talking about?  The Communists ARE winning the game.  That's why your country is fucked and hovering at the brink of insolvency.

<<And your like the guy that keeps losing for decades and keeps saying "you just wait"...if...one day...blah blah blah>>

Yeah.  "Decades."  That's the key word.  The prosperity of other countries was built over centuries and you think it should only take communism a few decades to catch up if it's got what it takes.  So it takes more than decades.  BFD.  The fact is, they're on the way up and you and your capitalist friends are on the way down.

<<My money is on the horse that as it becomes less communist it is becoming more successful.
<<China will not be Communist in 25 years for sure....maybe not in 10 years.>>

Their loss if they're not.  Anyone who doubts that can look at the fate of Russia.  Anytime China wants to lose its world stature, become a pawn of the Americans with NATO bases ringing it on all sides, it can always go the Russian route and throw Communism under the bus like those schmucks in Russia have done.  Personally I think they're too smart and too tough for that.
Title: Re: Brought to you by Karl Marx!
Post by: Plane on July 17, 2010, 10:41:17 PM
<<...where has communism ever made it to the top? All the countries at the top,
providing wonderful standards of living are democratic, free-market, pro-business. >>

Communism, as in China, will top all lists.  Besides even today, the countries at the top of the list are "mixed economies," i.e. with some features of socialism and some of capitalism.

Where does it fit in a ranking of income per capata?

In China the infant is the middle class which is a new thing and poorly developed as anything to speak of.

China has a bunch of fabulously wealthy and a big buncha cheap labor with a huge void in the middle where the middle class will have to show up gradually .

Part of the problem with this discussion is the meaning of "poor".


Quote
I don't see any incompatibility between high standards of living and communism.
Part of the problem with this discussion is the meaning of "poor".

99 % of Chinas population would meet the US definition of poor by means testing , If I could be on a US dole in China I wouldn't need much of a job.

China deserves an award for being "most improved " but we are talking about most improved since 1975 ,if you wanted to place this award on most improvement since 1945 the winner would be Japan.

Japan has slowed its improvement the last two decades , but it charged forward in the sixtys ,the seventys and eightys that it maintains the worlds second biggest economy even still and has a percapata income that is respectable even by American standards.

Japan and China were both taken down to a low level by the process of WWII, but Japan was exploited by the USA and didn't have a burdensome Mao type government to prevent its exploitation .

China had every other advantage , resorces and manpower , aid from the opposeing Super power why couldn't it grow at a rate simular to Japan?

There is a great Japaneese work ethic , but I beleive that the Chineese work ethic is not inferior , it was merely saddled with Communism to reduce its strength, China is shakeing off its communism like Forest Gump shook off his braces. The less communism the better off everyone there is, I consider it a rediculous idea that haveing partially escaped their communism that they would in the future  regress back into the less effective and more restrictive mode for no reason whatsoever.
Title: Re: Brought to you by Karl Marx!
Post by: Xavier_Onassis on July 18, 2010, 06:09:29 PM
There is a major difference with regard to China and other countries, and that is the huge size of the population. The US has about 300,000,000 people. Democracy in the US is limited by the huge population, but also by the fact that normally we only have two candidates in the elections that count. In comparison, take Costa Rica, which has something like 4,000,000 people, and several parties, that generally form alliances behind two or three candidates.

In Costa Rica, the individual's vote counts nearly 100 times as much as any citizen's vote does in the US, and 300 times as much as it would in China. Naturally, the percentage of eligible voters who vote is  higher in Costa Rica.

As I recall, China has 22 provinces and five or six autonomous regions, with populations that range from 95 million to maybe eight million.
So the individual vote is hardly likely to mean all that much to the average citizen. S long as the economy continues to expand and the standard of living improves, the population is unlikely to form any significant opposition, at meals not sufficient enough to overthrow or replace the current government. There are 23 official provinces, but the PRC government has nothing to do with running the 23rd province, Taiwan, which has 24 million people.

At some point, growth will have to slow down. At that point, the government will have to convince the people that it is doing as good as can be done. At the present moment, the growth rate has been over 8% and as high as 12% annually for a dozen years. No capitalist government can make a similar claim.
Title: Re: Brought to you by Karl Marx!
Post by: Christians4LessGvt on July 19, 2010, 01:19:15 PM
"The system of communism is still in place, the CP firmly in control, independent entrepreneurship operating under government control and with strict guidelines up to and including capital punishment for "businessmen" who cheat, take bribes or steal from the state"  

LOL....what are you talking about?...Corruption is rampant in China.

http://www.hrw.org/en/news/2010/05/13/chinese-corruption-hazardous-your-health (http://www.hrw.org/en/news/2010/05/13/chinese-corruption-hazardous-your-health)

