Summa Contra Buddhism. On Communist Buddha.

[luciferhorus]

Summa Contra Buddhism (Summary Against Buddhism). On Communist Buddha.

On the Proto-Communist Buddha.

Lucifer
http://www.luciferia.tv/animation/A.gif
For Anarchist Communism

When we consider Buddhism as one of the world’s major religions, we must obviously compare it to the teachings of Buddha and when we do so, we find a great disparity, just as we do between the teachings of the anti-Capitalist martyr Jesus and Capitalist Christianity.

As modernists it is appropriate to compare the teachings of Buddha to the philosophy of modern Anarchists and Communists.

Anti-Archon. Opposition to a hierarchy or priesthood.

‘Twice before his death he (Buddha) was asked to appoint some one as the head of the Sangha to control it. But each time he refused saying that the Dhamma (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dharma_(Buddhism) )is the Supreme Commander of the Sangha. He refused to be a dictator and refused to appoint a dictator’

http://www.notmytribe.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/06/untouchables-caste-india.jpg
(‘Untouchables’ in India)

Collectivism, anti-classism and anti-racism (anti-caste-ism).

The Buddhist Sanga was essentially a Communist collective devoid of economic classes, private property (apart from 8 simple items mentioned below) or a priestly class, where all castes (skin-colours) from Brahman to ‘untouchable’ were considered equals.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v219/julsitos/rape1.jpg

The anti-racism of Buddha is of course is a long way from the attitude of Japanese Buddhists, their Capitalist tyrant (Emperor), and their Imperialist master-race ideology which bore fruit in their genocide of the allegedly 'inferior' Japanese and Korean peoples.

Much as it has been with Christianity, Buddhist religion has been utilised as a justification for tyranny, Capitalism, nationalism, imperialism and even racism; the anti-thesis of Buddha’s teachings.

Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger (the current Pope), in 1997, "riled Buddhists when he called the religion an "autocratic spirituality" , and while this is certainly the pot calling the kettle black, it is certainly true today that Buddhism in general as an organised religion, like Catholicism, represents an autocratic spirituality, with a hierarchy of priests and indeed their own anti-Communist ‘Pope.’


Do not accept money, only food. Anti-monetarism.

Buddha of course forbade his comrades to accept any form of payment or money but rather to use the ‘begging bowl’ only to solicit food. This is of course a long way from today’s Japanese Buddhism with their multi-million dollar Temples and their encouragement to supply donations to support a professional priesthood and hierarchy

http://nyenoona.files.wordpress.com/2008/06/2buddha-image-in-wat-phu-by.jpg

No idolatry.

http://www.law.louisville.edu/sites/www.law.louisville.edu/files/CIMG1141.jpg

Buddha was certainly opposed to the Hindu practice of idolatry; there was simply no question of him planting an idol of himself in a temple and having his comrades worship him; such an idea is totally anti-thetical to the teachings of the Communist Buddha, but it is certainly a practice at the heart of modern Buddhism today which exists as a Capitalist and anti-Communist religion.

http://www.vanishingtattoo.com/images/contest2/kali.jpg

No blood sacrifice.

In comparison to Hindusim and Christianity which have at their core the concept of ‘human sacrifice’ Buddhism is entirely devoid of such things, even considering ‘butchers of meat’ to be errant.

http://z.about.com/d/atheism/1/0/G/7/3/Cannibalism.jpg

Buddhist Social Liberation

“Birth does not make an outcaste, birth does not a Brahman make;
action makes a person low, action makes him great."
(Sutta Nipata 136-139, Vasala Sutta)

http://home.earthlink.net/~brelief2/images/u-3.jpg
Babasaheb Ambedkar, founder of India’s Independent Labour Party

Perhaps a foremost modern proponent of Buddhist Socialism was Babasaheb Ambedkar, a champion of human rights, who rather than stressing idolatry and temple worship, stressed social equality and defined the scourge of the Indian people as “Brahmanism (racism / caste-ism) and Capitalism.”,

“Society has been aiming to lay a new foundation as was summarised by the French revolution in three words, fraternity, liberty and equality. The French revolution was welcomed because of this slogan. It failed to produce equality. We welcome the Russian revolution because it aims to produce equality. But it cannot be too much emphasized that in producing equality, society cannot afford to sacrifice fraternity or liberty. Equality will be of no value without fraternity or liberty. It seems that the three can coexist only if one follows the way of the Buddha. ”

http://www.ambedkar.org/gail/AmbedkarAs.htm

‘Taking the points form the Marxian Creed which have survived Dr. Ambedkar compares the Buddha and Karl Marx. He feels that, on the first point there is complete agreement between the Buddha and Karl Marx. That language is different but the meaning is the same. If for misery one reads exploitation Buddha is not away form Marx’

http://www.ambedkar.org/Babasaheb/Ambedkar_and_Communism.htm

In his classic essay 'Buddha or Karl Marx,' Ambedkar writes:

By scientific socialism what Karl Marx meant was that his brand of socialism was inevitable and inescapable and that society was moving towards it and that nothing could prevent its march. It is to prove this contention of his that Marx principally laboured. Marx's contention rested on the following theses. They were:—
(i) That the purpose of philosophy is to reconstruct the world and not to explain the origin of the universe.
(ii) That the force which shapes the course of history are primarily economic.
(iii) That society is divided into two classes, owners and workers. (iv) That there is always a class conflict going on between the two classes.
(v) That the workers are exploited by the owners who misappropriate the surplus value, which is the result of the workers' labour.
(vi) That this exploitation can be put an end to by nationalisation of the instruments of production i.e. abolition of private property.
(vii) That this exploitation is leading to greater and greater impoverishment of the workers.
(viii) That this growing impoverishment of the workers is resulting in a revolutionary spirit among the workers and the conversion of the class conflict into a class struggle.
(ix) That as the workers outnumber the owners, the workers are bound to capture the State and establish their rule, which he called the dictatorship of the proletariat.
(x) These factors are irresistible and therefore socialism is inevitable.

http://www.ambedkar.org/ambcd/20.Buddha%20or%20Karl%20Marx.htm

He further compares the Communist perspective to that of Buddha’s:

i) The function of philosophy is to reconstruct the world and not to waste its time in explaining the origin of the world.
(ii) That there is a conflict of interest between class and class.
(iii) That private ownership of property brings power to one class and sorrow to another through exploitation.
(iv) That it is necessary for the good of society that the sorrow be removed by the abolition of private property.
(Ibid)

He further writes:

…(in this point) there is complete agreement between the Buddha and Karl Marx. To show how close is the agreement I quote below a part of the dialogue between Buddha and the Brahmin Potthapada.

"Then, in the same terms, Potthapada asked (the Buddha) each of the following questions:
1. Is the world not eternal?
2. Is the world finite?
3. Is the world infinite?
4. Is the soul the same as the body?
5. Is the soul one thing, and the body another?
6. Does one who has gained the truth live again after death ?
7. Does he neither live again, nor not live again, after death ? And to each question the exalted one made the same reply: It was this.

(to which Buddha responds:’)
"That too, Potthapada, is a matter on which I have expressed no opinion ".

(Ibid)

Consider also:

According to the rules a Bhikku can have private property only in the following eight articles and no more. These eight articles are:
1 ?
2. } Three robes or pieces of cloth for daily wear.
3. ?
4. A girdle for the loins.
5. An alms-bowl.
6. A razor.
7. A needle.
8. A water strainer.
Further a Bhikku was completely forbidden to receive gold or silver for fear that with gold or silver he might buy some thing beside the eight things he is permitted to have.
These rules are far more rigorous than are to be found in communism in Russia."
(Ibid.)

Thus to conclude modern Buddhism appears to represent the anti-thesis of the Communist, anti-propertyist, anti-monetarist, anti-idolatrous teachings of Buddha, just as Christianity represents the anti-thesis of the anti-Capitalist Jesus. Buddhism as a religion appears to have no effect with regards to the transformation of society into the anti-propertyist, anti-monetarist, anti-idolatrous, anti-Archon (without tyrants or political or religous authorities) Communist collective (sangha) of the Buddha.

Shame. Woe to the Buddhists who make a mockery of his Communist teachings and who represent his anti-thesis with their temples, priests, idols and their anti-Communism. Thankfully in the Buddhist heartland of Nepal, Maoism is replacing Buddhism; the Maoists have deposed their Buddhist Dictator (Monarch) and taken over the government.

http://www.asianews.it/files/img/NEPAL_Maoists_Army_(409_x_287).jpg
(Maoist gerrillas in Nepal)

Respect to our late comrade Buddha.

Love and Light
Lux

http://www.independent.co.uk/multimedia/archive/00024/nepali-maoists_24014s.jpg

Revolution in all the world.

Following massive popular demonstrations, supported by most major political parties of Nepal, and a prolonged "People's War" against the monarchy, the CPN(M) (Communist Party of Nepal) became the largest party in the Nepalese Constituent Assembly election, 2008. At present, this party is the major ruling party in Nepal, leading a coalition government.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Communist_Party_of_Nepal_(Maoist)


Though Buddha left behind no written texts neither by his own hand, nor dictated to a scribe, many of the early dialogues and teachings of one of history's greatest proto-Communists, written centuries after his death can be found on: http://www.buddhanet.net/ebooks_s.htm

[zero1]

Agreed, 100%. Both Buddha and Jesus were anarcho-communists, or as I would have it Libertarian Socialists.

"Khristos", forerunner of "Christ" before the man upon whom the story was based became deliberately mythographized by the priesthoods, was a sort of pagan Buddha or "Enlightened One", but like all paganism with distince traces of the Olde pre-patriarchal Religion which was bound up in Goddess-worship (ie. the Khristos was the son of a female deity, originally a war-goddess but later transfigured into a virgin-prune in the mould of Pallas-Athene/Virgin Mary for the Father God, Zeus/Amon/Jupiter etc).

Gautama Buddha was the greatest anti-Capitalist reformer in history, no doubt in my mind, and a genuinely enlightened man. As I believe there was a man who lived upon whom the personage of "Jesus Christ" was based, I will include him as another, if naught but for the inherent and striking similarity of their respective teachings (when properly understood).

Again, great post LuciferHorus.

love & Light

Z1

[thelonious]

I doubt that Buddha would have approved the tactics of "Maoist guerrilas", seeing as how the Maoists invaded Tibet and enslaved that nation. :rolleyes:

http://bandaragama.files.wordpress.com/2008/06/buddhist-2.jpg

[eternal_spirit]

[/URL] Communists invaded Tibet and murdered Buddhists.
An article released by the Tibetan Government in Exile in 1996 states that the treaty was imposed on Tibet by force and it "was never validly concluded and was rejected by Tibetans,"[31] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Invasion_of_Tibet_%281950%E2%80%931951%29#cite_not e-goldstein-0) a position that was supported by a UK parliamentary review.[ (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Invasion_of_Tibet_%281950%E2%80%931951%29#cite_not e-31)

Death total : claims By Tibetan authorities based on 20+ year statistics[34] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Invasion_of_Tibet_%281950%E2%80%931951%29#cite_not e-33) [35] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Invasion_of_Tibet_%281950%E2%80%931951%29#cite_not e-34)[36] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Invasion_of_Tibet_%281950%E2%80%931951%29#cite_not e-35) 433,000 military action 343,000 famine 173,000 imprisonment 157,000 execution 93,000 torture 9,000 suicide Total: 1,148,000 deaths.


Tibetan 1953's census recorded a population of 1,273,969 for Tibet Autonomous Region (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tibet_Autonomous_Region).[37] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Invasion_of_Tibet_%281950%E2%80%931951%29#cite_not e-Leo_A._Orleans-36)


[URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Invasion_of_Tibet_%281950%E2%80%931951%29#cite_not e-37"]

[lightgiver]

The 4TH Noble Path,

1. Correct thought: avoiding covetousness, the wish to harm others and WRONG views (like thinking: actions have no consequences, I never have any problems, there are no ways to end suffering etc.)
2. Correct speech: avoid lying, divisive and harsh speech and idle gossip.
3. Correct actions: avoid killing, stealing and sexual misconduct
4. Correct livelihood: try to make a living with the above attitude of thought, speech and actions.
5. Correct understanding: developing genuine wisdom.
(The last three aspects refer mainly to the practice of meditation:)
6. Correct effort: after the first real step we need joyful perseverance to continue.
7. Correct mindfulness: try to be aware of the "here and now", instead of dreaming in the "there and then".
8. Correct concentration: to keep a steady, calm and attentive state of mind.

