The Commies Finally Get It!

[Plane]

The central mover was the profit , this was a lot of profit , it is a miracle that the system was ever shut down.The profit wasn't over .


maybe thier are aspects about slavery that eventually makes it non-viable. A good guess is slavery throught the years would not stay the same. labor responsiblity/complexity will of course grow. eventually many will not be farm labor. but these factor may cause a counter-productive effect. look at haiti.

The profit was not even nearly over when Slavery started to falter against the Abolition movement. Mechanasation had no effect for lessening such profit in those days , if anything the invention of the Cotton gen created a much greater profit in cotton and a greater demand for planting and harvesting hands.

Hati is quite unique , there was a well led slave revolt , coincidental with an outbreak of disease that weakened the French .

The reaction in the US to Hati was mixed of course , some cheered the impulse to liberty , some feared the example of successfull slave revolt.

[kimba1]

one of the curious aspect of slavery is the masters actually think slaves should be greatful. actually conquerers in general tend to believe their the rescuer. the rational of slavery is quite bizarre

[Xavier_Onassis]

Hati is quite unique , there was a well led slave revolt , coincidental with an outbreak of disease that weakened the French .

The reaction in the US to Hati was mixed of course , some cheered the impulse to liberty , some feared the example of successfull slave revolt.

=======================================
The slave revolt in Haiti did not start out as any sort of organized effort, but the French were not prepared for it at all, and malaria was the greatest ally of the rebellious slaves. After a while, the Haitians did organize quite well, and of course, they were more immune to malaria than the French troops. There is a great book (I am sure more than one, really) on this:  Black Majesty; The Life of Christophe, King of Haiti (Pocket Books 857)

Isabel Allende recently released a translation of her novel on the Haitian rebellion. "Island beneath the Sea. The library still hasn't got a copy of it, but I am sure it will be great: I have enjoyed all her books, and read them in both languages.

http://www.microsoft.com/isapi/redir.dll?prd=ie&pver=6&ar=CLinks

The Haitian revolution was celebrated by  a few abolitionists and used as an example of why slavery was a bad idea by others, but it mostly scared the bejeezus out of White Americans, especially in the South, as most of the stories that came out of that war were of the "crazed savages killing and eating civilized White people." If you were to take a poll in the Dominican Republic today, I am pretty sure that most Dominicans, both White and Black, would agree that Haitians back then were cannibalistic barbarians. They used to teach this in public schools there, until Balaguer left office.

There is no question who won the Haitian rebellion: the US. It convinced Napoleon that there was no reason for France to keep any major colonies in the New World, and he sold Louisiana to the Americans for about three cents an acre, in order to conquer Europe, a continent that he deemed worth conquering. The French kept Martinique, Guadaloupe, St.Martin and a few other places because no one would buy them except the British and they were enemies. The US could have probably gotten Guiane and the Iles du Salut for a pittance.

Haiti eventually was forced to pay for the value of the plantation land and the cost of the slaves lost in order to establish relations with France and other European countries.

[Michael Tee]

<<How long did it take Mao to replace his losses in Korea?>>

No longer than it took the U.S. to replace their losses in Korea.

What the hell was the point of the question?

[Plane]

<<How long did it take Mao to replace his losses in Korea?>>

No longer than it took the U.S. to replace their losses in Korea.

What the hell was the point of the question?

Mao didn't loose anything of value in Korea , what he lost, he figured he had plenty of.

[Michael Tee]

<< . . . what he [Mao] lost [in Korea], he figured he had plenty of.>>

You'll have to pardon my ignorance, but how exactly was this attitude any different from that in the Pentagon and Washington regarding their own war losses?  Mao at least was fighting on his own borders, remind me again where the Pentagon sent its men to die?

The blind self-righteousness of your condemnation of others is absolutely staggering.  It's utterly amazing how ready and eager you are to point accusing, condemning fingers at people thousands of miles away from your shores, when much bigger criminals are so close at hand.  Reminding me yet again of Jesus' observation of those so ready to point out the mite in their brother's eye while ignoring the mote in their own. 

