 |
| |
|
|
Velociryx
|
 |
of Candle'Bre
Apr 1999
time: 05:34
|
|
What I can't quite figure is this:
KNOWING that Bolivia is not a well-advanced and matured capitalist society, thus KNOWING that it does not meet the classic Marxist pre-requisite for a successful forray into Communism (bites tongue here to refrain form saying more), is pretty much stating before the revolution even begins that, even if they succeed in taking control, their efforts are ultimately just as doomed to failure as all the ones that came before it.
Thus, instead of finally getting a feather in your collective caps (meant in more than one way, btw) and scoring a point in the win column, by egging this doomed revolution on from your armchairs, are you not simply providing the cheering section for yet another red disaster-in-the-making? And if so, how can this POSSIBLY do anything but harm to your cause? So I guess the question is....knowing all this upfront, why are you not CRINGING at the idea?
Forgive the question, but this seems to run counter to every bit of common sense one can muster on the matter, or is there a part of the picture I'm not seeing?
-=Vel=-
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Lancer
|
|
Oregon Coast, USA! or Bohol, Philippines!
Apr 1999
time: 05:34
|
|
A trivia question is born.
What country has had more revolutions that the earth on which surface it is revolving?
Bolivia; "about 200 revolutions since its independence a hundred and sixty-odd years ago."
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Lancer
|
|
Oregon Coast, USA! or Bohol, Philippines!
Apr 1999
time: 05:34
|
|
Yes MrFun, that's right. You remember Jimmy Carter?
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Velociryx
|
|
of Candle'Bre
Apr 1999
time: 05:34
|
|
During the late ninteenth century and early twentieth century and then during the Cold War, United States had its own "might makes right" policy in Latin American, Carribean, African, and Asian countries.
So does this mean that United States was once a communist nation?
Nope, and I didn't say a thing about other revolutions. Was sticking to the topic at hand (the red tide), and didn't mention any others because that's not what is expected in Bolivia.
The point was that on the one hand, the reds love to talk about this society where everyone is "free," but what they don't like to mention (and get right offended if anyone dares to bring it up) is the fact that, in societies where private ownership is firmly established and fully appreciated (read: most every well-advanced nation on the planet (also known as the places where communism is most likely to succeed, per Marx), and several not so advanced nor well-off), those WITH a stake (even if it is a relatively small stake) in property will be unlikely in the extreme to vote to give up their holdings to the state (or to some smaller collectivist grouping), the only other option left open to the reds is to take said property by force (in Bolivia, for example, the people who live ON the land where the gas is, are now being threatened by the folks who live elsewhere).
Even more amusing is the offense the reds take at the thought that the glories of their revolution will not be recognized and appreciated by everyone, and thus, there will be resistance.
I'm still waiting to see how the white English speaking business elite minority has suddenly become a majority.
Who said that? And where?
-=Vel=-
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Kidicious
|
 |
Diety of Kidiverse
Mar 2003
time: 21:34
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Velociryx
The point was that on the one hand, the reds love to talk about this society where everyone is "free," but what they don't like to mention (and get right offended if anyone dares to bring it up) is the fact that, in societies where private ownership is firmly established and fully appreciated (read: most every well-advanced nation on the planet (also known as the places where communism is most likely to succeed, per Marx), and several not so advanced nor well-off), those WITH a stake (even if it is a relatively small stake) in property will be unlikely in the extreme to vote to give up their holdings to the state (or to some smaller collectivist grouping), the only other option left open to the reds is to take said property by force (in Bolivia, for example, the people who live ON the land where the gas is, are now being threatened by the folks who live elsewhere).
|
Umm.. The only option left is to take it by force because the government is corrupt.
|
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:34.
Apolyton Time is 00:34. |
top of page
|
|
|
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
|
|
|
|
|
|
09-06-2005 03:36
)
Carter was the anti-interventionist. The only brief military forey he ordered was an aborted rescue mission for the Hostages after the Iranian revolution.
|