Chinese citizens identify corruption as one of the public's top concerns!
"the ruling Chinese Communist Party (CCP) "one of the most corrupt organisations the world has ever witnessed"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corruption_in_the_People's_Republic_of_China (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corruption_in_the_People's_Republic_of_China)

"In both Cuba and the U.S.S.R. the communist system was flexible enough to allow for limited entrepreneurship when the circumstances seemed to call for it, most notably Lenin's NEP (New Economic Policy) in the 1920s - - concessions that were limited and then cut back as soon as they no longer served their purposes.  Following the curtailment of the NEP in the U.S.S.R., the gross national product of the U.S.S.R. grew annually by double digits in the 1930s when the rest of the developed world was still in the grips of a depression"

Yeah Russia has been such a great economic model.

I don't see any incompatibility between high standards of living and communism.

Then show me where one exists or ever has?
Talk is cheap....wealthy standards of living are "walking the walk"

Communism aims to lift all citizens out of poverty, so that each has decent living quarters,
food, medicine, education and employment.  


Yeah so many Microsoft Techie jobs in Cuba...or wait a minute maybe some web designs,
or Cisco, or Dells, or Southwest Airlines, or Walmart Corporation, or Fidelity Investments,
or FedEx-Kinkos, or Exxon, or Apple, or Nike, or General Electric, or Ford, or Home Depot,
or Lowes, or AT&T, UPS....ect ect ect ect....why I bet so many of those employed
here would trade it all in for what Cuba offers!

BFD.  

Yeah "BFD" for countries to reach the top of standards of living!  ::)
I tell you most of the world would love to be a part of that "BFD".

"The Communist system was not designed to lift any country to the top
of some think-tank's list.  It was devised to end poverty and the exploitation of man by man"


And it's done just the opposite. It has locked people into poverty.

That is NOT going to happen.  

It absolutely is going to happen.
The Chinese people, escpecially the younger generation wont be satisfied with a half-baked pie.

"It is not the businessmen who control China, it is the CP.  The businessmen work UNDER the CP"

Not for long.....

Ha ha ha!!!  Two words:  China.  Cuba.  THOSE are "top winning results."

And both have low standards of livings...so thats "winning results"?  ::)
Lets see some "Gold Medals"!
Not some "well at least we're not starving" awards

"For sure the capitalists do NOT believe in "freedom" - - they buy up all the media of communication"

Oh really?  Last time I checked Drudge is one of the most widely read sites in the world and it is owned
by Matt Drudge. There is a whole new world called the internet....btw brought to you by the western world.

"Capitalism can thrive side-by-side with slavery, and has done so"

But Communism is slavery

No, the list shows what has produced a certain kind of society that you and others like you appear to like;
it does not show what produces the most egalitarian society, one with the fairest and most equal distribution of the national wealth
.

The list produces the best results in the world. It's a scorecard and your way doesnt even show up
in the Top 20 and I doubt even the Top 40. It's an asskicking! Almost any sane person in a communist
country would like to live out their life in the contries on the list. Almost anyone in one of the countries
on the list could if they wanted move to a "workers paradise" like Cuba but they don't for good reason.

"No they are averages.  As you yourself probably realize, an average can be "weighted" by very high scores at
one end of the scale, which pull up the national average without indicating the true index of misery at the bottom
of the society.


So now you are claiming that Standards of Living or the Human Development Index are meaningless?
I guess when you are getting your ass kicked it's best to claim the test is unfair. You are implying
the poor in Norway would rather be in Cuba? Ha what a freaking joke!

"The fact is that the gap between rich and poor is highest in the capitalist countries
and lowest in the communist countries"


Not true, Capitalist countries like Japan, Italy, Norway, Denmark, Germany have greater
equality than most Communist countries.

But also because when no one is allowed to succeed it creates an un-natural low performance
Basically everyone is poor.
How can you have a gap when only the poor exist?
Communism enforces low standards of living.
No winners because everybody is forced to be a loser.
Very sad.

The whole aim and purpose of Communism is that NOBODY at the bottom should be miserable.

How's that working out in North Korea and many other countries that proclaim they are communists?

The aim of capitalism is that anyone who wants to should be free to pursue the top end of the scale
without any limits, regardless of what happens at the bottom end.


Without any limits? Yeah sure. I live those limits everyday 8-5...well really 7-6:30PM.
I've actually heard there are less limits on business in China now than in the US!

These data suggest that wealth is concentrated in the hands of a small number of families.

Thats true everywhere....there will always be an elite class, but the huge difference
is in the US and the others on the list there are huge middle classes with very
nice lives...in fact the middle class in the US would be considered "wealthy"
in many Communist countries.