[Plane]

<< . . . what he [Mao] lost [in Korea], he figured he had plenty of.>>

You'll have to pardon my ignorance, but how exactly was this attitude any different from that in the Pentagon and Washington regarding their own war losses?  Mao at least was fighting on his own borders, remind me again where the Pentagon sent its men to die?

The blind self-righteousness of your condemnation of others is absolutely staggering.  It's utterly amazing how ready and eager you are to point accusing, condemning fingers at people thousands of miles away from your shores, when much bigger criminals are so close at hand.  Reminding me yet again of Jesus' observation of those so ready to point out the mite in their brother's eye while ignoring the mote in their own. 

IN that case you shall demonstrate much more charity when considering Natzis and Slave owners.

The talk of them all is the benefit of their system , the proof against them all is the struggle of the inmates to get out.

How many people have risked their lives to leave South Korea , South Vietnam , West Gernmany,to get into North Korea , North Vietnam and East Germany?

It is like asking how many people fought to get out of free territory and onto the plantations , it is the same thing.

[sirs]

that case you shall demonstrate much more charity when considering Natzis and Slave owners.
The talk of them all is the benefit of their system , the proof against them all is the struggle of the inmates to get out.
How many people have risked their lives to leave South Korea , South Vietnam , West Gernmany,to get into North Korea , North Vietnam and East Germany?
It is like asking how many people fought to get out of free territory and onto the plantations , it is the same thing.

OUCH, Plane slams Tee to the debate ground, yet again.  No wonder he has nothing left in the tank in not responding to questions & POV I've posted     

[Michael Tee]

<<IN that case you shall demonstrate much more charity when considering Natzis and Slave owners.>>

Nice switch of focus, but it still leaves you holding the bag - - you are still the guy that Jesus had in mind when he spoke of seeing the mite in your neighbour's eye while ignoring the mote in your own.

In any case, what kind of charity do you expect me to show towards racists and slave owners?  Were they trying to end the exploitation of man by man, as the Communists were?  Hell, they were the absolute epitome of that exploitation.  Your suggestion is absurd.

<<The talk of them all is the benefit of their system . . . >>

So what?  There were objective means of proving which systems worked and which did not.  The Chinese are living proof of the benefits of Communism, the dozens of millions killed in the Second World War are proof of the horrors of fascism.

<< . . .  the proof against them all is the struggle of the inmates to get out.>>

Bullshit.  People always move from poor to rich countries.  Most people try to escape poverty.  You have no proof and you make it up - - the "millions" who flee are always counted from poor communist countries, comparable counts are never made of those who flee poor capitalist countries.  Mexico, for example, probably sends many more refugees to the U.S. than Cuba, but you count only the Cubans as "proof" of the "inferiority" of Cuban communism, never the Mexicans as proof of the inferiority of Mexican capitalism.  You just indulge in shabby reasoning and lazy, sloppy leaping to unwarranted conclusions, because the brainwashing you received from the capitalist society you live in has conditioned you to reject Communism without thinking.

<<How many people have risked their lives to leave South Korea , South Vietnam , West Gernmany,to get into North Korea , North Vietnam and East Germany?>>

Same bullshit.  How many people leave capitalist Mexico, capitalist Nigeria, capitalist Russia, capitalist Brazil, capitalist El Salvador?

<<It is like asking how many people fought to get out of free territory and onto the plantations , it is the same thing.>>

No, it's like asking how many people leave poverty for wealthier countries, only when you ask it that way you see what a dumb question it really is.

[Plane]

What was the scale of the problem of people swimming ninety miles to escape the Batista government?

Yes there is proof , Mexican system is highly inferior , Cuban system even worse.

We ought to invade and slay every member of both those governments , but building something better, as it turns out ,is the hard part.

Castro did not build better , neither did we when we had the chance .

Some pretty good governments have evolved from not so good ones , such as South Korea or England , but there seems to be some threshold that some governments cannot pass , as in Cuba where the concept of improvement can get one killed.

[Xavier_Onassis]

Yes there is proof , Mexican system is highly inferior , Cuban system even worse.

We ought to invade and slay every member of both those governments , but building something better, as it turns out ,is the hard part.
=======================================================
No, we oughtn't.

We have taken over both countries and in both cases, it has been worse by far than anything they have ever devised for themselves.

