"There has never been true communism."

[henry quirk]

Something new and relevant on the "true Communism" argument from the Left, particularly the "Scandinavia" dodge: short, but worth seeing.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gXTvFoOlH0Y

my current settings disallow videos: can you gimme the gist?

It shows a number of interesting facts about the Scandinvians, and about Leftist claims that Scandinavia represents Socialism or represents better fairness in things like taxation.

• In the US, the rich pay 70% of the taxes. The welfare system could not stay afloat without them continuing to do so.

• In Scandinavia, the economy runs on Capitalism, and only distributes to the public welfare pot on limited Socialist lines.

• Scandinavia does not ban private health care or schooling.

• In the Scandinavian countries, they have a "value-added tax," or VAT, that they impose on everyone, rich, poor and middle class, at 25%. That means that the poor bear a disproportionally high tax burden -- in other words, taxation in Scandinavia is not progressive, but regressive.

• The Left claims to advocate for Scandinavian policies, but the package they actually argue for is Cuban-Venzeuelan, not Scandinavian.

• Gun banning was Chavez's first step in controlling his populace. Then he used gangs of armed, Antifa-style thugs, or like Hitler's brownshirts, to intimidate his opposition.

There are some other gems in there. It's well worth a few minutes for those who can see it.

thanks

[gaffo]

!

Here is some very recent data on worldwide socialism:



Socialism Data

The first eleven units of our Socialism campaign cover theoretical and historical aspects of socialism and their implementations. This final unit provides recent data on countries that are currently socialistic.

Four countries proclaim themselves communist: China, Laos, Cuba, Vietnam. Eight more reference socialism in their constitutions: The People’s Republic of Bangladesh, Co-operative Republic of Guyana, Republic of India, North Korea, Federal Democratic Republic of Nepal, Portuguese Republic, Democratic Socialist Republic of Sri Lanka, and the United Republic of Tanzania. Several others have socialist parties with governing majorities: Angola, Bolivia, Congo, Ecuador, El Salvador, Ethiopia, Guinea-Bissau, Greece, Mozambique, Nicaragua, Uruguay, and Venezuela.

We analyzed and compared these 24 countries to each other and the rest of the world based on publicly-available indices and databases.

Economic Freedom
(Heritage Foundation’s 2019 Index of Economic Freedom):
20 of the socialist countries ranked 100th or lower, with the exceptions of Uruguay (47), where a fiscally conservative president assumed power, Portugal (56), Tanzania (89), and El Salvador (90)
All socialist countries scored low on economic freedoms related to the rule of law (property rights, judicial effectiveness, government integrity) except for China, Portugal, and Uruguay
All the countries scored 60 (out of 100) or below in the financial freedom category, which is an indicator of banking efficiency as well as a measure of independence from government control and interference in the financial sector

Human Freedom (CATO Institute’s 2019 Human Freedom Index):
17 out of 22 socialist countries (Cuba and North Korea are not included in CATO’s index) scored lower on total human freedom than the average for their regions. The only countries that scored above the regional average were India, Tanzania, and Uruguay
16 of these countries are in the bottom 50% of the world for personal freedom, and 17 are in the bottom 50% for economic freedom. Socialist countries got better results on the personal freedom scale than on economic freedom (13 vs. 9)
In general, these socialistic countries received their lowest results in Rule of Law; Association, Assembly, and Civil Society; and Legal System categories.

Corruption
(Transparency International’s 2018 Corruption Perceptions Index):
All the socialist countries mentioned above scored below 50 in Transparency International’s Index, except for Portugal and Uruguay
About half (12 out of 25) have declined in the corruption perceptions index in comparison to 2017. Nine countries ranked the same two years in a row

GDP (World Bank):
Except China and India, all socialist countries have GDP valued below $260 Billion.
19 out of 24 countries have positive GDP per capita annual growth, four of which have growth above 5.0% (no data is available for North Korea in this category)