No, because most are in "worker" status or equivalent - - even medical
doctors are salaried on a par with more conventional "workers."


And thats why there is so little innovation from Communist countries.
A Bill Gates or Steve Jobs are not motivated to create greatness.
It's no accident Bill Gates didn't come from Cuba!
I would have no interest in working as much & as hard as I do without the great reward.

<<It's either a few elites at the top and then everybody else the peasant living a pathetic life.>>

Yeah, sure I've got a question, which country has the "small poor class,"
the one where 40% of the nation own less than 1% of the wealth?  
BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!


It's called the middle class....you are confused....in Commi land it's either rich or poor,
in the US there is a huge middle class that lives quite well.

Yes, there is that difference between rich nation and poor nation.  
Population, huge land area, natural resources etc. still count for something,
don't they?
 

Excuses, excuses, excuses....
South Korea vs North Korea
Same people, same culture, same land...but results vastly different.
What was primary difference? ProBusiness vs Communist
Communism produced Shit Results!

How can it be any clearer that West Germany vs. East Germany.
Same people, same land, same climate, same culture, ...huge difference in results.
What was the difference?
ProBusiness Free Market vs Communism.
Communism produced SHIT RESULTS.

But the slums of capitalist America are still shit-holes just like the
slums of capitalist Haiti.


Haiti is a slum, the US is not.
You are equating because there are old cars in Cuba and old cars in the US it must be the same.
When in reality Cuba is only old cars.

Hear any Chinese complaining recently about their country's "bad luck?"

Yes! China is still a very very poor country. It's not anywhere near the Top 20.
They've gone from shit to "not as shitty".
When they provide a decent standard of living then talk to me.
And when and if they ever do....they wont be Communist for very long.


That's not genocide, it's class war.  

LOL...yeah sure Michael.
http://www.hawaii.edu/powerkills/NOTE2.HTM (http://www.hawaii.edu/powerkills/NOTE2.HTM)

I dunno - -maybe first you better show me, where are the slaves?

Mikey there are twenty-seven million humans in slavery today,
which is a greater number than at any other point in the world's history!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Modern_day_slavery (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Modern_day_slavery)

http://www.infoplease.com/spot/slavery1.html (http://www.infoplease.com/spot/slavery1.html)

the European involvement in the Trans Atlantic slave trade to the Americas lasted for just
over three centuries, the Arab involvement in the slave trade has lasted fourteen centuries,
and in some parts of the Muslim world is still continuing to this day.
http://blackeducator.blogspot.com/2008/01/arab-slave-trade-predates-european.html (http://blackeducator.blogspot.com/2008/01/arab-slave-trade-predates-european.html)

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/asia/inside-the-slave-trade-795307.html (http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/asia/inside-the-slave-trade-795307.html)

What are you talking about?  The Communists ARE winning the game.  
Yeah it really shows...how many on the list?
How many great new innovations from Communists?
How many great new companies from the Communists?
How many MRI machines?
How many relief planes in Haiti?
How much relief to the Tsunami victims?
http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/dis_fun_com_to_aid-disasters-funds-commited-tsunami-aid (http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/dis_fun_com_to_aid-disasters-funds-commited-tsunami-aid)

"only take communism a few decades to catch up"

Why is there any "catching up"?
Were they not on the same planet?
As Americans buy I-Phones by the millions, Cubans worry about toilet paper.
Doesn't that tell you something?

Plus now Commies have all the modern advantages/tools that Western Democracy
has produced to try and "catch up"...it's almost like we have to help the retarded
"catch up". Come along now this is an I-Phone....come along now this is an MRI
machine....come along now our leaders step down after serving and shake the
hands of the new elected President as opposed to the firing squad.

Title: Re: Brought to you by Karl Marx!
Post by: Xavier_Onassis on July 19, 2010, 02:44:28 PM
I do not think that the people of China will demand that the Communists give up the government unless there is a severe economic decline. No one in China is accustomed to regular elections. Korean and Taiwanese elections have been tinged with scandal, suicides and such in recent times, and this has not occurred in the PRC.

The fact is that the rapid growth rate in the PRC is in many ways BECAUSE the government has dictatorial powers over land use, labor relations, ethnic tensions, women's rights, worker compensation and worker health coverage. When a project has been approved, there are no legal obstacles, there are no strikes, there are no protests, certainly not as we see in the West.

