Re: The Nazi's Were Marxists

[iluvfreebeer]

i can second the low pay thing cuz my whole family lives and lived in russia since forever BUT
take into account 2 things

1 - cost of living in russia was pretty cheap in comparison so when you say 50 rubles you have to take into account that a loaf of bread was 5 kopeks (cents) and that Moscow - Kiev by plane cost 15 rubles in the 70s / 80s. Also no unemployment - everybody had a job, VERY low crime, free healthcare etc.

now obviously people weren't living the american dream - while you guys where discovering "two cars in every garage" soviet citizens were discovering the new and exciting possiblities of owning a 4 door or buying a place in the country - which has to be taken into account, everybody lived in apartments, suburbia didn't exist in russia till the 90s BUT maybe 1 out of 5 or 6 citizens could save up and buy a cottage... so there was that

2 - VERY IMPORTANT - VERY few people knew about how people lived outside the socialist block. you heard about the oppression of the black man and that americans were imperialist pigs but that was about it. nobody could compare their lifestyles with those of people in western europe or america - and ignorance is bliss. today, a broke, starving, toothless old man in the middle of siberia can watch mtv cribs on his tv, how is this an improvement ? i don't know. Would i go back to "communism" NO, do a lot of russians regret the advent of "democracy" YES. Russia is slowly coming out of the anarchy of the 90s, but poverty is still present in great numbers and social services suck balls, so its perfectly understandable why people are nostalgic about the good old days. It's like kids who lost their innocence too soon, grew up too fast, and regret the ignorant carefree days of yore - you can't go back, but you like to reminisce.

That's interesting.
I didn't and don't feel oppressed.
And considering that I had more 1,000 times more freedom than any of the average people in the USSR, by comparison, I was a king!

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

[Buzzy]

Now that you've spilt the milk and we now know that the USSR was just another capitalist country (pause for laughter) I guess the US wasn't the only imperialist pigs trying to dominate the world. Strange how the USSR actions seem all so different when it becomes apparent they were just trying to control oil and make money as capitalists.

[Bilbo Baggins]

Now that you've spilt the milk and we now know that the USSR was just another capitalist country (pause for laughter) I guess the US wasn't the only imperialist pigs trying to dominate the world. Strange how the USSR actions seem all so different when it becomes apparent they were just trying to control oil and make money as capitalists.

You're right, the USSR was imperialist, just as much as it was capitalist. Not to the same degree as the US, as the Soviets had many less allies, but they still had great ambitions.

[Buzzy]

Ah, the big lie of communism. Do you suppose that the millions who were murdered in the gulags and purges died to keep that secret?

Strange that Russia and America are still chasing those agendas. Personally I'm ready to abandon ours but I guess we can't while Putin is still trying to conquer the world.

[iluvfreebeer]

Now that you've spilt the milk and we now know that the USSR was just another capitalist country (pause for laughter) I guess the US wasn't the only imperialist pigs trying to dominate the world. Strange how the USSR actions seem all so different when it becomes apparent they were just trying to control oil and make money as capitalists.

You're right, the USSR was imperialist, just as much as it was capitalist. Not to the same degree as the US, as the Soviets had many less allies, but they still had great ambitions.

THe Sov's Capitalist??????
Where's your "proof" of this fantasy?

[Bilbo Baggins]

THe Sov's Capitalist??????
Where's your "proof" of this fantasy?

I've already provided a definition of state capitalism, I suggest you read it. You don't have to believe me but I think if you knew anything about the manner in which the Soviet economy operated you would say it had more in common with state capitalism than communism.

Ah, the big lie of communism. Do you suppose that the millions who were murdered in the gulags and purges died to keep that secret?

The Soviets wouldn't have thought of themselves as imperialists but they were.

Strange that Russia and America are still chasing those agendas. Personally I'm ready to abandon ours

I seriously doubt that, a superpower is never satisfied. Those on top are always afraid of losing their power and will do anything to maintain it.

I accidentally missed a comment last time about why were the Soviets still saying they were communists when they weren't. Pretty much they either didn't realise that they weren't being true to communism/socialism, or that they were power-hungry dictators who were trying to keep the USSR strong through whatever means. Maybe they thought for now their system was ok, that the 'dictatorship of the proletariat' needed this period before it could progress. Whatever the case, whether intentionally or not, the Soviets were not communists.

[Popov]

you heard about the oppression of the black man

That's interesting.
I didn't and don't feel oppressed.
And considering that I had more 1,000 times more freedom than any of the average people in the USSR, by comparison, I was a king!

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

yeah i'm referring to the civil rights movement, racism, the kkk, separate drinking fountains, you know that whole thing.

example of what i'm talking bout - i was reading a 1932 edition of "Pravda" at the library the other day, for kicks, and one of the articles was about how blacks in america couldn't own firearms even though a good number of black men served in WWI, died in europe, etc. that's the kind of thing that the russian press talked about - they highlighted issues in america, they never talked about the financial wellbeing of people, or about two cars in every garage, they focused on problems like high levels of crime, rampant homelessness in cities, and of course, racism. I'm not saying russia didn't have problems or trying to glorify soviet life, i'm just pointing out the kind of info that was available to soviet citizens about America during the soviet era. It was basically that, some music, and the occasional movie, but the latter was VERY limited, censored, etc, most people usually got movies and music through a friend who travelled to western europe on a naval or a balet tour or something, obviously, this kind of material was inexistent over the counter.