[zero1]

[/URL] Communists invaded Tibet and murdered Buddhists.
An article released by the Tibetan Government in Exile in 1996 states that the treaty was imposed on Tibet by force and it "was never validly concluded and was rejected by Tibetans,"[31] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Invasion_of_Tibet_%281950%E2%80%931951%29#cite_not e-goldstein-0) a position that was supported by a UK parliamentary review.[ (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Invasion_of_Tibet_%281950%E2%80%931951%29#cite_not e-31)

Death total : claims By Tibetan authorities based on 20+ year statistics[34] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Invasion_of_Tibet_%281950%E2%80%931951%29#cite_not e-33)

[35] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Invasion_of_Tibet_%281950%E2%80%931951%29#cite_not e-34)[36] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Invasion_of_Tibet_%281950%E2%80%931951%29#cite_not e-35) 433,000 military action 343,000 famine 173,000 imprisonment 157,000 execution 93,000 torture 9,000 suicide Total: 1,148,000 deaths.


Tibetan 1953's census recorded a population of 1,273,969 for Tibet Autonomous Region (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tibet_Autonomous_Region).[37] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Invasion_of_Tibet_%281950%E2%80%931951%29#cite_not e-Leo_A._Orleans-36)


[URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Invasion_of_Tibet_%281950%E2%80%931951%29#cite_not e-37"]

ES, firstly yes of course they did - but Maoism has yielded nothing but a State Capitalist system in China, as it will elsewhere where the blanket of it may be implemented (cf. Nepal, the historic birthplace of Gautama Buddha).

State Capitalism is a bourgeoise oligarchical sort of fascism which is the other side of the same coin as Nazism or the Roman Catholic Church.

It is as undesirable as so-called "Free Market" Capitalism and is definitely not the model Buddha or Jesus would have proposed, and indeed is antithetical to real Communism, which is Libertarian Socialism or more succintly Anarcho-Communalism.

Secondly, when the Chinese went "communist" ie. State Capitalist, they still did not want the eradication of Buddhism - Chinese Communism has many ties to Buddhism, they merely wanted it run and governed by the State, instead of the Lamas. Buddhists were oppressed and murdered, but only to strike fear into the hearts of the priesthoods who were loyal to figures such as the Dalai Lama, and not the Chairman of the Communist Party (who is an authoritarian autocrat as much as any Western Capitalist CEO or President).

Thirdly, the Chinese invaded Tibet because of the ties to the CIA and American big-business that the ruling Priesthood under the Dalai Lama had there, to ensure security for their mainland by annexing a country which otherwise would have been a base of operations and safe haven for foreign intelligence ops and domestic enemies.

Lastly, I hope LuciferHorus answers your assertion too, as he might do it from an angle I have missed. :);)

[eternal_spirit]

The 1959 Tibetan uprising, or 1959 Tibetan Rebellion began on 10 March (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/March_10) 1959 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1959), when an anti-Chinese and anti-Communist revolt erupted in Lhasa (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lhasa), the capital of Tibet (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tibet), which had been under the reign of the Communist Party of China (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Communist_Party_of_China) since the Invasion of Tibet (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/People%27s_Liberation_Army_invasion_of_Tibet_%2819 50%E2%80%931951%29) in 1950.[3] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1959_Tibetan_uprising#cite_note-2) Although the 14th Dalai Lama (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tenzin_Gyatso)'s flight occurred in 1959, armed conflict between Tibetan rebellion forces and the Chinese army started in 1956 in the Kham (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kham) and Amdo (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amdo) regions, which were subjected to socialist reform. The guerrilla warfare later spread to other areas of Tibet and lasted through 1962.
The anniversary of the uprising is observed by Tibetans as the Tibetan Uprising Day (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tibetan_Uprising_Day).


By 1957, Kham was in chaos. PLA reprisals against Khampa resistance fighters such as the Chushi Gangdruk (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chushi_Gangdruk) became increasingly brutal. Reportedly, they included beatings, starving prisoners, and the rape of prisoners' wives in front of them until they confessed. Monks and nuns were forced to have sex with each other and forcibly renounce their celibacy vows. After torture, these men and women were often killed.[5] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1959_Tibetan_uprising#cite_note-4) By the late 1950s, the number of Tibetan freedom fighters numbered in the tens of thousands.[2] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1959_Tibetan_uprising#cite_note-Roberts-1) Kham's monastic networks came to be used by guerilla forces to relay messages and hide rebels.[6] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1959_Tibetan_uprising#cite_note-5) Punitive strikes were carried out by the Chinese government against Tibetan villages and monasteries. Tibetan exiles claim that threats to bomb the Potala Palace (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Potala_Palace) and the Dalai Lama were made by Chinese military commanders in an attempt to intimidate the guerrilla forces into submission.[1] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1959_Tibetan_uprising#cite_note-giehist-0)

Lhasa continued to abide by the seventeen point agreement and sent a delegation to Kham to quell the rebellion. After speaking with the rebel leaders, the delegation instead joined the rebellion.[7] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1959_Tibetan_uprising#cite_note-Chushi_Gangdruk-6) Kham leaders contacted the Central Intelligence Agency (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Central_Intelligence_Agency) (CIA), but the CIA under President Dwight D. Eisenhower (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dwight_D._Eisenhower) required an official request from Lhasa to support the rebels. Lhasa did not act.[7] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1959_Tibetan_uprising#cite_note-Chushi_Gangdruk-6) Finally, the CIA began to provide covert support for the rebellion, without word from Lhasa. By then the rebellion had spread to Lhasa which had filled with refugees from Amdo and Kham.[2] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1959_Tibetan_uprising#cite_note-Roberts-1) Opposition to the Chinese presence in Tibet grew within the city of Lhasa.


read more
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1959_Tibetan_uprising

[lightgiver]

Mao took up residence in Zhongnanhai, a compound next to the Forbidden City in Beijing, and there he ordered the construction of an indoor swimming pool and other buildings. Mao often did his work either in bed or by the side of the pool, preferring not to wear formal clothes unless absolutely necessary, according to Dr. Li Zhisui, his personal physician. (Li's book, The Private Life of Chairman Mao, is regarded as controversial, especially by those sympathetic to Mao.)

Along with land reform, there were also campaigns of mass repression and public executions targeting alleged counter-revolutionaries (zhenfan)[18], such as former GMD officials, businessmen, former employees of Western companies, intellectuals whose loyalty was suspect, and significant numbers of rural gentry.[19] The U.S. State department in 1976 estimated that there may have been a million killed in the land reform, 800,000 killed in the counter-revolutionary campaign. Mao himself claimed that a total of 700,000 people were executed during the years 1949–53. However, because there was a policy to select "at least one landlord, and usually several, in virtually every village for public execution", the number of deaths range between between 2 million and 5 million. In addition, at least 1.5 million people were sent to "reform through labour" camps. Mao’s personal role in ordering mass executions is undeniable. He defended these killings as necessary for the securing of power.

Starting in 1951, Mao initiated two successive movements in an effort to rid urban areas of corruption by targeting wealthy capitalists and political opponents, known as the three-anti/five-anti campaigns. A climate of raw terror developed as workers denounced their bosses, wives turned on their husbands, and children informed on their parents; the victims often being humiliated at mass meetings. Mao insisted that minor offenders be criticized and reformed or sent to labour camps, "while the worst among them should be shot." These campaigns took several hundred thousand lives, the vast majority via suicide. In Shanghai, people jumping to their deaths from skyscrapers became so commonplace that they acquired the nickname 'parachutes'.

At the 1958 Party congress in Chengdu, Mao expressed support for the idea of personality cults if they venerated figures who were genuinely worthy of adulation:
“ There are two kinds of personality cults. One is a healthy personality cult, that is, to worship men like Marx, Engels, Lenin, and Stalin. Because they hold the truth in their hands. The other is a false personality cult, i.e. not analysed and blind worship.

http://img24.imageshack.us/img24/9851/kissingermao.jpg (http://img24.imageshack.us/my.php?image=kissingermao.jpg)

Kissenger and Mao.

Jung Chang and Jon Halliday, in Mao: the Unknown Story, alleged that Mao knew of the vast suffering and that he was dismissive of it, blaming bad weather or other officials for the famine.

"Although slaughter was not his purpose with the Leap, he was more than ready for myriad deaths to result, and hinted to his top echelon that they should not be too shocked if they happened (438-439)."

Whatever the case, the Great Leap Forward led to millions of deaths in China. Mao lost esteem among many of the top party cadres and was eventually forced to abandon the policy in 1962, also losing some political power to moderate leaders, notably Liu Shaoqi and Deng Xiaoping. However, Mao and national propaganda claimed that he was only partly to blame. As a result, he was able to remain Chairman of the Communist Party, with the Presidency transferred to Liu Shaoqi.

The Great Leap Forward was a disaster for China. Although the steel quotas were officially reached, almost all of it made in the countryside was useless lumps of iron, as it had been made from assorted scrap metal in home made furnaces with no reliable source of fuel such as coal. According to Zhang Rongmei, a geometry teacher in rural Shanghai during the Great Leap Forward:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mao_Zedong

Mao was one of the worst mass murderers of his time. According to assumptions made afterwards of people killed directly or indirectly by starvation or diseases only to be surpassed by Stalin.

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=3439076506613505887

[thelonious]

Mao was a butcher, with his Great Leap Forward and Cultural Revolution being responsible for the deaths of tens of millions of innocent people.

This doesn't even include his war against Buddhism, Taoism, Confucianism, and other "old thought".

Free Tibet now!

http://www.freetibet.org/

[luciferhorus]

I doubt that Buddha would have approved the tactics of "Maoist guerrilas",

Well Theolonius there is absolutely no question that Buddha was a pacifist, but my essay is a brief critique of Buddhism, not of Buddha.


Further since you are a member of a military order of knights where cultists buy and sell pompous military titles for Capitalist coin, and whose members are hardly forbidden from professions of the military, arm's manufacturing, and the assorted chaff of police state collaborators, commited to armed violent Capitalist revolution and genocide of all militant enemies (although the statistics seem to indicate that the victims are mostly innocent non-combatants; women and children etc.), you are hardly in a position to criticise the Maoists; and further you are hardly in a position to defend Buddha from any criticism, since much of the evil that he forbade among his followers is considered quite acceptable among your fellow knights.

Further I would add that although Buddha was a pacifist, that the Hindhu aristocracy were not, which might explain why almost two and a half thousand years afrer Buddha, his motherland (India) is today still a sewer of Capitalism, poverty, economic slavery, sex slavery, child slavery and institutionalised racism; much I admire Buddha, one simply cannot defeat miltiant Capitalists and religious cultists of the ilk of the Hindus and Masons by pacifism.

Further I might point out that Buddha propagated the 'sin of restriction' with regards to human sexuality and was very far from sexual communism / sexual liberation and thelemic philosophy, however I consider it anachronistic (out of historical context) to criticise him for this since he is an ancient ancestor who allegedly lived in a sex palace (as did many of the tyrants of history) and probably associated that with the corruption of the kings in comparison to the extreme suffering of the proletariat; were he alive today his hindsight on human history would be different.

The victims of Capitalist revolution are in their 'billions.'

seeing as how the Maoists invaded Tibet and enslaved that nation. :rolleyes:

You are such a hypocrite Thelonious; I suggest you consider the beam in the eyes of the cultists of your Capitalist miltary order and the genocidal effects upon humanity of the various Capitalist military orders (i.e., Masonry) to whom nothing seems forbidden, even that which is of unspeakable and unimaginable evil.

Torture may be worse now in Iraq than under Saddam Hussein, the UN's chief anti-torture expert says.
news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/5368360.stm

http://www.internationalist.org/iraqtorturedcollage.jpg

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_HbRE5y_QAOw/RwO37V3paXI/AAAAAAAAAAM/TwjuAPaMkZk/S660/Masonic_Welcome_Home_For_the_Troops-019.jpg

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_HbRE5y_QAOw/RwPCVV3paYI/AAAAAAAAAAU/0FO7kPrKdkk/S660/Masonic_Welcome_Home_For_the_Troops-048.jpg

http://www.cuttingedge.org/Bush_Masonic_TexasPublicSchool.jpg

I'm glad to have you here Theolonious since you are clearly one of the more intelligent and educated defenders of Masonic cultism whom I have come accross on the Internet, and frankly I'd rather have intelligent cultists, hypocrites and Capitalist devils to discuss such matters with than the usual dross which Masonry seems to recruit nowadays.