Take T Boone Picken's gas and windmill project. It was stymied because the owners and operators of current oil-fired plants and transmission lines do not want to be replaced by Pickens. They neither like nor trust him (nor should they, as Picken's past dealings have often resulting in Pickens screwing everyone else). But overall, it is a wise and sound project. In the PRC, the obstacles would have been removed and the project would be installed, if it were deemed for the common good.
Title: Re: Brought to you by Karl Marx!
Post by: Michael Tee on July 19, 2010, 03:23:39 PM
First thing, I guess I had better draw the group's attention to an article in today's Globe & Mail about gated communities in China.  CU4 and the rest of the anti-Commies in this group are going to love the article - - the gates are around migrant worker communities clustered around China's big cities, and the aim is to keep the migrant workers inside the walls after evening curfew to prevent the spread of violent crime, which has grown by about 10% last year, the first year since 2001 when violent crime was on the increase.  WHOAHH, what is happening to the egalitarian communist ideal?  The gates are maintained by armed guards and a pass system allows the migrant workers access and egress to and from their own communities and their own homes.  Ouch!

OK to get back to CU4's points, I just want to respond briefly for the time being that the list of top "liveable" countries apart from being headed up by countries with mixed economies (i.e., part socialist, part free enterprise) may not represent the aims of the communist parties worldwide at this point in time.  The CPs are aiming to lift entire populations from poverty to some mid-level where basics such as education, health-care, housing and food are guaranteed to the entire population across the board, and maybe from there they can embark upon a competition, if the people see fit, to reach the top of the list.  Or maybe, figuring they have made enough material progress (to the point where more would be superfluous) they may decide that other priorities such as self-defence and a strong military, take priority over reaching the top of CU4's list.  The Scandinavian and Western European countries which do so well on the list, by and large do not have to worry about U.S. aggression to steal their resources and prevent their independent development.  In the countries which require Communist revolution to break out of the chains of foreign (usually U.S.) domination, the ever-present fear of U.S. aggression demands a strong military perhaps out of proportion to the nation's wealth, to counter the threat, which means that in their progress towards the top of the list, they get stalled somewhere between zero and the top of the bottom third or even fifth, while their self-defence capabilities have to be built.

CU4 makes the ironic distinction between Cuba's concern for ensuring an adequate toilet paper supply (probably mythical at this point) and Americans twisting their knickers over what kind of cell-phone to buy.  A ridiculous comparison, IMHO, since cell-phones are a frill and a luxury while the basics that the Cuban Revolution provides to every citizen (health care, education, etc.) are simply more highly prioritized than either cell-phones or toilet paper.  The Americans, in contrast to Cuba, have lots of toilet paper for all 300,000,000 ass-holes, but cannot be said to provide either free health care or free education equally to all of them.   Which system is the more advanced?  You figure it out.

In passing, whatever audience Matt Drudge has, it shrinks into total insignificance when compared to the audience of the monolithic MSM.  But nice try, CU4.  Spin it any way you want, the corporate stranglehold on the flow of information is here to stay, Matt Drudge and Huffington Post notwithstanding.
Title: Re: Brought to you by Karl Marx!
Post by: Xavier_Onassis on July 19, 2010, 06:18:26 PM
Come along now this is an I-Phone....come along now this is an MRI
machine....come along now our leaders step down after serving and shake the
hands of the new elected President as opposed to the firing squad.

=======================================================
The Soviets have not put any of their leaders in front of a firing squad for many decades. The same is also true for China. The Gang of Four was deposed, but they were not shot, or even jailed. Kim Il Sung died of old age, and passed the leadership on to Kim Jung Il. I do not think anyone was shot even in North Korea. Fidel stepped down and Raul took his place. CU4 is making crap up.

On the other hand, Panamanian leaders and Nicaraguan leaders have been jailed after their terms have expired and successors have been democratically elected.
Title: Re: Brought to you by Karl Marx!
Post by: Christians4LessGvt on July 19, 2010, 06:21:01 PM
"gated communities in China".

Michael my brother just moved into a beautiful gated community.
He leaves his garage door up worry free for hours at a time. He
doesn't need an alarm system. You see quite young children out
riding their bikes. No Pink Flamingos in the yards. No boats in driveways.
It's one of my goals, not sure I'll make it....but I be a trying!

"The Americans, in contrast to Cuba, have lots of toilet paper for all 300,000,000 ass-holes,
but cannot be said to provide either free health care or free education equally to all of them"


Can not? Or does not?
And in my opinion should not.
And by the way healthcare any where is not "free".
Money grows on trees is a leftist fanatsy.
Good and services are not "free", they cost even if the funds
to pay for them are stolen from others.

"Which system is the more advanced?  You figure it out"

Yeah...lets "figure it out" with a vote....a vote with feet.
Yeah I am sure if we put it to a vote tons of people going to US
Public Clinics would surely vote to move to the "workers paradise" in Cuba!   ::)
And I am sure tons of Cubans would stay in Cuba if given the choice! lol
Title: Re: Brought to you by Karl Marx!
Post by: Christians4LessGvt on July 19, 2010, 06:27:25 PM
Fidel stepped down and Raul took his place. CU4 is making crap up.