[iluvfreebeer]

Yeah, because of course, it's so well documented how well the Russians and Sovs treated the Jews.
No oppression of those folks by your family, eh Popov?

Gimme a fucking break


1) The "Civil Rights Movement" was by and large a Soviet communist funded insurgency that didn't give me any rights.
2) The KKK got run out of my town on a rail by the citizens. White and black together.
3) Separate drinking fountains was before my time.
4) Racism? Today, by percentage, a lot more blacks are racist against whites than the other way around.

[Bilbo Baggins]

1) The "Civil Rights Movement" was by and large a Soviet communist funded insurgency that didn't give me any rights.

Do you actually believe that?

[iluvfreebeer]

1) The "Civil Rights Movement" was by and large a Soviet communist funded insurgency that didn't give me any rights.

Do you actually believe that?

It's a proven fact. King, Malcolm and others were the Useful Idiots of the Soviets. Apparantly you foreigners don't know much about what happens here.

[Bilbo Baggins]

It's a proven fact. King, Malcolm and others were the Useful Idiots of the Soviets. Apparantly you foreigners don't know much about what happens here.

I have studied the Civil Rights Movement and I think you're talking a load of crap. Wheres the 'proof' of their links to the Soviet Union?

[iluvfreebeer]

It's a proven fact. King, Malcolm and others were the Useful Idiots of the Soviets. Apparantly you foreigners don't know much about what happens here.

I have studied the Civil Rights Movement and I think you're talking a load of crap. Wheres the 'proof' of their links to the Soviet Union?

You "studied it". Where?
I LIVED it kid.

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

[Bilbo Baggins]

You "studied it". Where?
I LIVED it kid.

Firstly at school and then university. Lived it you may have, but you seem to have a distorted view on the world so I'm waiting for some facts to back up your claim that the Civil Rights Movement was a communist-backed insurgency. Because from my understanding its was a fight against oppression and the inherent racism of US society.

[iluvfreebeer]

COMMUNIST FRAUD

By: Alan Stang

Let us now praise famous men – if we can. There are two reasons you don’t need to know anything about Mike (even his name is a fraud) King, to know that we should not be celebrating a holiday in his name. First, a respectable time needs to pass after a man dies, during which the facts will mature. After sober reflection has considered them, a national clamor will spontaneously call such an honor into being – it if is deserved.

To force such a holiday into law soon after a man dies, almost gasping in haste as in an emergency, using intimidation and threats, is unseemly to say the least; but that is how the present farce we uncelebrate was arranged. Need we add that this principle applies to any man, whatever his name, whatever his color.




The second reason proves ipso facto that the "Martin Luther" King holiday is a fraud. The only American who used to be so honored – the only one – was George Washington himself, the Father of our country, because sober reflection on the facts proved he deserved it.

Since then, George Washington has been demoted. Look at your calendar. His birthday has been submerged in "Presidents Day," with the result that the only American honored with a holiday all his own is Mike King. Even if you knew nothing about him before you started reading this, the obvious question should erupt from your monitor: Does this man – does any American – deserve to be honored above Washington?

Mike was said to be an apostle of Mohandas K. Gandhi’s non-violence. Many Americans at the time wondered why it was that, wherever King went, violence erupted. He explained it himself, in a piece he wrote for Saturday Review (April 3, 1965), in which he set forth the four steps of his technique.

"1. Nonviolent demonstrators go into the streets to exercise their constitutional rights. 2. Racists resist by unleashing violence against them. 3. Americans of conscience in the name of decency demand federal intervention and legislation. 4. The administration, under mass pressure, initiates measures of immediate intervention and remedial legislation."

Remember, this is not something we are accusing him of. Mike King wrote this himself. Notice that step two of his formulation calls for violence. The reason violence broke out wherever he went was that violence was what he went into the streets to get. His lieutenants would do things in the target city deliberately designed to drive normal human beings berserk.

What would you do if you looked out your bay window some glorious morning and saw someone peeing on your lawn? What would you do if you saw a couple there enjoying sex? What would you do if you were a mounted policeman and someone tried to disembowel your horse?

The Communist Broadcasting System, etc., would not record this, but it would broadcast graphic coverage of what you did when you went crazy, with the logical result that fair-minded people around the country believed you attacked the "nonviolent demonstrators exercising their constitutional rights" for no reason. This was a typical King "nonviolent" demonstration.

I participated in a modest effort to defuse some of this, as the only white member of a strike team that would travel to a targeted town and explain the scheme before Mike’s terrorists arrived to foment animosity. For instance, King chose Sandersville, Georgia as a target and Julia Brown and I went there to do what we could.