Invading and slaying is for Ghenghis Khan. The days of invading and slaying are passed, and with good reason.

[Plane]

Yes there is proof , Mexican system is highly inferior , Cuban system even worse.

We ought to invade and slay every member of both those governments , but building something better, as it turns out ,is the hard part.
=======================================================
No, we oughtn't.

We have taken over both countries and in both cases, it has been worse by far than anything they have ever devised for themselves.

Invading and slaying is for Ghenghis Khan. The days of invading and slaying are passed, and with good reason.

It is out of fashion , but fashion is cyclical.

I know that we have invaded Cuba and Mexico, I know that we wound up not doing them much good.

Invadeing Mexico at least we didn't intend to do them much good , Polk was an expantionist , period.

In Cuba we were supposed to be on a rescue mission , Phillipines also. and truely we did them so clumsily that Mexico recovered better.

Nationbuilding is not really our best talent , but we have had some success, who elese is even going to try?

[Michael Tee]

<<What was the scale of the problem of people swimming ninety miles to escape the Batista government?>>

The scale of the problem was that Batista was in bed with the U.S. State Department and if any Cuban ever got to the U.S., he'd be handed right back to Cuba.  The U.S. had no reason to grant asylum to any Cuban who made it to their shores because they had no intention of embarrassing Batista.  Why would any Cuban try to enter America illegally, knowing that the U.S. would return him anyway?

<<Yes there is proof , Mexican system is highly inferior , Cuban system even worse.>>

Well, I've been in both Mexico and Cuba, Mexico three times, Cuba twice, and it is obvious to me you don't know jack-shit about either one of them.  Mexico is a helluva lot worse than Cuba, and it always was, even before the narcotraficantes took over the fucking country.  Cuba is probably better than any other Latin American country except maybe Chile or Argentina and I don't really know either one of them - - I spent two or three days in BA two years ago and never been to Chile.  I learned virtually nothing about Argentina in the short time I spent in BA other than they revalued their currency after going broke and you could stay in a five-star hotel for $60 a night.   I've been in Brazil a couple of times and there's no comparison between the lives and opportunities of the Cubans compared to the Brazilians.  Brazil's a great country and I love it there, but those people will need twenty or thirty years to catch up to the Cubans.

<<We ought to invade and slay every member of both those governments , but building something better, as it turns out ,is the hard part.>>

"Invade and Slay."  Ought to be your national motto. 

<<Castro did not build better , neither did we when we had the chance .>>

It's really too bad that instead of getting all your info on Cuba from self-exiled gusanos, you can't actually travel to Cuba, talk to some real Cuban people who can describe for you what their lives were like prior to the Revolution and how the Revolution changed their lives and their futures.  You are talking absolute nonsense, from a perspective of pure ignorance.

<<Some pretty good governments have evolved from not so good ones , such as South Korea or England . . . >>

OK.  So?

<< . . .  but there seems to be some threshold that some governments cannot pass , as in Cuba where the concept of improvement can get one killed.>>

Really?  And you know this, how?  More to the point, can you tell me who got killed in Cuba for "the concept of improvement?"  Inquiring minds need to know.

[Plane]

<<What was the scale of the problem of people swimming ninety miles to escape the Batista government?>>

The scale of the problem was that Batista was in bed with the U.S. State Department and

did not require half so much violence to maintain his regime as Fidel Castro needs.

I thought you were telling me that people always run from the poor country s to the welthy ones?

Is Cuba really that much more poor than it was?

[Michael Tee]

<<[Batista] did not require half so much violence to maintain his regime as Fidel Castro needs.>>

What on earth are you talking about?  Batista had torture chambers in every city and town in the country.  Who the hell did you think were being executed against the walls of the Havana baseball stadium in the first days of the Triumph of the Revolution?  Sunday school teachers?

<<I thought you were telling me that people always run from the poor country s to the welthy ones?

<<Is Cuba really that much more poor than it was?>>

Didn't I just deal with that point?  Under Batista, they'd be sent back, so what was the point?  Under Fidel, they'd be welcomed with open arms and never sent back, just to embarrass Fidel.  Poverty motivates some people to flee the country, but when there's no place for them to go, they don't go.  When a place suddenly opens up, they go.   Is this really all that hard to understand?