Yeah sure XO.....i'm just making up crap while you live in a fantasy land
of moral relativism....sure it be the same....lol....Fidel steps down his brother
steps in and if anyone tries to run for the same office he winds up in prison or dead.
Yep....just the same as President Bush shaking Obama's hand when the
transition took place after a free and open election. Your ability to make
excuses for tyrants is quite lame, but I realize you are a prosecutor on
most things American and a defense attorney for everything not American.
Title: Re: Brought to you by Karl Marx!
Post by: Xavier_Onassis on July 19, 2010, 06:48:10 PM
I was simply pointing out that the old crap about how one Communist leader assumes power and shoots the former leader is simply untrue. Stalin did not execute Lenin, though he did have Trotsy assassinated. But that was a long time ago.

You might as well claim that the English had this bloodthirsty tradition, since Cromwell did have Charles beheaded.

The fact is that China's leaders seem to be pretty good at economic development. Better than Juniorbush, for sure. And they have engaged in fewer wars than the US. After Korea, there was a brief spat or two with India, and some minor fiddling with the Vietnamese, but by and large, they have focused on development, and have been demonstrably good at it. They learned how NOT to run China from Mao, who was a disaster: the Great Leap Forward was a leap backward, and the Cultural Revolution was a similar bad call. But Mao ois dead, so they put his face on all the money, and let anyone who wishes admire him as a great leader. Just as they now admire Confucious, Buddha, Lao-Tse and others, as revered ancients.

Personally, I would not want to live in China or Cuba, but then again I am neither Chinese nor Cuban. Every country and every culture has its pluses and minuses.
Title: Re: Brought to you by Karl Marx!
Post by: Michael Tee on July 19, 2010, 09:09:34 PM
<<But Mao ois dead, so they put his face on all the money, and let anyone who wishes admire him as a great leader. Just as they now admire Confucious, Buddha, Lao-Tse and others, as revered ancients.>>

Mao is revered as the leader of the Long March and the Triumph of the Revolution.  He brought the Revolution to victory over Japanese and then KMT forces that tried, with U.S. help, to crush it.  In the Sixties, Mao was faced with the problem that faces all successful Communist revolutions, how the Party can weed out the opportunists and careerists from the True Believers once the Revolution had triumphed.  IMHO, this is one problem that Communism has never solved.  Mao's solution, Revolution Within the Revolution, obviously did not work and caused a lot of chaos.  I don't fault him for trying where others just ducked the problem.  I believe that the failure to solve this problem, more than any other reason, was the ultimate cause behind the downfall of Communism in the U.S.S.R., even though the proximate cause may well have been Western subversion and/or sabotage.  I believe Mao must have been fully aware of the pitfalls awaiting him, but may have figured, overestimating his own considerable leadership skills, that with proper leadership, Revolution Within the Revolution  had a reasonable chance of success, whereas by simply doing nothing to resolve the problem, the CP would have been signing the death warrant of Chinese Communism.  I still have a lot of love, admiration and respect for Chairman Mao and don't hold it against him that his experiment went wrong.  He at least dared to experiment.  He at least recognized the problem.  Also I don't buy into the bullshit about him and young virgins, the same kind of crap was circulated about Gandhi.  That kind of perversion is unfortunately  all too real among the low-life scum that make up the USMC, it is pure fantasy when applied to world leaders such as Gandhi and Mao.
Title: Re: Brought to you by Karl Marx!
Post by: Xavier_Onassis on July 20, 2010, 12:01:30 PM
Mao was a military genius. He was not an adequate administrator. The Cultural Revolution was a disaster and the Great Leap Forward in the opposite direction. I would say that China has succeeded more at Communism than the Soviets because China is a much more homogenous country: most people are Han Chinese, with just four main languages, and one dominant language (Mandarin) that was already accepted as the official one. The USSR was a hodgepodge of different ethnicities, many with deep and ancestral hatred of one another. The heavily populated region of China is rather more compact than the comparable areas of the USSR, which is much larger and much less thickly populated.

It hardly matters whether Mao (or Gandhi) enjoyed "young virgins" or not. Ataturk was blond, tall, homosexual and alcoholic to boot. But he was a great military AND a great political leader despite all his eccentricities. And Turkey was also quite homogenous.

Exceptional leaders tend to be, well exceptional in more than just one way. I suppose we lucked off with George Washington, as his only apparent diversion was bad teeth and owning slaves, or more specifically, his wife owning slaves. Lincoln had fits of depression, FDR was a cripple and a apparently a philanderer, Jefferson had Sally Hemmings, and no one claims that he mistreated her, and so what? All of them were superior to other presidents like Coolidge, Harrison, Hayes and Polk who seemed to be a lot more run of the mill.