LL

Lux


http://naxalwar.files.wordpress.com/2009/04/nepal_election_results_02.jpg



These articles were compiled by the MLM-Revolutionary Study Group, and are available separately on BannedThought.Net.

Communist Party of India (Maoist), Central Committee
Press Release April 24, 2008

The verdict in Nepal is a verdict against feudal monarchy, Indian expansionism and US imperialism; it reflects the growing aspirations of the Nepalese masses for land, livelihood and democracy!

Oppose the moves of the imperialists, particularly US imperialists, and the Indian expansionists to meddle in the affairs of Nepal!!

The election results in Nepal have proved once again the overwhelming anger of the masses against the outdated feudal monarchic rule in Nepal, against the Indian expansionist’s bullying and domination of Nepal, against US domination and oppression, and are a reflection of the growing aspirations of the Nepali masses for democracy, land, livelihood and genuine freedom from imperialist and feudal exploitation. It is these aspirations of the overwhelming majority of the masses that had completely trounced the parties that had either supported the King and/or the Indian ruling classes or hesitated to come out strongly against feudal, imperialist oppression and Indian intervention in Nepal. Hence, when an alternative like the CPN(M) came to the fore, with its open commitment to abolish the feudal monarchy once for all, abrogate all unequal treaties signed with India by the former ruling classes of Nepal, and ensure democracy and equality for the oppressed sections of society such as Dalits, adivasis, national minorities and women, the masses enthusiastically veered towards the Maoists. The CC, CPI(Maoist), hails the Nepali masses for routing the feudal, pro-imperialist, pro-Indian comprador parties and voting for a genuine change in the rotten feudal system in Nepal. It sends its fraternal revolutionary greetings for their victory in the struggle against the reactionary forces which is the culmination of a ten year process of historic struggles and battles where over 10,000 gave their precious lives.

https://tiscali.co.uk/media/images/feeds/reuters/world/2008/04/14/150/2008-04-13t050756z_01_nootr_rtridsp_2_oukwd-uk-nepal-elections-maoists.jpg

[thelonious]

The Communist cult has far been responsible for more deaths than any movement in history. Wherever the flag of Communism has flown, absolute tyranny has followed.


Communist Cult Leaders Responsible For Genocide

Josef Stalin
Mao Zedong
Pol Pot
Kim Il Sung
Kim Jong Il
Mengistu Haile Mariam

Communist Cult Leaders Responsible For Mass Murder

Vladimir Lenin
Felix Dzerzhinsky
Deng Xiaping
Fidel Castro
Nicolae Ceauşescu
Erich Honecker
Bela Kun


Communism is a crime against humanity.

[flyermay]

The Communist cult has far been responsible for more deaths than any movement in history. Wherever the flag of Communism has flown, absolute tyranny has followed.


Communist Cult Leaders Responsible For Genocide

Josef Stalin
Mao Zedong
Pol Pot
Kim Il Sung
Kim Jong Il
Mengistu Haile Mariam

Communist Cult Leaders Responsible For Mass Murder

Vladimir Lenin
Felix Dzerzhinsky
Deng Xiaping
Fidel Castro
Nicolae Ceauşescu
Erich Honecker
Bela Kun

Communism is a crime against humanity.

You forgot to add the list of "democrats" who were also responsible for genocide and mass murderer (to balance your statement). :rolleyes:

Oh, wait, I cannot think of any political ideology free of leaders deeply involved in genocide and mass murder (coincidence???).

Political leaders are a crime against humanity

[luciferhorus]

The Communist cult has far been responsible for more deaths than any movement in history. Wherever the flag of Communism has flown, absolute tyranny has followed.



Pleased to meet you Thelonious.

Please allow me to introduce myself to you.

My premise here on the david-icke forum is:

The Capitalist cult has far been responsible for more deaths than any movement in history. Wherever the flag of Capitalism has flown, absolute tyranny has followed.

This is not an 'argument;' rather merely a statement.

Hopefully we shall both elaborate in front of the assembled wheat and chaff, our 'ad hoc' enemies and allies.

So nice to meet you; i have no desire to napalm you; I prefer debate.

Let us begin.


Here is a great genius who was genocidal in his ideology.

http://www.oktat.com/pictures/img/mao_zedong_09.jpg

Here is all genocidal and militant folly, with weapons of mass destruction, and an army of police state collaborators of your ilk.

http://www.saintjohn.nbcc.nb.ca/Heritage/royal/images/sittingqueent.jpg

Let us debate this.

Your mistress is not as genocidal as mine.

Thus we as slaves to the goddess, we might now debate who is more genocidal.

Love and Light

Lux

Fire, plague and poisoned waters.

By 'all means necessary'



http://www.theeastisred.com/images/silks/SLK%2000135.jpg



http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_wB_B2FyhJMM/SOiRGA9YeYI/AAAAAAAAAHg/Yfe7kELMWP8/s320/Vietnam_napalm_1972.jpg

[lightgiver]

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=4954282565997157307

I suppose one tin pot dictatorship replaces another tin pot dictatorship,no matter what label one puts upon it,

Its just deciding which is the lesser of 2 evils.

[thelonious]

You forgot to add the list of "democrats" who were also responsible for genocide and mass murderer (to balance your statement).

We mustn't try to compare apples with oranges. There has been no group in the history of the world with the blatant murder record of the Communists.

I invite anyone who says that Democrats or Republicans are as bad to move to North Korea in order to see the differences firsthand. There's really no comparison at all.

[lightgiver]

Tyrants still exist because
of its brainwashed people

Good people become evil
because of the brainwashed
system created by Tyrants

Tyrants and Brainwash have
the same mind, same belief,


The brainwasher's and tyrants' mindset:
1) Never consider/accept the possibility
of something that cannot sense:
Buddha, God, Saint ..Religion

Ironically, they accept the solar system
The round earth, the Atom ....
Even though they cannot
use their limited sense to touch them

It is the consequences of
fallacious Ignorance.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EZEKFQdK1Ks

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U5tnAbQGYVg

"The most potent weapon in
the hands of the oppressor is
the mind of the oppressed." --
Steve Biko

[flyermay]

We mustn't try to compare apples with oranges. There has been no group in the history of the world with the blatant murder record of the Communists.

I invite anyone who says that Democrats or Republicans are as bad to move to North Korea in order to see the differences firsthand. There's really no comparison at all.

I'll look for some examples tomorrow, for now just think on how many people were instantly killed in Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

[luciferhorus]

To Thelonious

Mao made some mistakes in his agricultural revolution, as have I, but not out of premeditation.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/b/b4/Che-mao.jpg

Mao and I were and are now far from the premeditated genocide and torture of innocents, and of the anti-Capitalists of Eden; obviously the like of yourself must be given over to the firing squads and subjected to the merciless brutality as the 'chaff',' (as useless eaters, economic parasites, morally worthless vermin (untermensche) who are unworthy of life) just as those of your ilk have done to their militant enemies and victims; I am not innocent of the blood of those of your ilk; on the contrary my robes are eternally stained with the blood of your bretheren and I bear not an iota or jot of remorse; I celebrate the rivers of blood of your Capitalist bretheren, and I eternally curse them to hell, in the spirit of Mao and Che.

I consider it anachronistic to criticse Mao too severely; he liked to have sex with numerous Communist women and to eat food; this behaviour does not constitute sin (i.e., evil) and if it does I am also forever condemned with Mao; neither is the holocaust of one's enemies in war a sin (i.e., evil); if one is on the side if anti-Capitalism; I am destined to go to anti-Christian / anti-Masonic / pro-Communist hell with them anyway; I am too far into this; I wil always love Mao and Che and will defend them, now and in eternity against morally worthless Christian / Masonic devils like you; the aforementioned Communists are possibly my greatest mentors, my love and my inspiration to whom my eternal soul is bound, and I will not have morally inferior vermin, scum of your own ilk, berate them in my presence, not without verbal retaliation.

http://www.math.jussieu.fr/~kahn/Timor/images/torture/torture4.jpg

Here is deliberate the premidiated evil which Mao and I would both agree on:

http://protoplasm.files.wordpress.com/2009/01/water-torture.jpg

That is Christianty and all it's worth.

But Mao, Ho Che, Che, Fidel, Trotsky et. al. remain as my eminent saints and martyrs; would they be condemed to hell by the Christians, I am bound to bear that burden with them and to spend eternity in Christian hell with them.

And thus are we bound on earth to our allies and enemies in eternity.

I worry that the spirit of Mao shall always love me, as I love him, and that he shall in eternity shall hate you, and that you shall not be among the 'saved,' but that is of your own doing, my Capitalist devil brother, and not of mine; any compassion I feel for you, is only my own weakness and compassion for the enemy which I am ready to overcome and resist and to deny in eternity.

http://i129.photobucket.com/albums/p204/vampire87_2006/anarchist.jpg


Behind you I perceive the chaff of the state terrorists and police state collaboraters.

But here you are only armed with your knowledge and your intellect and your worthelss moral philosphy.

In other words, you are totally defenseless and morally worthless, and insignificant; a mere detail of the history of Capitalism


Her is your moral worth

http://www.freemasonrywatch.org/pics/georgevi.masonic.garb.gif


In eternity, you shall end up with that bitch Elizabeth, and I shall be redeemed by Mao.

Here is your moral worth, totally genocidal, an armchair warrior of Capitalist revolution

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/c5/Mao-young.jpg


And here is mine:

I deamd nothing less than that my robes are dibbed in the blood and in the blood of those of your ilk.

http://incontiguousbrick.files.wordpress.com/2007/06/mao-zedong-3.jpg


I shall take my fate; and leave you to your own.


In eternity, the world is not enough

Lux





Your allies and enemies on earth shall be your eternal allies and enemies.

What we bind on earth we bind in heaven (Tien)

Lux


http://tbn1.google.com/images?q=tbn:KwQVlptoKLuMQM:http://mikeely.files.wordpress.com/2008/03/redindia.jpg

[lightgiver]

Dream on dreamers Ha Ha,you are in cloud cuckoo land,if anyone thinks that ideology is making a comeback.

They state typing from their capitalist homes,brought up and educated in a capitalist country,with far more freedoms than any type of commie Ideology,its a just a choice which is the lesser of 2 evils and which one would people choose to live in.:)

As far as mao,s and other dictators Ideology goes,big time evil comes to mind,and did you see the brainwashed masses in the films:eek: and the countless deaths heaped upon his own people from his silly and dangerous Idiocy's what people still today admire,now that is very disturbing to say the least,much on par with the NWO Ideology's,lets hope neither come about.

[thelonious]

I'll look for some examples tomorrow, for now just think on how many people were instantly killed in Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

That's true, but in the end, it actually saved lives.

If the US had had to invade the island of Japan, they estimated Japanese civilian casualties to be 3 times what they were in Nagasaki and Hiroshima, not to even mention the US troop casualties that would have been sustained.

The fact that the bomb was necessary is lamentable, but what other answer could there have been? The Japanese were given ample warning of a "doomsday bomb" and opportunity to surrender. They ignored it.

My uncle was in the Bataan Death March. They lined the prisoners up, called every third man to step forward, then shot them point blank in the head. The only water they had to drink was the water the Japanese soldiers had used to shave with, and their only food was rotten fish heads.

Somebody had to end that war.

[thelonious]

Dream on dreamers Ha Ha,you are in cloud cuckoo land,if anyone thinks that ideology is making a comeback.

They state typing from their capitalist homes,brought up and educated in a capitalist country,with far more freedoms than any type of commie Ideology,its a just a choice which is the lesser of 2 evils and which one would people choose to live in.:)

As far as mao,s Ideology goes,big time evil comes to mind,and did you see the brainwashed masses in the films:eek:

For once, I agree with LG completely.

[lightgiver]

For once, I agree with LG completely.

and I with you on this one;)

[luciferhorus]

http://aftermathnews.files.wordpress.com/2008/11/freemasons_duke_kent.jpg

[luciferhorus]

For once, I agree with LG completely.


No Thelonious, it is hardly a 'first;' it is so nice to see you two girls unified; it is just as I predicted; after all the Christians and Masons are on the same side; you are both in love with the god of Capital; your allies both fight for Christan State terrorism and are anti-Communists.

I shall have to leave this debate for a few days, since I am travelling, I am off to commune with the Devil himself in the Devil's motherland; and in the meantime I would suggest that you two make up, count the dead and tortured innocents of the Christian / Christian / Masonic revolution, and perhaps in a few days I shall return, and we can add up the statistics of the long and bloody history of Christianity and Masonic revolution.