China vs. Hong Kong (World Bank):
Life expectancy at birth: 76 vs. 85
Unemployment, total (% of total labor force) (modeled ILO estimate): 4.4 vs. 2.8
Population ages 65 and above, male (% of male population): 10.0% vs. 17.1%
Population ages 65 and above, female (% of female population): 11.9% vs. 16.7%
Mortality rate, female, adult (per 1,000 people): 61.1 vs. 33.6
Mortality rate, male, adult (per 1,000 people): 95.1 62.6
GDP per capita (constant 2010 US$): 7,752.6 vs. 38,781.8
Crude death rate (per 1,000 people): 7.1 vs. 6.3

North Korea vs. South Korea (World Bank):
Life expectancy at birth: 72 vs. 83
Unemployment, total (% of total labor force) (modeled ILO estimate): 3.3 vs. 3.8
Population ages 65 and above, male (% of male population): 6.7% vs. 12.3%
Population ages 65 and above, female (% of female population): 11.9% vs. 16.5%
Mortality rate, female, adult (per 1,000 people): 97.1 vs. 32.9
Mortality rate, male, adult (per 1,000 people): 164.1 vs. 80.5
GDP per capita (constant 2010 US$): — vs. 26,761.9
Crude death rate (per 1,000 people): 9.0 vs. 5.6
Infant mortality rate (per 1,000 people): 13.7 vs. 2.7

Chile vs. Venezuela (World Bank):
Life expectancy at birth: 79.9 vs. 72.2
Unemployment, total (% of total labor force) (modeled ILO estimate): 7.2 vs. 8.4
Population ages 65 and above, male (% of male population): 10.0% vs. 6.5%
Population ages 65 and above, female (% of female population): 13.0% vs. 8.0%
Mortality rate, female, adult (per 1,000 people): 65.4 vs. 88.1
Mortality rate, male, adult (per 1,000 people): 106.1 vs. 188.9
GDP per capita (constant 2010 US$): 14,170.9 vs. 9,013.4
Crude death rate (per 1,000 people): 5.8 vs. 6.2
Infant mortality rate (per 1,000 people): 6.7 vs. 16.8

Compiled by Andrei Volkov and Stephen Hicks, 2020.

thanks for taking the time to post about all the countries, i note that Portugal elected a right "president/premeir" - but economically seems more socialist.

i noted as interesting.

how would like me to reply? i do not affirm Trickldown, and so affirming more taxation on the rich to "force" a real trickldown.

as for all the Nations above - past and present, i do know more history than "Joe Ave" and assuming you do, i welcome talking about those nations - past and present.


thanks for reply Sir.

70's democrat.


------------

I doubt you know about the State of India, and the whole early 60's thing. but the ruler of Portugal (Salizar?) demanded his general in Goa to "defend The state of India to the last man" his man seeing he lost a few - less then 10 at the time (but each man's life matters - as does understanding the march of history - colonialization was over with by the 60's said general ingored his "president" and did not order his men to die for the State of India.

thankfully.

now Goa is a provence of Indian and not a colony of Portuagal The State of India.

and so I commend the portuges general in ingorning his boss, and affirm the march of history.

[Immanuel Can]

thanks for reply Sir.

No problem. I got the data from a very reputable academic source,as you can see. Interesting, no?

[gaffo]

thanks for reply Sir.

No problem. I got the data from a very reputable academic source,as you can see. Interesting, no?

lets talk about The State of India, and the Indian army that took it by force (1963?) - not per the Rule of Law.

[gaffo]

Henry, me being a near Socailist, but also Libertarian, and you more conservative and also Libertarian.


is if possible i might be more Libertarian than you?

honestly wondering here.

[henry quirk]

Henry, me being a near Socailist, but also Libertarian, and you more conservative and also Libertarian.


is if possible i might be more Libertarian than you?

honestly wondering here.

as I see it: if you're socialist & libertarian, you're neither

schizophrenic might be the better label

I'm not sure what you mean by libertarian anymore...by you're own lights mebbe you are, but as I see it, no, you aren't

[Immanuel Can]

lets talk about The State of India, and the Indian army that took it by force (1963?) - not per the Rule of Law.

Honestly, I don't presently know enough about it to say much. India's a fascinating place, and lord knows those folks can cook...but I would have to confess my limitations on the subject of Indian history.

