 |
| |
|
| |
|
|
chegitz guevara
|
 |
Ft. Lauderdale, FL Communist Party of Apolyton
Jun 2000
time: 00:36
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by DinoDoc
Hasn't Hellboy killed you a couple of times already? |
Don't you know I'm unkillable?
nye, since you were unaware of the elections in Russia, you really don't know very much about went on there. The point of November was that there were two governments in Russia. One was elected, one was appointed. The elected one abolished the appointed one. That's what November was.
Now, there are those who will argue that the Provisional government was legitimate because it was appointed by the Duma. This ignores the fact that the Duma itself was a non-representive legislative body, in which the lower classes of Russia (who were 95% f the population of Russia) were allowed a tiny minority of the representation, while capitalists and aristocrats were handed the majority. The point, however, remains, no one elected Kerensky or any of the other ministers that were abolished in the November Revolution.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
notyoueither
|
 |
of naught
Aug 2001
time: 22:36
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by chegitz guevara
Don't you know I'm unkillable?
nye, since you were unaware of the elections in Russia, you really don't know very much about went on there. The point of November was that there were two governments in Russia. One was elected, one was appointed. The elected one abolished the appointed one. That's what November was.
Now, there are those who will argue that the Provisional government was legitimate because it was appointed by the Duma. This ignores the fact that the Duma itself was a non-representive legislative body, in which the lower classes of Russia (who were 95% f the population of Russia) were allowed a tiny minority of the representation, while capitalists and aristocrats were handed the majority. The point, however, remains, no one elected Kerensky or any of the other ministers that were abolished in the November Revolution. |
Can you point to a source for this 'election', other than Bolshevik party nominations?
I'm sortta waiting for you to lay it out for us, since you are the expert.
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
notyoueither
|
|
of naught
Aug 2001
time: 22:36
|
|
I did find this.
http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/RUSassembly.htm
quote:
After Nicholas II abdicated on 1st March, 1917, the new Provisional Government announced it would introduce a Constituent Assembly. Elections were due to take place on 17th September but problems caused by the need to prepare electoral lists resulted in them being postponed until November.
A total of 703 candidates were elected to the Constituent Assembly in November, 1917. This included Socialist Revolutionaries (299), Bolsheviks (168), Mensheviks (18) and Constitutional Democratic Party (17).
The Bolsheviks were bitterly disappointed with the result as they hoped it would legitimize the October Revolution. When it opened on 5th January, 1918, Victor Chernov, leader of the Socialist Revolutionaries, was elected President. When the Assembly refused to support the programme of the new Soviet Government, the Bolsheviks walked out in protest.
Later that day, Vladimir Lenin announced that the Constituent Assembly had been dissolved. Soon afterwards all opposition political groups, including the Socialist Revolutionaries, Mensheviks and the Constitutional Democratic Party, were banned in Russia. |
Sounds like a coup to me.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
chegitz guevara
|
|
Ft. Lauderdale, FL Communist Party of Apolyton
Jun 2000
time: 00:36
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by notyoueither
However, it also says that Lenin still pressed to seize power, as if he had little patience. |
No country can long stand two governments. One or the other must win out. If the Soviets did nothing, eventually the Provisional government would have abolished the Soviets, in fact they tried to do so, but it backfired and Kornilov tried to take power for himself.
Anyway, their slogan was "All Power to the Soviets." I realize we live in a cynical day and age, where we don't expect leaders to follow through on their promises, but the Bolsheviks did make an attempt.
quote:
Nowhere do I find references to parties other than the Communists after 1920. Can you point them out to me? |
As I pointed out, the ones that fought them were abolished. The rest joined the Communist Party. If you mean, why weren't there any new parties A) the Civil War lasted until 1921, B) political life in Russia had collapsed in Russia during the civil war, C) by the time people were interested in politics again, the bureaucrats, through Stalin, had seized control and instituted a dictatorship.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
chegitz guevara
|
|
Ft. Lauderdale, FL Communist Party of Apolyton
Jun 2000
time: 00:36
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by notyoueither
As I pointed out, they enjoyed the peace of the grave. |
That's your side's fault, not ours. Ours followed through on our promise to end the war. Your side started a new one. We wanted peace. You gave us war. So we devoted our society to preparing for the next invasion, and there were crimes committed, but it made us ready to fight the next invasion, and you should be glad we did, or you'd have German overlords, just like everyone else.
quote:
From someone who goes ape-**** over GWB, I find it really funny how you can argue that the Communists hijacking Russia for 70 years can be justified. |
They were the legitimate elected government of Russia. If your side hadn't deliberately interfered, things may have turned out very different. Well never know, conveniently for you. It's as if you peed into someone's food, and then blamed them for being a bad cook.