In the meantime, please try to refrain from dropping any depleted uranium on women and children and from sexually abusing muslim men; I do understand that it is in your nature to do otherwise, but it is far beyond my understanding of '93.'

Lux

'Oh how good and how pleasant it is when bretheren dwell together in unity'

http://www.excatholicsforchrist.com/images/priest.JPG
(Above: A Masonic Christian Devil (Army Chaplain).

http://www.mysticvalleylodge.org/images/DenningWashingtonBible.jpg

(Above: some Capitalist Devils with their Holy Book)


http://etregalia.com/lg_images/masonic-altar-bible_lg.jpg

(Above: a close-up of the Holy Book of the genocidal, state terrorist, narco terrorist, infanticidal, proto-fascist god to whom Masonic and Christian cultists swear their legal, military and Capitalist oaths.)


http://www.whereistheoutrage.net/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2006/11/return-coffins-from-iraq.jpg

'Oh how good and how pleasant it is when bretheren dwell together in unity'

http://www.mqmagazine.co.uk/issue-21/issue-21-images/p-29-a.jpg

Burying the Masonic and Christian dead; slavation through faith in the god of Capital.

Prior to my present Masonic appointment as Provincial Grand Chaplain for Buckinghamshire
On a cold February morning in 1940 I was born the fourth child of a Regimental Sergeant-Major stationed at Catterick camp in Yorkshire. He was also a life-long Salvationist. He became a Freemason many years later and had been Chaplain to Eden Park Lodge No. 123 in Surrey.
On his death-bed he turned to me – I was dressed in my uniform as a full-time Salvation Army officer – and said wistfully: “I always wondered, David, why you never asked to join my Lodge?”
He then proceeded to recite the working tools of an Entered Apprentice Freemason:
“The twenty-four inch gauge represents the twenty-four hours of the day, part to be spent in prayer to Almighty God, part in labour and refreshment, and part in serving a friend or Brother in time of need…”
Was this, in essence, so different from the Covenant and Dedication that I had signed and pledged my allegiance to, 17 years earlier, at the time when I was Commissioned and ordained to serve God through the ranks of the Salvation Army?
I spent many days, months – indeed, over five years thinking and pondering on these thoughts before a very fine friend asked me if I had ever thought of becoming a Mason?
I answered – ‘Yes!’ And so, on the first day of April 1981, I was initiated, as a Lewis, in company with a second candidate, into Freemasonry and became a member of the Lodge of Integrity No. 5149, which meets at Chelmsford.
‘….Masonry is free, and requires a perfect freedom of inclination in every Candidate for its mysteries. It is founded on the purest principles of piety and virtue…vows of fidelity are required; but let me assure you that in those vows there is nothing incompatible with your civil, moral or religious duties….’
Oh! I have found this to be so very true.
Freemasonry is not a religion – ‘it is a peculiar system of morality’ but its teachings provide so much of…‘what’s good to be understood by a …mason.’
Twenty-six years have now passed and they have been a most thrilling and rewarding part of my life. As a Salvationist and a Mason there has been no conflict with my faith, no conflict in my daily living, and no conflict in my dealings with other people.
Both the Salvation Army, a branch of the Christian Church, and the Fraternity of our Brotherhood, have parallel ideals –

http://www.mqmagazine.co.uk/issue-21/issue-21-images/p-29-1.gif


http://www.mqmagazine.co.uk/issue-21/p-29.php


Blessed are the poor, just so long as they die in a reign of fire from the sky without complaint

http://bristol.indymedia.org/attachments/oct2007/major_tim_saunders_briefs_hrh_the_duke_of_kent.jpg

(Above; The Duke of Kent, Grand Master of all Masonic slaves of the York Rite of Masonry)

The poor, meek, humble Grand Master.

http://www.constantinian.com/pictures/press/pictures/Royalty-2003-p3.jpg

And here is the poor head of the Christian Church; the highest representative of 'Jesus' on earth, 'defensor fides' of the Capitalist god, in whose name all manner of state terrorism, narco-terrorism, torture and murder is committed.

http://i105.photobucket.com/albums/m202/anunnaki_2006/Image32.gif


http://warshop.cz/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2006/02/prince_harry_nazi.jpg

Above: Her Beloved Son (and also James Hewitt's), possibly the future head of the army, the government, and of the Church of England, the representative of Jesus on earth.

[luciferhorus]

http://www.awalls.org/files/images/Samba.jpg

Blessed are the poor who shall inherit the earth.

[flyermay]

That's true, but in the end, it actually saved lives.

If the US had had to invade the island of Japan, they estimated Japanese civilian casualties to be 3 times what they were in Nagasaki and Hiroshima, not to even mention the US troop casualties that would have been sustained.

I can’t believe what I’m reading!!!

So, you justify the ruthless killing of the few to save the many? I’m wondering why that sounds to me like a communist justification for mass murder and genocide…

Let me ask you a question: would you kill a healthy human being, to save 5 patients awaiting different transplants? Well, that exactly what you are saying…


The fact that the bomb was necessary is lamentable, but what other answer could there have been? The Japanese were given ample warning of a "doomsday bomb" and opportunity to surrender. They ignored it.

There was never, there isn’t, and there never will be a justification to cowardly drop a nuclear bomb (or any other explosive device) over a civilian population.

Here is Picasso criticising such tactics (obviously ignored), which represents the first bombing ever of a civilian population in Guernica (Euskadi)

http://memex.naughtons.org/wp-content/uploads/2009/03/guernica.jpg

But those are conventional bombs. Your government is the only one to have taken a steep forward and dropped the 2 only nuclear bombs over civilians in history, and if that wasn't enough, it insist on dropping depleted uranium shells on the civilian population of Iraq (for their own good and freedom; I suppose).

Your government's total disregard for human life has even taken them to the extreme of testing the effects of nuclear weapons and chemical agents on their own soldiers. Which by the way, are openly called worthless pieces of s**t by one of your highest ranking politicians: "Military men are dumb, stupid animals to be used as pawns for foreign policy (Henry Kissinger)", with whom I happen to agree.

http://www.davidicke.com/forum/picture.php?albumid=309&pictureid=2726


My uncle was in the Bataan Death March. They lined the prisoners up, called every third man to step forward, then shot them point blank in the head. The only water they had to drink was the water the Japanese soldiers had used to shave with, and their only food was rotten fish heads.

And the idea of anyone justifying it with the excuse of saving the lives of the troops is simply sad. I can’t understand how anyone can think that the life of those brainwashed trained ruthless killers is even close the value of a human life. All that was human in them was long gone during instruction, where they are driven to lose their identity, individualism, own thoughts, rationale, ideals, compassion, love, and the list goes on and on until they make a “brainless puppet”.

Somebody had to end that war.

So… according to that statement, you would agree on Japan (or any other country) dropping nuclear bombs on the US with the justification of ending a war…

[eternal_spirit]

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/news...-Iraq-war.html



Former MI6 chief says Britain was 'dragged' into Iraq war
Britain was "dragged into a war in Iraq which was always against out better judgment" the former deputy head of MI6 has claimed, in a remark that will reignite the debate over political interference in the war.


By Duncan Gardham, Security Correspondent
Last Updated: 11:25PM BST 03 May 2009
Former MI6 chief says Britain was 'dragged' into Iraq war
British troops leave Iraq this week after the contentious six-year mission Photo: Lewis Whyld/PA Wire

The comments, made by Nigel Inkster, who was deputy director of MI6 at the time, make clear there were reservations over the war at a very senior level within the Secret Intelligence Service.

MI6 was blamed for the failure of intelligence that took Britain to war after helping produce a dossier in which Tony Blair claimed that Iraq was ready to use weapons of mass destruction within 45 minutes.

The dossier, said to have been "sexed up" by Downing Street, also mentioned controversial intelligence that Saddam Hussain was seeking uranium from Niger.

In a speech at the Institute for Public Policy Research, Mr Inkster blamed weakness at the Foreign Office for allowing Britain to get dragged into a war over which officials had serious doubts.

"The Foreign Office no longer does foreign policy," Mr Inkster said. "It acts as a platform for a multiplicity of UK departments and the lack of a clearly articulated sense of our strategic location in the world explains how we got dragged into a war with Iraq which was always against our better judgment."

His views on Iraq, expressed for the first time in public, may also explain why he was passed over as the head of MI6 in favour of Sir John Scarlett, who took responsibility for the dossier during the Hutton inquiry into the death of Dr David Kelly.

Sir John, the current director of MI6, was head of the Joint Intelligence Committee at the start of the war and was criticised for being too close to Tony Blair, the former Prime Minister, and Alastair Campbell, his spin doctor.

The Butler Report into the intelligence that took Britain to war, concluded that "more weight was placed on the intelligence than it could bear", and that judgements had stretched available intelligence "to the outer limits".

The comments by Mr Inkster come in the week that the six-year British mission to Iraq ended after the death of 179 British servicemen and thousands of Iraqis.

In his speech, he also criticised the current mission to Afghanistan, saying Britain has been attempting to implement an agenda that is "ludicrously at variants with the resources allocated to that task."

Professor Paul Collier of Oxford University, who has advised the government on failing states, said there had been a "massive mistake" in Afghanistan where Britain had believed there could be a "magical flip from the middle ages to Scandanavia in one go."

Mr Inkster said the world was moving from "being policed by America to be policed by nobody" and the danger of an increasingly unstable world meant populations were likely to fall back on the "snake oil and voodoo" of religious and nationalistic movements.

When it came to the conflict between Russia and Georgia last summer, he added, Britain was caught "completely flat footed" and used a strategy that "amounted to little more than moral indignation, which is not a strategy."

Mr Inkster, who now works for the International Institute of Strategic Studies, worked for MI6 from 1975 until 2006 in posts including Asia, Latin America and Europe.

He spent seven years on the board of the intelligence service, the last two as assistant chief and director for operations and intelligence under Sir Richard Dearlove, who had originally groomed him as his successor.

[thelonious]

So, you justify the ruthless killing of the few to save the many? I’m wondering why that sounds to me like a communist justification for mass murder and genocide…

Let me ask you a question: would you kill a healthy human being, to save 5 patients awaiting different transplants? Well, that exactly what you are saying…

That's not what I'm saying at all. I'm only saying that there were two choices: end the war quickly by dropping the bomb or prolonging it by an invasion. The latter option would have resulted in more casualties for the Japanese, and many more for the United States.

Now, let's say that you had been president at this time. The world had been ravaged by Fascist aggression, and because of it, you know that hundreds of thousands of American boys have already been slaughtered on foreign soil.

As president, you have taken the oath to protect and defend the United States and its citizens. You are given the option to end the war with the atomic weapon or to launch an invasion. You know that the invasion will result in more casualties than if the bomb is used. You also know that if the bomb is used, the boys you are pledged to protect will suffer no more casualties in the South Pacific.

What do you do?



There was never, there isn’t, and there never will be a justification to cowardly drop a nuclear bomb (or any other explosive device) over a civilian population.

The Japanese had been doing exactly that for years, although not with nuclear bombs. However, if they had had that technology, do you think they wouldn't have?

The US gave the Japanese warning ahead of time. Did the Fascist dictator Hideki Tojo give Hawaiian civilians warning at Pearl Harbor or in the Phillipines? Or even the Chinese, Vietnamese, or Koreans when Japanese forces raped those countries and enslaved their populations?

[flyermay]

That's not what I'm saying at all. I'm only saying that there were two choices: end the war quickly by dropping the bomb or prolonging it by an invasion. The latter option would have resulted in more casualties for the Japanese, and many more for the United States.

The casualties as a consequence of an invasion would be mainly military; while the casualties of dropping a nuclear bomb in a highly populated area were mainly civilians. I don’t even see what makes you hesitate…

Both American and Japanese troops knew what they were getting into by taking on arms; civilians never chose to get involved. There is no way I will choose the lives of thousands of troops over the life of a single child.

And in fact, Roosevelt allowed the attack on Perl Harbour; which was by the way, a military target outside US soil. The blood of everyone who died in Perl Harbour falls in Roosevelt’s hands, who thought it was a sacrifice needed to convince the American public to enter WWII. So, in the first place, those boys that you talk about found themselves in that position thanks to Roosevelt.

But you are steering the discussion away from the main subject: that all political ideologies have their hands full of blood from mass murder and/or genocide, and all of them always look for ways to justify those deaths (as you well proved with the example of Hiroshima and Nagasaki).

Then, why do you list communism as the only ideology capable of those atrocities, and make the statement that “communism is a crime against humanity”?

It is a fact that all world leaders are potential mass murderers; regardless of their ideology.