[gaffo]

Henry, me being a near Socailist, but also Libertarian, and you more conservative and also Libertarian.


is if possible i might be more Libertarian than you?

honestly wondering here.

as I see it: if you're socialist & libertarian, you're neither

as i stated, i am a near socialist, so a 70's democrat.

and a Libertarian.

schizophrenic might be the better label

do you think i am crazy? if so. i welcome talking about how crazy i am.

if that is important to you - rather than how one can be a Liberal Libertarian.

I'm not sure what you mean by libertarian anymore...by you're own lights mebbe you are, but as I see it, no, you aren't

ok, you disscount my Libertarianism due to my insanity, so clarify how it is impossible to be a Liberal Libertarian.

i welcome you showing my insanity to myself - maybe you can show to my ill mind how it is impossible to be a near Socialist and Libertarian at the same time.

fix my sick mind, i welcome discussion.

[gaffo]

lets talk about The State of India, and the Indian army that took it by force (1963?) - not per the Rule of Law.

Honestly, I don't presently know enough about it to say much. India's a fascinating place, and lord knows those folks can cook...but I would have to confess my limitations on the subject of Indian history.

no prob, i love the food too - love it enough to know how to make it myself now - Tikka Massala is not india (sweet pap for the english) - proper indian food is Chicken Korma, Chicken Karala. Ragjama.

as to State of India, it was an old Empire of Portugal (like all the old empires of europe - like Singapore for england - lost around the same time - 65). it was just a colony the the UN did not like but affirmed as valid, so did not green light the Indian army to take over - and make it the indian provence of Goe, which they did anyway in the early 60's.

with the death of a few Port conscripts (not sure if any indians died in the "war" - it was over in a couple of weeks - though india threatened to take the port colony over for about 10 yrs before finally doing so in the early 60's).

as i said the port general (not sure what happened to him proffessionally - court martialed?/etc....) did the right thing thinking of the march of history and did not "die on the last hill" for his boss "salizar"? (dictator of portugal at the time) making such a demand.

the State of India was just a pimple of history - long forgotten now by all - there are many such pimples of history, even within the last century, sadly all forgotten (too many ignorant of history) - knowledge of history is a key to wisdom IMO. one can't be the latter without some knowledge of the former.

[gaffo]

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-india-42390008

http://web.stanford.edu/group/tomzgroup ... -a-RCW.pdf

[henry quirk]

ok, you disscount my Libertarianism due to my insanity, so clarify how it is impossible to be a socialist Libertarian.

note: I changed liberal to socialist...socialist is what you said, socialist is what I'm goin' with

as I see it...

to be libertarian is to accept certain things about man: that he belongs to himself, that he is responsible for himself, that he is owed diddly-squat by other men; that contracts freely & and knowingly entered into ought to be abided, that contracts violated ought to entail real consequence; that men ought to transact freely & fairly, and transactions of service and product are nobodies business beyond the transactors; that self-defense & defense of other are not just permissible, but damned near obligatory

as I see it...

to be socialist is to be subsumed, to place the furtherance of society above your own welfare, to view yourself as cog, to turn over the reins of your life to another; it's the compromise of self, the accommodation of the other, it's the we dominatin' the I, the many consumin' the one; it's loss of identity, diminishment of the person, adulteration of the singular; it's the exaltation of the crowd, the democracy, the will of the people; it's the boot on the neck; the leash on the throat, the brand on the arm

as I see it: libertarianism & socialism cannot coexist, cannot intermingle

[Immanuel Can]

Chicken Korma, Chicken Karala. Ragjama....

Aloo gobi, samosas, chapati, nan, basmati...yep, all of that.

...the State of India was just a pimple of history

That depends. If you lived there, it was the centre of the world. It's certainly a group of ancient, complex regional cultures. I'd love to visit there.