 
Title: Re: Brought to you by Karl Marx!
Post by: Plane on July 20, 2010, 11:33:26 PM
Did Mao fight the Japaneese?


I didn't know that.
Title: Re: Brought to you by Karl Marx!
Post by: Michael Tee on July 21, 2010, 02:47:09 PM
<<Michael my brother just moved into a beautiful gated community.
He leaves his garage door up worry free for hours at a time. He
doesn't need an alarm system. You see quite young children out
riding their bikes. No Pink Flamingos in the yards. No boats in driveways.
It's one of my goals, not sure I'll make it....but I be a trying!>>

You just described the neighbourhood I live in, CU4, only without the gates.  No pink flamingos or boats in the drives, but one guy had a giant RV - - does that count?  I've only got one beef and that's with the emblems on my wife's SAAB, they keep getting stolen off the car.  The cops caught one kid once who had a big shopping bag full of them but catching the kid didn't change the situation, it's like the Taliban, they keep replenishing themselves from the bottom.  Maybe I should start catching the little bastards and waterboarding them.

Anyway, I thought you already reached your ideal - - didn't you post a photo of a dream house on some rustic lot out in the country?
Title: Re: Brought to you by Karl Marx!
Post by: Christians4LessGvt on July 21, 2010, 06:02:27 PM
"You just described the neighbourhood I live in, CU4, only without the gates"

Good for you...I am assuming the Liberal lives in a "Lily White" community as most do?

"No pink flamingos or boats in the drives, but one guy had a giant RV - - does that count?"

Hell no RV's....no fricking boats in the driveway either.
He told me they dont even allow pickup trucks in driveways over-night...only in garage.
Dont like the rules? Then dont move in!
I love HOA's.
Hate bozos that move in and say "oh I love this neighborhood...so nice...so pretty"
Then they proceed to break all the rules that made it the place they wanted to be!
Read the rules before you buy...dont like the rules...then dont buy and then bitch.

it's like the Taliban, they keep replenishing themselves from the bottom.
Maybe I should start catching the little bastards and waterboarding them.


Or maybe since when we catch murderer and we know there will be more murderers
we should throw our hands up and just pretend they dont exist?

"Anyway, I thought you already reached your ideal - -
didn't you post a photo of a dream house on some rustic lot out in the country?"


Well I bought the 3 acre lot, but have not built a house yet.
Obama'sEconomy has me scared to start a 2nd house project.
It's my "dream house" in the country, but it's still a dream.
I could do it...but it would be half debt....dont want any debt at this time.
Title: Re: Brought to you by Karl Marx!
Post by: Plane on July 21, 2010, 07:32:42 PM
Did Mao fight the Japaneese?


I didn't know that.

Anyone know where the important battles between the CCP and the imperial Japaneese occured?
I can't find much.

Quote
During World War II Mao did not fight the Japanese, but planned to divide China with Japan. http://www.kirjasto.sci.fi/mao.htm (http://www.kirjasto.sci.fi/mao.htm)

Quote
At the urging of the Soviet Union, the CCP joins the Guomindang in a second united front against the Japanese, although their uneasy alliance begins to break down late in 1938. Mao sees the alliance as an excellent opportunity for the development of the party. "Our determined policy is 70% self-development, 20% compromise, and 10% fight the Japanese," he states. .............
Following the defeat of the Japanese, hostilities between the Guomindang and CCP resume. The communists now have an advantage, having occupied vast areas formerly held by the Japanese and seized large quantities of surrendered Japanese arms. The communist army, which now numbers about one million troops, also receives supplies from the Soviet Union.

http://www.moreorless.au.com/killers/mao.html (http://www.moreorless.au.com/killers/mao.html)

Quote
In the Chinese People's War of Resistance Against Japan Memorial near the Marco Polo Bridge and in mainland Chinese textbooks, the People's Republic of China (PRC) claims that the Nationalists mostly avoided fighting the Japanese to preserve its strength for a final showdown with the Communist Party of China (CCP or CPC), while the Communists was the main military force in the Chinese resistance efforts against the Japanese invasion.[51] Recently, however, with a change in the political climate, the CCP has admitted that certain Nationalist generals made important contributions in resisting the Japanese. The official history in mainland China now states that the KMT fought a bloody, yet indecisive, frontal war against Japan, while the CCP engaged the Japanese forces in far greater numbers behind enemy lines. For the sake of Chinese reunification and appeasing the Republic of China (ROC) on Taiwan, the PRC has begun to "acknowledge" the Nationalists and the Communists as "equal" contributors, because the victory over Japan belonged to the Chinese people, rather than to any political party.[52]