"Power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely"

[kasalt]

The casualties as a consequence of an invasion would be mainly military; while the casualties of dropping a nuclear bomb in a highly populated area were mainly civilians. I don’t even see what makes you hesitate…

Both American and Japanese troops knew what they were getting into by taking on arms; civilians never chose to get involved. There is no way I will choose the lives of thousands of troops over the life of a single child.

I despise the fact that Hiroshima and Nagasaki were civilian targets. But let's not forget that imperialist Japan was allied with the Nazis. Japan's goal at the time was to do the same thing in Asia that the Nazis were doing in the West. Do you think the Nazis gave a shit about "civilian casualties"? No, of course they didn't. And neither did the imperialist Japanese.

The goal was to bring a swift and certain end to a long and brutal war that our side didn't start. As much as I object to where those bombs were dropped, the fact is that it had its intended effect. And yes, many lives were saved that would have perished otherwise--both civilian and military.

[flyermay]

I despise the fact that Hiroshima and Nagasaki were civilian targets. But let's not forget that Imperialist Japan was allied with the Nazis. Japan's goal at the time was to do the same thing in Asia that the Nazis were doing in the West. Did either the Nazis or the Imperialist Japanese gave a shit about "civilian casualties"? No, of course they didn't.

The goal was to bring a swift and certain end to a long and brutal war that our side didn't start. As much as I object to where those bombs were dropped, the fact is that it had its intended effect. And yes, many lives were saved that would have perished otherwise--both civilian and military.

You are steering the discussion again from the main point: that all ideologies justify mass murder.

Both you and Thelonious are justifying the death of thousands of men, women and children in name of a greater good, and that's exactly what all ideologies do (which I oppose).

So there is no point in saying that fascists or communists are mass murderers, when also democrats (supposing that America is democratic) and republicans do as well. Maybe with a different justification, which suits their own ideology; but still mass murderers.

To understand what I'm saying you have to step back from your patriotic view, and forget about what was embedded in you with fire since a child about fascism and communism. Only then you will realise that there is no difference between the justifications of a communist or those of a republican regarding mass murder (both will tell you that they are doing it for a greater good and to save lives in the long run).

This takes me back again to my question: would you kill a healthy man to save 5 waiting different transplants? If you say no, you are condemning 5 to a slow death; and if you say yes, you will sentence an innocent.

[thelonious]

The casualties as a consequence of an invasion would be mainly military; while the casualties of dropping a nuclear bomb in a highly populated area were mainly civilians. I don’t even see what makes you hesitate…

Because, in the event of invasion, they would not be mainly military, and the Allies would suffer heavy casualties as well.

Also, the Japanese civilains were organized into militias, just like in Germany, which means they would have engaged in battle in the streets, just like German civilians engaged the Soviets on the streets of Berlin.

Both American and Japanese troops knew what they were getting into by taking on arms; civilians never chose to get involved.

Civilians were drafted into the armed forces, and consisted of the bulk of Allied troops.


There is no way I will choose the lives of thousands of troops over the life of a single child.

You say this as though the Japanese respected the lives of children, which they didn't. What about the Chinese babies in Nanking that the Japanese used for target practice?

And in fact, Roosevelt allowed the attack on Perl Harbour

You've got to be kidding me. Roosevelt had been warning of the Japanese threat for months, while the US Congress ignored him. The Japanese were putting up a front, pretending to negotiate peace, while all the time preparing for war. When they sent reps to peace talks in November 1941, the Pearl Harbor order had already been given by Tojo, and the purpose was to stall for time. They didn't even tell Hitler or Mussolini what they were doing, but somehow Roosevelt was to blame? :rolleyes:


Then, why do you list communism as the only ideology capable of those atrocities

I do not.

and make the statement that “communism is a crime against humanity”?

Because history shows time and time again that it is.

[kasalt]

You are steering the discussion again from the main point: that all ideologies justify mass murder.

Rubbish. The bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki was not done for "ideological reasons". It was done for one reason and one reason only: to bring about a swift and certain end to the most devastating war humanity has ever known. In contrast, the Nazis and imperialist Japanese committed mass murder of civilians all throughout WWII as a matter of course.

I've said before and I'll say again that the bombing of those cities was morally wrong. But rightly or wrongly, the undeniable historical fact of the matter is that it did bring about the end of WWII.

To understand what I'm saying you have to step back from your patriotic view, and forget about what was embedded in you with fire since a child about fascism and communism.

Yes, those pesky historical facts about fascism and communism do get in the way of your argument, don't they...

This takes me back again to my question: would you kill a healthy man to save 5 waiting different transplants? If you say no, you are condemning 5 to a slow death; and if you say yes, you will sentence an innocent.

That is a laughable and morally unjustifiable attempt at an analogy.

[flyermay]

And on it goes again! can’t you see that both of you are justifying the killing of the few in favour of the many. What’s so difficult to understand?

You are justifying mass murder. I understand those bastards justifying themselves, after all they are the mass murderers and it’s what we all expect from politicians. But you two are lowering yourselves to their level.

Let me say it once more:
All ideologies justify mass murder for one reason or another; fact.

[thelonious]

And on it goes again! can’t you see that both of you are justifying the killing of the few in favour of the many. What’s so difficult to understand?

I don't think that either of us are saying that. All I'm saying is that, at that point in time, we were at war with a dangerous aggressor. Obviously, dropping atomic bombs is also dangerous, but not in the same sense. Had the Axis Powers won the war, the world would have been subject to absolute tyranny.

Now you will find many on this forum crying about the "tyranny" we live in now. The naivety of such a view is self-apparent, as the same people wouldn't be able to survive a single day in a real tyranny.

I personally do not agree with the way parts of the situation was handled at the end of WWII, and I do believe further cautions should have first been used. But again, whether we like it or not, war kills innocent people. And the innocent people who were killed in Nagasaki and Hiroshima had been praising Tojo and demanded Allied bloodshed the day before.

[element]

Your allies and enemies on earth shall be your eternal allies and enemies.

What we bind on earth we bind in heaven (Tien)

Lux


http://tbn1.google.com/images?q=tbn:KwQVlptoKLuMQM:http://mikeely.files.wordpress.com/2008/03/redindia.jpg

I can't really believe this!
Our relations on earth are temporary. For all you know, your biggest enemy might become your father next time.

'Eternal' allies and enemies is a very religious view, I thought you were against that?:confused:

[lightgiver]

No Thelonious, it is hardly a 'first;' it is so nice to see you two girls unified; it is just as I predicted; after all the Christians and Masons are on the same side; you are both in love with the god of Capital; your allies both fight for Christan State terrorism and are anti-Communists.

I shall have to leave this debate for a few days, since I am travelling, I am off to commune with the Devil himself in the Devil's motherland; and in the meantime I would suggest that you two make up, count the dead and tortured innocents of the Christian / Christian / Masonic revolution, and perhaps in a few days I shall return, and we can add up the statistics of the long and bloody history of Christianity and Masonic revolution.

In the meantime, please try to refrain from dropping any depleted uranium on women and children and from sexually abusing muslim men; I do understand that it is in your nature to do otherwise, but it is far beyond my understanding of '93.'

Lux

'Oh how good and how pleasant it is when bretheren dwell together in unity'

http://www.excatholicsforchrist.com/images/priest.JPG
(Above: A Masonic Christian Devil (Army Chaplain).

http://www.mysticvalleylodge.org/images/DenningWashingtonBible.jpg

(Above: some Capitalist Devils with their Holy Book)


http://etregalia.com/lg_images/masonic-altar-bible_lg.jpg

(Above: a close-up of the Holy Book of the genocidal, state terrorist, narco terrorist, infanticidal, proto-fascist god to whom Masonic and Christian cultists swear their legal, military and Capitalist oaths.)


http://www.whereistheoutrage.net/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2006/11/return-coffins-from-iraq.jpg

'Oh how good and how pleasant it is when bretheren dwell together in unity'

http://www.mqmagazine.co.uk/issue-21/issue-21-images/p-29-a.jpg

Burying the Masonic and Christian dead; slavation through faith in the god of Capital.

Prior to my present Masonic appointment as Provincial Grand Chaplain for Buckinghamshire
On a cold February morning in 1940 I was born the fourth child of a Regimental Sergeant-Major stationed at Catterick camp in Yorkshire. He was also a life-long Salvationist. He became a Freemason many years later and had been Chaplain to Eden Park Lodge No. 123 in Surrey.
On his death-bed he turned to me – I was dressed in my uniform as a full-time Salvation Army officer – and said wistfully: “I always wondered, David, why you never asked to join my Lodge?”
He then proceeded to recite the working tools of an Entered Apprentice Freemason:
“The twenty-four inch gauge represents the twenty-four hours of the day, part to be spent in prayer to Almighty God, part in labour and refreshment, and part in serving a friend or Brother in time of need…”
Was this, in essence, so different from the Covenant and Dedication that I had signed and pledged my allegiance to, 17 years earlier, at the time when I was Commissioned and ordained to serve God through the ranks of the Salvation Army?
I spent many days, months – indeed, over five years thinking and pondering on these thoughts before a very fine friend asked me if I had ever thought of becoming a Mason?
I answered – ‘Yes!’ And so, on the first day of April 1981, I was initiated, as a Lewis, in company with a second candidate, into Freemasonry and became a member of the Lodge of Integrity No. 5149, which meets at Chelmsford.
‘….Masonry is free, and requires a perfect freedom of inclination in every Candidate for its mysteries. It is founded on the purest principles of piety and virtue…vows of fidelity are required; but let me assure you that in those vows there is nothing incompatible with your civil, moral or religious duties….’
Oh! I have found this to be so very true.
Freemasonry is not a religion – ‘it is a peculiar system of morality’ but its teachings provide so much of…‘what’s good to be understood by a …mason.’
Twenty-six years have now passed and they have been a most thrilling and rewarding part of my life. As a Salvationist and a Mason there has been no conflict with my faith, no conflict in my daily living, and no conflict in my dealings with other people.
Both the Salvation Army, a branch of the Christian Church, and the Fraternity of our Brotherhood, have parallel ideals –

http://www.mqmagazine.co.uk/issue-21/issue-21-images/p-29-1.gif


http://www.mqmagazine.co.uk/issue-21/p-29.php


Blessed are the poor, just so long as they die in a reign of fire from the sky without complaint

http://bristol.indymedia.org/attachments/oct2007/major_tim_saunders_briefs_hrh_the_duke_of_kent.jpg

(Above; The Duke of Kent, Grand Master of all Masonic slaves of the York Rite of Masonry)

The poor, meek, humble Grand Master.

http://www.constantinian.com/pictures/press/pictures/Royalty-2003-p3.jpg

And here is the poor head of the Christian Church; the highest representative of 'Jesus' on earth, 'defensor fides' of the Capitalist god, in whose name all manner of state terrorism, narco-terrorism, torture and murder is committed.

http://i105.photobucket.com/albums/m202/anunnaki_2006/Image32.gif


http://warshop.cz/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2006/02/prince_harry_nazi.jpg

Above: Her Beloved Son (and also James Hewitt's), possibly the future head of the army, the government, and of the Church of England, the representative of Jesus on earth.

You are not well mate,you make things up in your mind.

Your ideology will never work,the people will make sure of that.

and do us a favour whatever commie country you visit with your capitalisitic money,stay there,you would soon come crying back with your tail between your hooves.

[flyermay]

I don't think that either of us are saying that. All I'm saying is that, at that point in time, we were at war with a dangerous aggressor. Obviously, dropping atomic bombs is also dangerous, but not in the same sense. Had the Axis Powers won the war, the world would have been subject to absolute tyranny.

I understand what you are saying. But you are still justifying dropping the bomb, and killing the few to save the many. It doesn't matter if you want to save the world from tyranny, from an invasion, or from death in battle; the fact is that you are justifying it; that cannot be denied.

Now you will find many on this forum crying about the "tyranny" we live in now. The naivety of such a view is self-apparent, as the same people wouldn't be able to survive a single day in a real tyranny.

I also know what you mean. However, it happens that I did live for many years under a real fascist dictatorship; and I'm still here. Just let you know one thing about this subject: don't be so sure that this is so different from a tyranny (and it's getting worst each year -I see it with my own eyes, and I do have a real reference to contrast with-).

I personally do not agree with the way parts of the situation was handled at the end of WWII, and I do believe further cautions should have first been used. But again, whether we like it or not, war kills innocent people. And the innocent people who were killed in Nagasaki and Hiroshima had been praising Tojo and demanded Allied bloodshed the day before.