[gaffo]

ok, you disscount my Libertarianism due to my insanity, so clarify how it is impossible to be a socialist Libertarian.

note: I changed liberal to socialist...socialist is what you said, socialist is what I'm goin' with

as I see it...

to be libertarian is to accept certain things about man: that he belongs to himself, that he is responsible for himself, that he is owed diddly-squat by other men; that contracts freely & and knowingly entered into ought to be abided, that contracts violated ought to entail real consequence; that men ought to transact freely & fairly, and transactions of service and product are nobodies business beyond the transactors; that self-defense & defense of other are not just permissible, but damned near obligatory

agree with all , but defense of other, though i can think of exceptions (small kids.your kids/etc..in fire fight.etc///, its a the minority, and so per definition their welfare is up to them per thier own self defense, and not covered by your actions via your claim of self defense.

as I see it...

to be socialist is to be subsumed, to place the furtherance of society above your own welfare, to view yourself as cog, to turn over the reigns of your life to another; it's the compromise of self, the accommodation of the other, it's the we dominatin' the I, the many consumin' the one; it's loss of identity, diminishment of the person, adulteration of the singular; it's the exaltation of the crowd, the democracy, the will of the people; it's the boot on the neck; the leash on the throat, the brand on the arm

as I see it: libertarianism & socialism cannot coexist, cannot intermingle

its not either or, no man is an island, and so i affirm the concept of the community good - even if you do not - if i were to be forced to choose between myself and my community i would choose the former, thankfully those two concepts are not mutually exclusive (though for some reason you think they are).

thanks for playing nonetheless.


------now that we know i am Socialist, and i am not - lol, though i stated i was a near socialist and a 70's dem - but i will play your name game and so i am a socialist.

now me being a socialist and insane and fake Libertarian, i'd like you to tell me how you are more Libertarian than i am:

your views on State's Rights - 10 amendment, you affirm any State to leave the Union via Reforendum? (BTW the 11 Southern States in Civil War held such reforendum - they voted to leave the Union 60/40. I affirm their right to leave the Union - do you?) - BTW the original Colonial States volunteerly joined the Union with the assumption they could leave it - i affirm that concept, do you as a Libertarian?).

Jury Rights - Jury Pardon. your view? do you think a juror as the right/power to ignore the laws the accused is accused of violating? if said laws are deemed by the conscience of the juror (fugative slave laws - last century - marijwana laws today) - do you affirm the concept of the juror to ignore the law - knowing that the accused is in voilation of, but rules "innocent" because the law is shit - or you reject this concept of conscience as a "libertarian"?

9th amendment - all rights prior to the US foundation (like Jury Rights above - and marriage, association - choosing your friends), those affirmed by British Law and not mentioned in the Constitution are still valid after the US separates from Britain. as a libertarian, do you affirm there are said rights?

don't bother to reply, i'm just an insane communist that denies there is any trickle in the down. - though 50 yrs proves no trickle to down upon the pleabs.

[gaffo]

Chicken Korma, Chicken Karala. Ragjama....

Aloo gobi, samosas, chapati, nan, basmati...yep, all of that.

...the State of India was just a pimple of history

That depends. If you lived there, it was the centre of the world. It's certainly a group of ancient, complex regional cultures. I'd love to visit there.

Indeed so - true, not a pimple for those there. in fact i bought one of the last DVD box sets of 70's movies - 9 movies, one of them is about an upperclass indian family in the 60 in Goa, during the indian invasion - i've not watched it yet. but bought the set due to Majid Majidi recommending it (an indian director that he like - my dvd box set of 9 movies from that director - and me loving Majidi's works (iranian director - Children of Heaven, Color of Paradise (this is my top3 fav of all time - a blind kid that can "read nature" from the rocks in a stream to the birds/while his father who can see is blind to all before him (though to be far his dad is not a bad man, just a fool, who learns to see by the end of the film - though after the ultimate price as a father). Majidi also directed the fun/funny film Song of Sparrows.............its good not to get too heavy sometimes, and nice to see the director of heavy-heartbreaking films can make equally good funny ones. where the guy get greedy, and has to take a couple of knocks in his live to got back to his roots - ie. become humble, not greedy, and value the simple things. family/health.

if you have not seen nor know of Majid Majidi (an Iranian Islamist beheader!!!!!!!!!!!!! - all arabs are don't you know?). check his movies out. they are all about the universal human condition.

I don't know if he is a Muslim, just know he is Iranian - my first GF was not the former, but the latter - wow the world is not so B/w! who knew! if he is, well great, if not well likewise.

All i know is he has made around 10 films in the last 25 yrs, and most of them are in my top 25 of all time. so a great director.

end of rant.

[henry quirk]

don't bother to reply

okay