Other scholars documented quite a different view. Such studies found evidence that the Communists actually played a minuscule role in the war against the Japanese compared to the Nationalists, and preserved its strength for a final showdown with the Kuomintang (KMT).[53] This view point gives the KMT credit for the brunt of the fighting, which is confirmed by Communists leader Zhou Enlai's secret report to Joseph Stalin in January 1940. This report stated that out of more than one million Chinese soldiers killed or wounded since the war began in 1937, only 40,000 were from the Communists Eighth Route Army and New Fourth Army. In other words, by the CCP's own account, the Communists had suffered a mere three percent of total casualties half way into the war.[54] This is because the Communists were not the main participants in any of the 22 major battles between China and Japan (involving more than 100,000 troops on both sides) and usually avoided open warfare (the Hundred Regiments Offensive and the Battle of Pingxingguan are notable exceptions), preferring to fight in small squads to harass the Japanese supply lines. In comparison, right from the beginning of the war the Nationalists committed their best troops (including the 36th, 87th, 88th divisions, the crack divisions of Chiang's Central Army) to defend Shanghai from the Japanese, and continue to deploy most of their forces to fight the Japanese even as the Communists changed their strategy to engage mainly in a political offensive against the Japanese and declared that the CCP should "save and preserve our strength and wait for favorable timing" by the end of 1941.[55] The Japanese considered the KMT rather than the Communists as their main enemy[56] and bombed the Nationalist wartime capital of Chongqing to the point that it was the most heavily bombed city in the world to date.[57]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Sino-Japanese_War (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Sino-Japanese_War)
Title: Re: Brought to you by Karl Marx!
Post by: Plane on July 21, 2010, 07:35:00 PM
"...even though the proximate cause may well have been Western subversion and/or sabotage. .........................."


How was the west more resistant to subversion than the east was?
Title: Re: Brought to you by Karl Marx!
Post by: Xavier_Onassis on July 21, 2010, 10:27:46 PM

How was the west more resistant to subversion than the east was?

China was in a state of almost permanent chaos, war and invasion from the early 1900's until the final triumph of Mao in 1949.

49 years of chaos makes subversion easier than only a few years, I imagine.
Title: Re: Brought to you by Karl Marx!
Post by: Plane on July 21, 2010, 11:21:16 PM

How was the west more resistant to subversion than the east was?

China was in a state of almost permanent chaos, war and invasion from the early 1900's until the final triumph of Mao in 1949.

49 years of chaos makes subversion easier than only a few years, I imagine.


Doesn't match the facts I know.

Didn't the CCP acheive a very good controll of the Nation and a very tough seal of the border?

When was it harder to infiltrate the US than infiltrate China?
Title: Re: Brought to you by Karl Marx!
Post by: Michael Tee on July 21, 2010, 11:23:41 PM
<<Good for you...I am assuming the Liberal lives in a "Lily White" community as most do?>>

Going from the corner house to the one two houses away in the other direction, you have:  Persian, Jewish, Jewish (us), Persian, Italian.  The only other people in the block that I know are:   WASP, Italian, Jewish, Chinese all the way to the other corner.  Lots that I don't know.  No blacks but plenty of Asians, mostly Chinese.  Possibly now the Chinese kids outnumber the white kids.   It certainly isn't "lily white," even the whites seem to be mostly Jews, Persians and Italians.  We only know one really Anglo-Saxon couple in the whole block, although the house next door that's Jewish now had two successive Anglo-Saxon families before the Jewish couple moved in.  We all get along fine.  Across the road are three Anglo-Saxon families in a row, then a mixed Jewish-Japanese couple, then Jewish, then Mormon (of mixed German, South African and Scottish background.)  

I don't know why you think liberals live in "Lily White" communities - - we relish and cherish diversity.  There are blacks in the same subdivision but they live seven or eight blocks away from us, in subsidized housing.  The street is roughly two-thirds white and one-third black.

<<Hell no RV's....no fricking boats in the driveway either.
<<He told me they dont even allow pickup trucks in driveways over-night...only in garage.>>

I'm absolutely amazed.  I don't think there's a community in all of Canada where there is that much control over how people can use their own homes!!!  I was in Dallas, Texas about thirty years ago looking into some housing developments there and I was totally amazed at the lack of controls even then - - a guy could open up a full-service garage in his own home, even if it was in the middle of a residential block and none of the neighbours could do a God-damn thing to stop him.  I always figured that Americans were a lot freer than Canadians in how they could use their own properties, because we had some pretty restrictive zoning by-laws in Toronto but absolutely nothing like what you are telling me now.

<<Dont like the rules? Then dont move in!
<<I love HOA's.>>

HOA's? ? ? ? ?