In my opinion, only innocent people suffer the consequences of wars; as these bastards always find fools willing to fight. In the meantime, for them, it's business as usual.

[lightgiver]

Read your history. Study what power does to people. Study about the kind of people drawn to power. Study how the get power, how they keep it, and how they use it. You will come to one conclusion: Your mindset of tolerance and compassion isn’t shared by everyone. And when push comes to shove, those people will try to use it against you.

Take the communist movement. A young idealist, Karl Marx, is simply trying to think about all the poor people around the world, and trying to come up with a fair way to help them be free from economic slavery. Sounds noble and good, right? And it is. This is something everyone should work for, starting with themselves, and then their families, and then their communities.

What wasn’t good was Karl Marx’s plan to make everyone equal by government rule. Rather than build up, he wanted to tear down. Rather than quicken, he wanted to kill. He saw obstacles to his wonderful utopic recipe everywhere he turned. His conclusion, and the conclusions of everyone who tries to follow his path, is that everyone else, every other organization, must be destroyed. The ones that must be destroyed first are those that do the most good. In the ashes, society can be rebuilt in the just and true way.

Communism, as others have carefully explained, is not a new idea. It is a very old idea, dressed up in modern clothes and freshened up with modern language. It is the same idea that the Egyptians had when they enslaved the Jews. It is the same idea that the Assyrians, Babylonians, Persians, Greeks, Romans, and Mongols had as they sent out murdering armies to torture the earth and enslave free people. It is the same idea as the people who bought and sold men. It is simply man’s quest to conquer everyone else and make themselves king or emperor. They want to eat the food made by others for free, and they will say and do anything to get it.

Under communism, a select group of elites control every aspect of life. They control who gets to grow food, who gets to eat that food, and who gets to starve. Interestingly, it is the people who grow the food who starve. They control what people are allowed to think, say, and do. They control every aspect of society. Or so they wish to do so.

As my friend who actually lived under Communist Russia explained, early into the revolution, it was realized that communism was much more dangerous than any anti-communist had thought. It was a dangerous thing, dangerous not just to the people but to those high up in the power chain. And so the government began to relax the very controls that communism prescribed. That is, Russia only boasted that they were communist, but what kept them alive was the black markets, black markets that moved food, medical supplies, and expertise around the country without any government intervention. And the government did little to stop the black markets, acknowledging, privately, that those markets kept the people alive.

More isms and schisms dressed up by LH to look good,until push comes to shove.

I just love reading these commie types who have lived and have been brought up in a capitalist society and then suddenly decide they want to become just another commie dictator,not much different from the capitalist dictators,but a lot worse.

[luciferhorus]

We mustn't try to compare apples with oranges. There has been no group in the history of the world with the blatant murder record of the Communists. .

I shall be away for a few days, but I must remark in conclusion (temporarily) here, that I doubt very much if you have such little understanding of the history of Christianity and their orgy of violence, wars, holocausts, holy crusades, inquisitions and imperialism over many centuries; and then to top it all we have the history of 20th century Christian state terrorism, their wars, military coups and palace revolutions.

http://rogerhollander.files.wordpress.com/2009/04/torture_inquisition3.jpg

Violent Communist revolution is very much a response to the violence fo Christendom; if the Christians were not militant, it would not be necessary to resist them with violence.

http://traveltovietnam.cc/Upload/tour/288200834634_Vietnam%20War11.jpg

.
I invite anyone who says that Democrats or Republicans are as bad to move to North Korea in order to see the differences firsthand. There's really no comparison at all.

This is very much a straw man argument with respect to my own position; and further it is if I stated, 'Well if you love Capitalism so much, why don't you sell your mother as a slave in some to some Third World brothel, or why don't you go and live in some shantytown outside Rio or a shack in just about any suburb of any city in South Africa.

http://meanmore.com/market/images/P/born_into_brothels_lrg.jpg

Just as Capitalists often point to highly developed elite 'master' societies as their model, Communist tend to consider more developed anti-slavery models such as Cuba, the Kibbutz, the Spanish Revolution, etc., as models, not North Korea.

Similarly the proponents of slavery do not measure the success of slavery by pointing to the misery of the enslaved, but by pointing to the wealth of the slavemaster.


LL

Lux

[lightgiver]

I shall be away for a few days, but I must remark in conclusion (temporarily) here, that I doubt very much if you have such little understanding of the history of Christianity and their orgy of violence, wars, holocausts, holy crusades, inquisitions and imperialism over many centuries; and then to top it all we have the history of 20th century Christian state terrorism, their wars, military coups and palace revolutions.

http://rogerhollander.files.wordpress.com/2009/04/torture_inquisition3.jpg

Violent Communist revolution is very much a response to the violence fo Christendom; if the Christians were not militant, it would not be necessary to resist them with violence.

http://traveltovietnam.cc/Upload/tour/288200834634_Vietnam%20War11.jpg

.

This is very much a straw man argument with respect to my own position; and further it is if I stated, 'Well if you love Capitalism so much, why don't you sell your mother as a slave in some to some Third World brothel, or why don't you go and live in some shantytown outside Rio or a shack in just about any suburb of any city in South Africa.

http://meanmore.com/market/images/P/born_into_brothels_lrg.jpg

Just as Capitalists often point to highly developed elite 'master' societies as their model, Communist tend to consider more developed anti-slavery models such as Cuba, the Kibbutz, the Spanish Revolution, etc., as models, not North Korea.

Similarly the proponents of slavery do not measure the success of slavery by pointing to the misery of the enslaved, but by pointing to the wealth of the slavemaster.


LL

Lux


Got it wrong again I see LH,it was not Christians who carried such evil things,it may have been people hiding behind the label Christianity,but they are no way on earth linked to the true teachings of Christ.

Your argument is weak and flawed to the bone.

Have a good holiday and make it a very long one if you can,I am sure you will soon be back to your capitalistic comforts.:p

The Black Book of Communism: Crimes, Terror, Repression is a book which describes a history of repressions, both political and civilian, by Communist states, including extrajudicial executions, deportations, and artificial famines. The book was originally published in 1997 in France under the title, Le Livre noir du communisme : Crimes, terreur, répression. In the United States it is published by Harvard University Press.

The book Stalinism and Nazism: History and Memory Compared argues that the title echoes that of Ilya Ehrenburg's and Vasily Grossman's documentary record of the Nazi atrocities, The Black Book (but in France, "Livre noir" is often used since more than a century. The introduction, by editor Stéphane Courtois, asserts that "...Communist regimes...turned mass crime into a full-blown system of government". Using unofficial estimates he cites a death toll which totals 94 million, not counting the "excess deaths" (decrease of the population due to lower than the expected birth rate). The breakdown of the number of deaths given by Courtois is as follows:

* 20 million in the Soviet Union
* 65 million in the People's Republic of China
* 1 million in Vietnam
* 2 million in North Korea
* 2 million in Cambodia
* 1 million in the Communist states of Eastern Europe
* 150,000 in Latin America
* 1.7 million in Africa
* 1.5 million in Afghanistan
* 10,000 deaths "resulting from actions of the international communist movement and communist parties not in power."

Courtois claims that Communist regimes are responsible for a greater number of deaths than any other political ideal or movement, including Nazism. The statistics of victims includes executions, intentional destruction of population by starvation, and deaths resulting from deportations, physical confinement, or through forced labour. It does not include "excess deaths" due to higher mortality or lower birth rates than expected of the population. Nor does it include China's compulsory abortion program.

A more detailed listing of the accusations of repressions committed in the Soviet Union under the regimes of Lenin and Stalin described in the book include:

* the executions of tens of thousands of hostages and prisoners, and the murder of hundreds of thousands of rebellious workers and peasants from 1918 to 1922 (See also: Red Terror)
* the Russian famine of 1921, which caused the death of 5 million people
* the extermination and deportation of the Don Cossacks in 1920
* the murder of tens of thousands in concentration camps in the period between 1918 and 1930
* the Great Purge which killed almost 690,000 people
* the deportation of 2 million so-called "kulaks" from 1930 to 1932
* the deaths of 4 million Ukrainians (Holodomor) and 2 million others during the famine of 1932 and 1933
* the deportations of Poles, Ukrainians, Balts, Moldavians and Bessarabians from 1939 to 1941 and from 1944 to 1945
* the deportation of the Volga Germans in 1941
* the deportation of the Crimean Tatars in 1943
* the deportation of the Chechens in 1944.

Yeah LHs Ideology is such a good alternative,

..Communist regimes...turned mass crime into a full-blown system of government"

:"The "genocide of a "class" may well be tantamount to the genocide of a "race" - the deliberate starvation of a child of a Ukrainian kulak as a result of the famine caused by Stalin's regime "is equal to" the starvation of a Jewish child in the Warsaw ghetto as a result of the famine caused by the Nazi regime".

Communist regimes are responsible for a greater number of deaths than any other political ideal or movement.

[flyermay]

Violent Communist revolution is very much a response to the violence fo Christendom; if the Christians were not militant, it would not be necessary to resist them with violence.

Good point,

I always wondered how successful communist Cuba would be without the negative influences of US embargo for the past 50 years. Petty they never had a real chance of succeeding due to the constant international oppression.

Just as Capitalists often point to highly developed elite 'master' societies as their model, Communist tend to consider more developed anti-slavery models such as Cuba, the Kibbutz, the Spanish Revolution, etc., as models, not North Korea.

Another great point! Sadly, I don't think many anti-communists ever hear of any of those successful examples, as they are not included in the negative propaganda.

[lightgiver]

Good point,

I always wondered how successful communist Cuba would be without the negative influences of US embargo for the past 50 years. Petty they never had a real chance of succeeding due to the constant international oppression.



Another great point! Sadly, I don't think many anti-communists ever hear of any of those successful examples, as they are not included in the negative propaganda.

Hi FM,

I see your sig is bill cooper.

A world of people who do not use their intelligence are no better than animals that do not have intelligence (Milton William Cooper)

Of special interest is the powerful society in Afghanistan in ancient times called the Roshaniya--illuminated ones. There are actually references to this mystical cult going back through history to the House of Wisdom at Cairo. The major tenets of this cult were: the abolition of private property; the elimination of religion; the elimination of nation states; the belief that illumination emanated from the Supreme Being who desired a class of perfect men and women to carry out the organization and direction of the world; belief in a plan to reshape the social system of the world by first taking control of individual countries one by one, and the belief that after reaching the fourth degree one could communicate directly with the unknown supervisors who had imparted knowledge to initiates throughout the ages. Wise men will again recognize the Brotherhood.

The important fact to remember is that the leaders of both the right and the left are a small, hard core of men who have been and still are Illuminists or members of the Brotherhood. They may have been or may be members of the Christian or Jewish religions, but that is only to further their own ends. They give allegiance to no particular nation, although they have used nationalism to further their causes. Their only concern is to gain greater economic and political power. The ultimate objective of the leaders of both groups is identical. They are determined to win for themselves undisputed control of the wealth, natural resources, and manpower of the entire planet. They intend to turn the world into their conception of a totalitarian socialist state. In the process they will eliminate all Christians, Jews, and atheists. You have just learned one, but only one, of the great mysteries.

a little quote from bill,and another,

Their goal is to rule the world. The doctrine of this group is not democracy or communism, but is a form of fascism. The doctrine is totalitarian socialism. You must begin to think correctly. The Illuminati are not Communists, but some Communists are Illuminati. (1) Monarchism (thesis) faced democracy (antithesis) in WWI, which resulted in the formation of communism and the League of Nations (synthesis). (2) Democracy and communism (thesis) faced fascism (antithesis) in WWII and resulted in a more powerful United Nations (synthesis). (3) Capitalism (thesis) now faces communism (antithesis) and the result will be the New World Order, totalitarian socialism (synthesis).

[flyermay]

Hi FM,

I see your sig is bill cooper.

A world of people who do not use their intelligence are no better than animals that do not have intelligence (Milton William Cooper)

Cooper was brutally direct in his statements; he didn't like going around in circles, and spoke his mind openly without restrictions. But he also was a hard core Christian.

Guevara was a brave man; ready to die for his ideals and the welfare of others. But he also thought that the ends justify the means.

Newton was a genius; he was an eminence in every field he ever got involved with. But he also was an eccentric with a difficult character.

I quote Cooper, admire Guevara and envy Newton, but I follow none; for none of them were perfect, neither I believe a perfect being exists.

[lightgiver]

Cooper was brutally direct in his statements; he didn't like going around in circles, and spoke his mind openly without restrictions. But he also was a hard core Christian.