Try to understand something, every single time we have come to power, whether by election or revolution, we have been attacked, invaded, suffered terrorism, espionage, boycotts, etc. . . . every single time. Not once, in our entire history, have we been left alone to try and build a better society without having to worry if tomrrow is the day the Yankees show up, or if some *******'s gonna burn our crops or home down. Israel only manages because the United States and Germany pour billions of free dollars into its economy.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Tingkai
|
|
To find the Northwest Passage
Aug 2001
time: 13:36
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by DaShi
I personally didn't know anything about this until Chinese people pointed it out. Talk to them about it. It's quite noticeable. You know, there is no system of charity here. Just last week, I saw a restaurant manager literally throw a poorer man's bicycle into the mud to make room for a car of a customer. In fact, he asked the driver if he was a customer before doing it. You don't live in mainland China. I'm not saying that the Chinese are bad people. They just have a different culture with different values developed from a different history. I am saying that Chinese culture isn't suited to communism. Even Mao recognized that.
|
What you said doesn't have anything to do with your previous statement
You initially claimed that Chinese people do not have a sense of community and "There really isn't a sense of kinship". That's ridiculous. Chinese society is very much a communal one. Do you really think that Chinese society is based on the individualism seen in the West?
The initial focus of Chinese society is the family and then the extended family and then the much wider family clans. In other words, kinship.
The family ties are supplemented by neighbourhood, city or provincial ties. When people move around the country or immigrate, they search out for people from their old communities.
You claimed that Chinese "rarely socialize with strangers". But that's true for every society. Most people spend most of their time socializing with their friends.
It is true that Chinese business people prefer dealing with people they know and trust, in other words, people within their community.
If there is no charity in Mainland China, it does not mean that Chinese society is uncaring. It reflects the fact that under communist rule there was no need for charity because everyone lived at the same level and received the same services. Charity was forbidden because it was seen as being a way for the rich to relieve their guilt.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
chegitz guevara
|
|
Ft. Lauderdale, FL Communist Party of Apolyton
Jun 2000
time: 00:36
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui
quote:
the Socialists would have continued to be as impotent as they were before the revolution. |
You mean the 1846 revolutions? The BOURGEOIS revolutions? The ones in which the liberals and socialists undertook? |
That was the last time we cooperated, running dog. After that, you realized our power and got scared of us (at that time, socialists hadn't divided into Socialists and Communists, we were all both). But no, I did not mean the 1848 revolutions (1846 was the Polish Uprising against Russia), but the Soviet and subsequent revolutions. The ones where you realized we could run a society without you.
One of the big problems people today have is they take what they know today, and project it backwards in time. In the 1930s, no one outside the USSR knew what Stalin was up to, not even the Trotskyists, and we hated the guy more than you did, and we had people there, still in the government.
A million people joined and left the Communist Party of the United States in the 1930s (even Ronald Reagan tried to join). Their influrnce was even bigger. Some guy may not have joined the Communists, but when they led a strike and got results, you can be sure people took an interest in what they had to say.
A lot of people were convinced there was going to be a revolution in the U.S. in the 1930s, and they weren't happy about it. So they did what they could to make the lives of working people better, increased wages, created social security, unemployment, etc. When you've got nothing, that Communist sounds pretty reasonable. When you're on the dole, he may sound reasonable, but at least you aren't going to starve to death. It takes the immediacy and necessiity out of the equation.
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
DaShi
|
 |
The Taste of Japan
Sep 2000
time: 05:36
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Tingkai
What you said doesn't have anything to do with your previous statement
You initially claimed that Chinese people do not have a sense of community and "There really isn't a sense of kinship". That's ridiculous. Chinese society is very much a communal one. Do you really think that Chinese society is based on the individualism seen in the West?
The initial focus of Chinese society is the family and then the extended family and then the much wider family clans. In other words, kinship.
The family ties are supplemented by neighbourhood, city or provincial ties. When people move around the country or immigrate, they search out for people from their old communities.
You claimed that Chinese "rarely socialize with strangers". But that's true for every society. Most people spend most of their time socializing with their friends.
It is true that Chinese business people prefer dealing with people they know and trust, in other words, people within their community.
If there is no charity in Mainland China, it does not mean that Chinese society is uncaring. It reflects the fact that under communist rule there was no need for charity because everyone lived at the same level and received the same services. Charity was forbidden because it was seen as being a way for the rich to relieve their guilt. |
In mainland China, it is rare to see a Chinese person go out of their way to help another. In traffic accidents, no one asks if anyone was hurt. Crowds just gather around to watch or pass judgement. My point mainly is that there is no 'love thy neighbor' attitude amongst many people here. Perhaps I was a bit extreme before to say that Chinese people don't make any connections with eachother. This is mainly in mainland China, where most people are Chinese. Outside of China, it is a different story.
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Kuciwalker
|
 |
of Schmooism
Feb 2001
time: 00:36
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by chegitz guevara
quote:
Originally posted by notyoueither
When were the Bolsheviks elected in a free election, Che? |
September of 1917, the Bolsheviks were elected to the Soviets, the government the people of Russia, not the Tsar, created, in a landslide. |
1) was anyone else running
2) who, exactly, was voting?
quote:
How did it come to them the moral authority to plunge the country into a civil war which, as you described, cost so many millions their lives? |
quote:
The Civil War was started by the aristocrats and capitalists, not us. |
Umm... they were in power. There was a civil war. Afterwards, you were in power. How did they start it?
|
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:36.
Apolyton Time is 00:36. |
top of page
|
| archivepost |
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|
17-05-2004 08:45
|