Mrs. Brown had served as an F.B.I. undercover agent for many years in Cleveland. (This was the original, American F.B.I., not today’s terrorist gang that commits mass murder of Americans and has merged with the Soviet KGB.) Julia and I worked together many times. She would delight in telling people I was her grandson, which raised some eyebrows among people too polite to ask how a black lady could have a grandson as white as Herman Talmadge.

When we arrived, Sandersville was simmering. King’s men had already provoked so much tension that it would have been dangerous to bring the black and white residents together to the same hall to hear us. So, we spoke to them on two consecutive evenings, one evening to the blacks, the other to the whites.

We told them what this man King was, which organizations and people he worked with and fronted for, how he did it and what his purpose was. We explained that he was trying to divide the races and foment violence in behalf of his bosses who had more contempt for Negroes, as people of color then were known, than the worst racist concocted by the perfervid imagination of Harriet Beecher Stowe

And, mirabile dictu, the tension dissipated. The people of Sandersville, Georgia, black and white, united in understanding who their true enemy was. King’s revolutionaries left. There was no riot. Later, Congressman Larry McDonald, the Georgia Democrat, invited Julia and me to testify against the proposed holiday for Mike. My beautiful "grandmother" and I flew together to the District of Criminals for the purpose. Julia testified that while she was a Party member, she "knew Martin Luther King to be closely connected with the Communist Party."

Mrs. Brown became a one-woman truth squad. When word arrived about the next town King planned to terrorize, she would go there first and talk to the townspeople of both races who were willing to listen. Mike’s scheme would fizzle. So effective was she at exposing what Mike really was, so discredited and ineffective did he become, I worried that his Communist bosses might have him killed. As a martyr, he would be much more valuable to them than he had become.

Wanting Mike to remain alive and ineffective, I warned my colleagues of my fear, hoping that sufficient publicity could neutralize the threat, but a few weeks later he was dead, killed by the usual "lone assassin." As usual, there was "no conspiracy." There never is. Waving a shirt he said was drenched with King’s blood (it wasn’t), Jesse Jackson, who said he cradled the dying King in his arms (he didn’t), launched a career selling "protection," that no doubt has turned Cosa Nostra black with envy.

So, what was "Martin Luther" King, Jr.? Please look at the piece I did a year ago on the subject, which you will find in the archives of etherzone.com. He was a Communist. For proof of this, look, for just one example, at my book, It’s Very Simple: The True Story of Civil Rights (Boston, Western Island, 1965), which sold half a million copies.

It’s Very Simple talks about Bayard Rustin, King’s sodomite "secretary," who spent his entire life in Communist Party activities, and who demanded that "more bloody Negro suffering should be encouraged so that squeamish Northern Negroes would be horrified into line. . . ." There was also a man named Hunter Pitts O’Dell, who ran King’s organization. O’Dell was a member of the national committee of the Communist Party. The media of the time kept exposing O’Dell and Mike kept pretending to fire him, but O’Dell later would turn up elsewhere in King’s apparatus.

But the thing that has always amused me is that, after the book was published, we learned much more about King’s Communist and other activities than we knew before. I had to write many magazine articles to catch up. For instance, when I wrote It’s Very Simple I did not yet know about Stanley Levison.

Suddenly, King started to make speeches about the war in Vietnam. Well meaning Americans scratched their heads. The war took him far afield from "civil rights," and his speeches sounded like enemy propaganda cooked up in Hanoi. The reason was that Stanley Levison was writing those speeches. So who was Stanley Levison?

Stanley was the paymaster in this country for the KGB, the Soviet secret police. The KGB would send Stanley the rubles to pay for all Soviet activities in the United States, and he would distribute the money. How high up in the Soviet apparatus would you have to be – how much would the KGB have to trust you – to get that job? Stanley Levison, of the KGB, financed Mike King and wrote his speeches.

I also did not yet know that "Dr." King was a consummate plagiarist, who stole enormous chunks of other people’s work. Anyone else doing that to such an extent would be summarily stripped of his doctorate, but "Dr." King is more than equal. (See George Orwell’s Animal Farm.) He also turns out to have been a world-class womanizer, maybe even surpassing his protector, Jack Kennedy. Remember that King was allegedly a preacher of the gospel.

The giveaway to all this is that even King’s admirers – unable to staunch the extrusion of treason and filth – reluctantly admit it. See for instance the work of Professor David J. Garrow, certainly a sympathetic King scholar. This is the record of the man our Communist leaders in the District of Criminals have even elevated above Washington.





"Published originally at EtherZone.com : republication allowed with this notice and hyperlink intact."

[Bilbo Baggins]

What a load of crap, where did you get this? Wheres the basis for any of his allegations that Martin Luther King attempted to incite violence against him? Just because he knew he would be attacked by racist individuals does not mean he actively sought it. He was standing up for the rights he deserved.

King’s sodomite "secretary,"

The true colours of Mr Strang become evident now. Etherzone reeks of right-wing rubbish. How could you think that I would trust a site so biased towards the right? He cites no sources for his claims other than his own book. Brilliant.