Guevara was a brave man; ready to die for his ideals and the welfare of others. But he also thought that the ends justify the means.

Newton was a genius; he was an eminence in every field he ever got involved with. But he also was an eccentric with a difficult character.

I quote Cooper, admire Guevara and envy Newton, but I follow none; for none of them were perfect, neither I believe a perfect being exists.

Are we not here to try and perfect our beings.:)

The central idea of The Perfection of Wisdom is complete release from the world of existence.

The view of The Perfection of Wisdom is that words and analysis have a practical application in that they are necessary for us to function in this world but, ultimately, all that we experience is a dream painted on a surface with no inherent nature.

[zero1]

Similarly the proponents of slavery do not measure the success of slavery by pointing to the misery of the enslaved, but by pointing to the wealth of the slavemaster.

The strongest point yet. ;):cool:

[eternal_spirit]

The Black Book of Communism: Crimes, Terror, Repression is a book which describes a history of repressions, both political and civilian, by Communist states, including extrajudicial executions, deportations, and artificial famines. Using unofficial estimates he cites a death toll which totals 94 million, not counting the "excess deaths" (decrease of the population due to lower than the expected birth rate). The breakdown of the number of deaths given by Courtois is as follows:

* 20 million in the Soviet Union
* 65 million in the People's Republic of China
* 1 million in Vietnam
* 2 million in North Korea
* 2 million in Cambodia
* 1 million in the Communist states of Eastern Europe
* 150,000 in Latin America
* 1.7 million in Africa
* 1.5 million in Afghanistan
* 10,000 deaths "resulting from actions of the international communist movement and communist parties not in power."

Courtois claims that Communist regimes are responsible for a greater number of deaths than any other political ideal or movement, including Nazism. The statistics of victims includes executions, intentional destruction of population by starvation, and deaths resulting from deportations, physical confinement, or through forced labour. It does not include "excess deaths" due to higher mortality or lower birth rates than expected of the population. Nor does it include China's compulsory abortion program.

A more detailed listing of the accusations of repressions committed in the Soviet Union under the regimes of Lenin and Stalin described in the book include:

* the executions of tens of thousands of hostages and prisoners, and the murder of hundreds of thousands of rebellious workers and peasants from 1918 to 1922 (See also: Red Terror)
* the Russian famine of 1921, which caused the death of 5 million people
* the extermination and deportation of the Don Cossacks in 1920
* the murder of tens of thousands in concentration camps in the period between 1918 and 1930
* the Great Purge which killed almost 690,000 people
* the deportation of 2 million so-called "kulaks" from 1930 to 1932
* the deaths of 4 million Ukrainians (Holodomor) and 2 million others during the famine of 1932 and 1933
* the deportations of Poles, Ukrainians, Balts, Moldavians and Bessarabians from 1939 to 1941 and from 1944 to 1945
* the deportation of the Volga Germans in 1941
* the deportation of the Crimean Tatars in 1943
* the deportation of the Chechens in 1944.

Yeah LHs Ideology is such a good alternative,

..Communist regimes...turned mass crime into a full-blown system of government"



Communist regimes are responsible for a greater number of deaths than any other political ideal or movement.

Good post. Does the World need another Communist war and mass slaughter of none Communists! No!

and also


Joe Leiberman tossed off a couple of lines about God in a speech the other day. He said that the framers guaranteed freedom of religion, not freedom from religion. Seems true enough, but from the press fallout, you'd think he'd called for a new Inquisition. Yes, after more than 100 million deaths by government in our own century, after Hitler and Stalin, we are still to be constantly worried about events Pope Sixtus IV authorized many centuries ago that killed several thousand over centuries.

This is one of a thousand examples of the wholly unjustified anti-religious bias of our time. The assumption of most intellectuals and their media echo chamber is that believers, particularly Christians, are a danger to society and to liberty. Sure, people should have freedom of religion, so long as their religion is private, invisible, politically ineffectual, and culturally irrelevant. The Church is to be hounded as a menace, and the State heralded as liberator of mankind.

Do believers represent a danger to society? Are they the would-be oppressors of our time, to be constantly watched and thwarted? Are they perpetrators of violence? Look at the sweep of the century and you see that Christians, particularly Catholics, have in fact been the main victims of state violence in our century. For full documentation of these claims, I commend to you Robert Royal's remarkable new book, The Catholic Martyrs of the Twentieth Century: A Comprehensive World History (New York: Crossroad Publishing, 2000).

"In absolute numbers, the century's martyrs far surpass those of any previous century," he writes. And why? Royal blames "the appearance of virulent anti-Christian ideologies and brutally repressive regimes seeking to impose them, which led directly to the widespread suffering and slaughter of religious believers."

"In a century that rightly prided itself on its scientific and technological advances on the one hand and its commitment to human rights on the other, refined methods of torture and control, physical and mental, also emerged with a vengeance all around the globe. As one of the deepest sources of opposition to oppressive tendencies, religion was a logical target for tyrants. The twentieth century, by any measure, presents a brutal spectacle that may be remembered historically as one of the darkest periods of martyrdom."

When Royal refers to martyrs, he is speaking not just of people who have been killed, but people killed specifically for their faith. The main victims fell to Communism, which was called "godless Communism" in the West for good reason. It was the most virulently anti-Christian political ideology ever invented. Royal reminds us of Vladimir Bukovsky's observation that Communism typically killed as many people in a day as the Inquisition killed in all the centuries of its existence. Most of its victims were believers.

The Royal book begins with a detailed study of the Mexican socialist revolution of 1917-the first in the history of the world, predating the Bolshevik revolution, but forgotten today. "Churches were destroyed, desecrated, confiscated, and turned into army barracks; religious items were profaned by soldiers drinking from chalices, chopping up statues for firewood, and using religious art for target practice; orders of priests and nuns were outlawed, and teaching about religion prohibited; religious buildings or private homes where religious activities occurred might be subject for forfeit." Priests had to seek government licenses.

The governor of the Mexican territory Tabasco named his children Lenin, Lucifer, and Satan, expelled any priest who would not marry, and set out to destroy all churches. And today, is there any sensitivity in Mexico about attacking Christians? Any warnings that anti-Catholicism might open old wounds? Actually, it's the reverse: the Western press warned of a new intolerance when the new president-elect was filmed receiving communion.

And the Soviet Union? What can we say? Here was a regime that attempted to stamp out all religion through an incredible wave of violence though this thoroughly religious society. Schools were shut, priests were murdered, and Bishops jailed and tortured. Churches were surrounded by troops and the priests taken to Moscow to be killed.

The institution of the family was targeted mainly because it was here, Soviet authorities were convinced, that faith was taught. How many martyrs? Royal says we can't know for sure. But millions were slaughtered.

The chapter on the Ukrainian liquidation of believers makes for very difficult reading. Imagine this: the Ukrainian Catholic Church had 2,772 parishes, 8 bishops, 4,119 churches and chapels, 142 monasteries and convents, 2,628 priests, 164 monks, 773 nuns, and 4 million laypeople. By the end of the largest suppression of believers in world history, the entire apparatus was reduced to: zero.

The list goes on: the mountains of carnage in France, Albania, Lithuania, Vietnam, Poland, Germany, Latin America, Romania, Korea, Africa, Spain (at the end of the Spanish Civil War, lasting three years, seven thousand names of martyrs for the faith were turned over to the Holy See). And only most recently, the murderous Indonesian regime killed dozens of priests and nuns in East Timor. These were all deaths by government, and the governments doing the killing were mostly states that professed hatred of Christianity.

Much of Royal's research is new. The project began with a sentence in one of John Paul II's encyclicals. He said that the martyrs of our century "should not be forgotten." A group of parishioners at Saint Aloysius Parish in New Canaan, Connecticut, took the words seriously, and began to accumulate materials. The word spread and materials started coming in from around the world. What began as a simple list became an amazing archive. With the help of his brother who is a priest, Royal began the work of putting the results in book form.

Royal has done a masterful job, not only of documenting hundreds of examples along with the stories of some of the most heroic; he has also given us an account of why martyrdom should matter to us. Royal reminds us that Christianity is a faith in which martyrdom, not conquest, is the driving theme. All the Apostles except possibly one (John the Evangelist) died violent deaths.

St. Paul was beheaded, but likely expected it: just as in Israel of old, he wrote in Galatians, "he that was born after the flesh persecuted him that was born of the Spirit, even so it is now."

St. Peter was crucified upside down and set on fire, and foreshadowed his suffering by writing in his Epistle: "Beloved, do not be startled at the trial by fire now taking place among you...but rejoice, in so far as you are partakers of the sufferings of Christ."

http://www.lewrockwell.com/rockwell/martyrs.html

[thelonious]

Good point,

I always wondered how successful communist Cuba would be without the negative influences of US embargo for the past 50 years. Petty they never had a real chance of succeeding due to the constant international oppression.

Cuba never had a chance of succeeding because Castro betrayed that nation. When he marched into Havana in 1959, he promised free elections.

Now it is 2009. What's he waiting on?



Another great point! Sadly, I don't think many anti-communists ever hear of any of those successful examples, as they are not included in the negative propaganda.

You may think that Cuba is a successful example of an anti-slavery model, but the political prisoners sentenced to labor camps on that island would probably disagree.

http://www.hrw.org/legacy/reports/1999/cuba/Cuba996-09.htm

[flyermay]

Cuba never had a chance of succeeding because Castro betrayed that nation. When he marched into Havana in 1959, he promised free elections.

Now it is 2009. What's he waiting on?

I only see one difference regarding these subject: the Cuban people know what is going on; unlike in the US, were you are lied and lied non-stop (until you get used to it).

You may think that Cuba is a successful example of an anti-slavery model, but the political prisoners sentenced to labor camps on that island would probably disagree.

You mean: something like the US concetration camps during the 40's, the penalty of death in many US states, and the thousands of people killed by your secret services and black operations, the kidnapping, torture and killing of innocents men in Guantanamo. I'm sure all that people (and their families) would also disagree with you.

Maybe you would be interested in reading what your goverment is up to at this moment. Please notice the kind of tactics they use (you might be surprised):

CIA, Guantanamo and Communist Mind Control (http://www.davidicke.com/forum/showthread.php?p=973702#post973702)

By the way, Raul Castro won the last elections (with a huge difference -99.4% of the votes-). I think the Cuban people are quite happy with their communism; unlike the American public.

[thelonious]

Good post. Does the World need another Communist war and mass slaughter of none Communists! No!



True, and that's just the non-Communists. Communists are notorious for purging and murdering their fellow comrades as well. When Stalin assumed power, he systematically knocked off practically *all* of the Old Bolsheviks, whom he saw as rivals.

The Cultural Revolution in China saw the mass arrest and executions of top Communist Party members whom Mao saw as threats. This has gone on in every single Communist country.

With friends like Communists, who needs enemies?

[thelonious]

I only see one difference regarding these subject: the Cuban people know what is going on; unlike in the US, were you are lied and lied non-stop (until you get used to it).

You honestly believe that the Cuban government tells its people the truth?



You mean: something like the US concetration camps during the 40's, the penalty of death in many US states, and the thousands of people killed by your secret services and black operations, the kidnapping, torture and killing of innocents men in Guantanamo. I'm sure all that people (and their families) would also disagree with you.

I never said that the US government was innocent, and I'm one of its strongest critics. But it cannot even begin to be compared to the atrocities committed by the various Communist regimes.



By the way, Raul Castro won the last elections (with a huge difference -99.4% of the votes-). I think the Cuban people are quite happy with their communism; unlike the American public.

Using this logic, I suppose the Iraqi people were happy with Saddam Hussein as well, and the Austrians with Hitler, as both received over 99% of the vote as well.

Obviously, if someone is receiving that many votes, something's not quite kosher in the electoral system. Of course, it makes sense if Raoul is the only one running, and considering the fact that all major candidates have to be approved by the Politburo of the Communist Party.

Besides, if everyone's so happy, why all the homemade rafts to Miami?

http://linseyk.files.wordpress.com/2008/04/cuba-image2193980.jpg

[flyermay]

I never said that the US government was innocent, and I'm one of its strongest critics.

You just said it all...

Now, do you want to compare which country was involved in more armed conflicts for the past 300 years; and therefore killed the greater number of people?

Obviously, if someone is receiving that many votes, something's not quite kosher in the electoral system.

You mean, like banning the africanamericans from voting, or maybe like getting your brother to fix the recount?

I told you, you are lowering yourself by defending those bastards, or by saying that some are *much* better than others.