<<Hate bozos that move in and say "oh I love this neighborhood...so nice...so pretty"
<<Then they proceed to break all the rules that made it the place they wanted to be!
<<Read the rules before you buy...dont like the rules...then dont buy and then bitch.>>

Well, I don't think my neighbour should be able to open up an autobody shop in my block, or even a bakery, but I don't see anything wrong with a boat in the drive or even pink flamingos on the lawn if that's what the guy likes.  I can't imagine any of my neighbours putting up pink flamingos, but if that's what they want in their own front yard, God bless 'em.

<<Or maybe since when we catch murderer and we know there will be more murderers
we should throw our hands up and just pretend they dont exist?>>

I think the first thing you've got to realize is that you've got plenty of hit teams and death squads doing just the same as they are.  The essence of the dispute is political, so the sooner you realize that and move towards a political solution, the faster the conflict will resolve.  They aren't any more "murderers" than you are, so I'd say lose the self-righteous attitude and get down to brass tacks.  Don't forget, they think that you guys are the "murderers" and so if you each pursue a goal of catching the "murderers" and "punishing" them for their alleged misdeeds, this conflict will never end.

<<Well I bought the 3 acre lot, but have not built a house yet.
<<Obama'sEconomy has me scared to start a 2nd house project.
<<It's my "dream house" in the country, but it's still a dream.
<<I could do it...but it would be half debt....dont want any debt at this time.>>

Tough decision.  The Americans I talk to don't think the housing market's bottomed out yet, but who the hell knows?  I think it's more important to keep your eye on the local real estate market because it could be way off the national averages.  Best of luck, whichever way you decide to go.
Title: Re: Brought to you by Karl Marx!
Post by: Plane on July 21, 2010, 11:35:29 PM
Home Owners Associations.

Take dues and enforce the covenant.

Sometimes run by the worst sort of petty tyrant.
Title: Re: Brought to you by Karl Marx!
Post by: BT on July 22, 2010, 12:01:44 AM
Home Owners Associations.

Busybody Barnie Fife's with a bullet. And they have foreclosure powers.
Title: Re: Brought to you by Karl Marx!
Post by: Xavier_Onassis on July 22, 2010, 11:11:39 AM
Doesn't match the facts I know.

Then your facts are wrong. Observe, i was referring to the years 1910-1949

Didn't the CCP acheive a very good controll of the Nation and a very tough seal of the border?

Yes, but that was after 1950, at the earliest.

When was it harder to infiltrate the US than infiltrate China?

Between 1910 and 1949, as I said.
Title: Re: Brought to you by Karl Marx!
Post by: Christians4LessGvt on July 26, 2010, 11:28:06 AM
sorry i dont want this kind of crap sitting in a drive-way across the street from my house!

(http://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y273/ItsZep/Politics/c04cfde2.jpg)

(http://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y273/ItsZep/Politics/a25cc993.jpg)

Title: Re: Brought to you by Karl Marx!
Post by: Amianthus on July 26, 2010, 12:55:04 PM
sorry i dont want this kind of crap sitting in a drive-way across the street from my house!

Then buy the house across the street.

I know a guy who did this once. He was eating breakfast and noticed that the previously empty lot outside his kitchen window (which was also the same view from his den) had construction equipment about to break ground on a new house. He called his lawyer and a real estate agent and bought the lot and had a load of trees planted on it.
Title: Re: Brought to you by Karl Marx!
Post by: Christians4LessGvt on July 26, 2010, 01:27:09 PM
Then buy the house across the street.
AMI funny you should say that because thats exactly what I am trying to do
across the lake from my lake lot. the people that own it I can envision
if they could would put a mobile home on the lot, but deed restrictions
wont allow them to do that. but if they ever build I imagine the house
would not be much to look at...so I am going to try and buy the lot
from them during this weak economy so no one could ever build an
eye-sore right across the pond from me. This is what I dont want!

(http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_3gdanHd2bwU/SwWLlmaMvVI/AAAAAAAAABo/tXLfvolnMys/s1600/Ugly+house.jpg)

Title: Re: Brought to you by Karl Marx!
Post by: Plane on July 26, 2010, 06:34:17 PM
sorry i dont want this kind of crap sitting in a drive-way across the street from my house!

(http://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y273/ItsZep/Politics/c04cfde2.jpg)

(http://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y273/ItsZep/Politics/a25cc993.jpg)




I like this boat!

I like the rig and the engine , so you live near McGuiver?

Looks as if it is fitted out for duck hunting.


I had a friend once who built a homebuilt aircraft and hung a Ford 302 V-8 on the frount.

I wouldn't want to live near anyone who would squalk if I started building something in the yard , experiment is half the fun.