[thelonious]

You just said it all...

Now, do you want to compare which country was involved in more armed conflicts for the past 300 years; and therefore killed the greater number of people?

False premiss. The USA's involvement in armed conflicts does not correspond to the number of people killed. The Communists have killed many many more people in time of peace than the United States has in time of war.



I told you, you are lowering yourself by defending those bastards, or by saying that some are *much* better than others.

I haven't been defending anyone I've been merely pointing out the darkness of Communism. You, on the other hand, for some unfathomable reason, are defending butchers.

[lightgiver]

Communism is abhorrent,it is the worst Philosophy in the universe,and you may ask why,because it does not practise what it preaches,just take a look at all the communist regimes that have ever existed,tyranny in its rawest form.

Few years after Lenin's death, Joseph Stalin won over his chief rival Leon Trotsky and in 1928 emerged as the sole leader of the Soviet Union, the position he held until his death in 1953. He is connected with Stalinism, an oppressive system of extensive government spying, extra judicial punishment, and political "purging", or elimination of political opponents either by direct killing or through exile. His methods involved an extensive use of propaganda to establish a personality cult around him to maintain control over the nation's people and to maintain political control for the Communist Party.

We should never allow such a monstrosity to take hold ,it is no better than the Ideals of the Elites NWO.

Freedom and liberty is the middle path.

[flyermay]

False premiss. The USA's involvement in armed conflicts does not correspond to the number of people killed. The Communists have killed many many more people in time of peace than the United States has in time of war.

Is that what your government tells you?

I haven't been defending anyone I've been merely pointing out the darkness of Communism. You, on the other hand, for some unfathomable reason, are defending butchers.

You are defending the most corrupt and criminal government that the world has ever seeing, for which the value of a dollar is far greater than that of a human life. Just think about the fact that this forum woudn't even exist if your government behaved half as well as you believe they do.

On the other hand, I don't need to justifying any communists (I already said that there will never be a justification to sacrify the few for the good of the many); besides, I'm not a communist, never was, and never will be. But I do need to set the record straight regarding communist countries in order to make you see that all ideologies justify mass murder and genocide (yours as much as anyone else).

I don't need to defend anyone, as I follow no one.

[thelonious]

Is that what your government tells you?

No, it's what math tells me. Mao was responsible for an estimated 20 million deaths, not in war, but his own citizens, in peace time. This is by itself far more any nation has killed in war, and doesn't even include the victims of Stalin, Ceaucescaue, Castro, Pol Pot, Honecher, and the other Communist leaders.


You are defending the most corrupt and criminal government that the world has ever seeing

You're wrong there. I haven't defended anybody, I've been criticizing the Communists. But *you* are defending them, and *they* are the most corrupt and criminal form of government the world has ever seen.

[flyermay]

False premiss. The USA's involvement in armed conflicts does not correspond to the number of people killed. The Communists have killed many many more people in time of peace than the United States has in time of war.

This is a small example of all nations that the US was involved in armed conflict with in the last 250 years:

Great Britain (1775)

Mexico (1816)

Native Americans (1865)

Spain (1898)

Cuba (1989)

Mexico (1898)

Panama (1898)

Philippines (1899)

China (1900)

Nicaragua (1912)

Germany (1914)

Haiti (1915)

Dominican Republic (1916)

Nicaragua (1926)

Russia (1918)

Japan (1939)

Germany (1939)

Italy (1939)

Soviet Union (1946)

Korea (1950)

People’s Republic of China (1950)

Soviet Union (1950)

Lebanon (1958)

Cuba (1961)

Dominican Republic (1965)

Vietnam (1957)

Soviet Union (1957)

Iran (1980)

Grenada (1983)

Lebanon (1983)

Panama (1989)

Iraq (1990)

Somalia (1992)

Yugoslavia (1999)

Afghanistan (2001)

Liberia (2003)

Iraq (2003)

… And on their waiting list

Iran

Pakistan

Probably many more, this is just what I could find in a couple of minutes for this leaflet. And that doesn't count their own people.


http://www.davidicke.com/forum/picture.php?albumid=309&pictureid=2726

Look, Mrs. Clinton is just now on TV apologising for killing all those civilians in Afghanistan; followed by Afghan farmers saying that they hate Americans (so much for your freedom and democracy).

[flyermay]

You're wrong there. I haven't defended anybody, I've been criticizing the Communists. But *you* are defending them, and *they* are the most corrupt and criminal form of government the world has ever seen.

You are just copying and pasting my words!!!!

[lightgiver]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JDB7mxJv71E

[thelonious]

This is a small example of all nations that the US was involved in armed conflict with in the last 250 years.

And yet the the death toll enacted by the Communists, in time of peace, far surpasses the casualties of all those wars combined. With Communism, there never really *is* a time of peace.

Never forget:

A free people cannot afford to forget the evils of Communism. We cannot allow the atrocities of Lenin, Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot, Ho Chi Minh, and Castro to fade into the background of history. We must not forget the trail of blood and tears this utopian deception has left behind:

When the Bolsheviks murdered their way into power...
When Lenin destroyed hundreds of thousands of Cossacks...
When the Kremlin starved more than six million in Ukraine...
When Mao murdered tens of millions of Chinese peasants during his "Great Leap Forward"...
When Ho Chi Minh sent 850,000 Vietnamese to their graves in "education camps"...
When Castro buried dissenters in the infamous Isle of Pines...
When the student voices of freedom were silenced at Tiananmen Square...

http://www.victimsofcommunism.org/history_communism.php

In Communism, as Orwell pointed out, all animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others. In Communism, as Orwell also pointed out, War is Peace, Freedom is Slavery, Hatred is Love.

[flyermay]

And yet the the death toll enacted by the Communists, in time of peace, far surpasses the casualties of all those wars combined. With Communism, there never really *is* a time of peace.

Never forget:

A free people cannot afford to forget the evils of Communism. We cannot allow the atrocities of Lenin, Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot, Ho Chi Minh, and Castro to fade into the background of history. We must not forget the trail of blood and tears this utopian deception has left behind:

When the Bolsheviks murdered their way into power...
When Lenin destroyed hundreds of thousands of Cossacks...
When the Kremlin starved more than six million in Ukraine...
When Mao murdered tens of millions of Chinese peasants during his "Great Leap Forward"...
When Ho Chi Minh sent 850,000 Vietnamese to their graves in "education camps"...
When Castro buried dissenters in the infamous Isle of Pines...
When the student voices of freedom were silenced at Tiananmen Square...

http://www.victimsofcommunism.org/history_communism.php

In Communism, as Orwell pointed out, all animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others. In Communism, as Orwell also pointed out, War is Peace, Freedom is Slavery, Hatred is Love.

And that's the main reason why I will never be a communist (as I've been saying from the beginning).

But you need to compare all communist countries againt just one to make your point: "the US", that saying a lot... Thanks!!!

On the other hand, it is clear on the list above that the US doesn't know what "time of peace" means.

[lightgiver]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KNcuDkozfOI

[thelonious]

You are comparing all communist countries againt just one: "the US", that saying a lot... Thanks!!!

On the other hand, it is clear on the list above that the US doesn't know what "time of peace" means.

I keep trying to address Communism, which is the topic, and you keep ignoring it and bringing up the US.

But ok, if it makes you happy, several communist countries have individually killed more people in time of peace than the USA has in its entire history of war. These would be Communist China, Communist Russia, and Communist Cambodia.

[flyermay]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KNcuDkozfOI

Maybe you would like to see how much the US hates communist tactics: CIA, Guantanamo and communist mind control (http://www.davidicke.com/forum/showthread.php?p=973702#post973702)

[flyermay]

I keep trying to address Communism, which is the topic, and you keep ignoring it and bringing up the US.

And I keep on saying that all ideologies are equally guilty of mass murder and / or genocide; not only communists.

[lightgiver]

Maybe you would like to see how much the US hates communist tactics: CIA, Guantanamo and communist mind control (http://www.davidicke.com/forum/showthread.php?p=973702#post973702)

Maybe you would like to live in a communist country,thing is they will all end, in the end.:)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8ajqk875Xu0

[thelonious]

Maybe you would like to live in a communist country,thing is they will all end, in the end.:)



I would recommend against it, unless he likes to stand in line for 4 hours to get a roll of toilet paper.

And that's if they LIKE you! :eek:

[flyermay]

Maybe you would like to live in a communist country,thing is they will all end, in the end.:)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8ajqk875Xu0

do you know any real communist country?

[lightgiver]

do you know any real communist country?

Nothing is real.:)

Unless you enjoy standing in line for toilet paper or some other basic necessity.

[watson_k]

Nothing is real.:)

Unless you enjoy standing in line for toilet paper or some other basic necessity.

Lightgiver, I've seen that "Nothing is real" stuff being said all over. What exactly does it mean? If you don't mind me asking.

[flyermay]

Nothing is real.:)

Unless you enjoy standing in line for toilet paper or some other basic necessity.

I see that the propaganda machine is well oiled in the "free world" :D

Where did you saw that: CNN, BBC, Sky News... or maybe someone told you in the queue outside the church waiting for a bowl of soup? No... perhaps the jobcentre.

[lightgiver]

I see that the propaganda machine is well oiled in the "free world" :D

Where did you saw that: CNN, BBC, Sky News... or maybe someone told you in the queue outside the church waiting for a bowl of soup? No... perhaps the jobcentre.

If you do not like the free world then go find another less well oiled place, where freedom of speech is curtailed:D

I do like the quote,

A world of people who do not use their intelligence are no better than animals that do not have intelligence (Milton William Cooper)

Maybe you should be using yours more.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6jfnQDgNX2E

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ybnzMnFEWJY

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nAh5mfkuAXk

speaking of personality cults.:D

[lightgiver]

http://www.scribd.com/doc/13014869/2-Faces-Freemasonry-John-Daniel-07

[thelonious]

I see that the propaganda machine is well oiled in the "free world" :D

Where did you saw that: CNN, BBC, Sky News... or maybe someone told you in the queue outside the church waiting for a bowl of soup? No... perhaps the jobcentre.

Even though Lightgiver and I disagree on pretty much everything (except Communism), and we fight all the time, we nevertheless have the freedom to do so, and no governmental entity is trying to stop us from expressing our opinions on this website.

In Cuba, use of the Internet is highly restricted, and is practically banned for the average citizen. It is illegal to criticize the Castro brothers, and doing so makes one guilty of "dangerousness", which is a real word written into a real law on that island.

Flyermay, I've spoken to you in depth before on other subjects, and I know that you're an intelligent person, and not an idiot. I just for the life of me cannot figure out why you're defending those criminals.

We all want a better world. Most of us want to see more egalitarianism and more grass roots political power. We want to end hunger and oppression too. But can't you see that the Communists use our humanitarian concerns against us, like a carrot on a stick?

[flyermay]

Even though Lightgiver and I disagree on pretty much everything (except Communism), and we fight all the time, we nevertheless have the freedom to do so, and no governmental entity is trying to stop us from expressing our opinions on this website.

In Cuba, use of the Internet is highly restricted, and is practically banned for the average citizen. It is illegal to criticize the Castro brothers, and doing so makes one guilty of "dangerousness", which is a real word written into a real law on that island.

I ask you all again (as I did before): do any of you know a genuine communist country?

Why do you insist on confusing communist dictatorship with communism? I simply don’t understand it.

Flyermay, I've spoken to you in depth before on other subjects, and I know that you're an intelligent person, and not an idiot. I just for the life of me cannot figure out why you're defending those criminals.

And again… you keep on putting words in my mouth. You need me to be a communist just to have a target to attack. I never defended communism dictatorships, and much less any of their leaders (for that matter, any political leader; all of them are the scum of the earth). I’m just trying to make you see that the US (which you DO defend) is as guilty of the same sins as the communist dictatorships; which you refuse to accept.

As a matter of fact: I’m the only one here who DOES NOT justify mass murder, neither the killing of the few for the good of the many. I repeated it a dozen times and I even argued against it with you. Don’t you think that I would agree with such justification (like you do; by the way) if I had even the slightest intention of defending any communist leaders?

Why do you keep on insulting me, misinterpreting me and putting words on my mouth that I never said? I expected it of Lightgiver (after all, that how he ends every discussion), but I thought better of you.

We all want a better world. Most of us want to see more egalitarianism and more grass roots political power. We want to end hunger and oppression too. But can't you see that the Communists use our humanitarian concerns against us, like a carrot on a stick?

I wonder why you point this out to me: did you found any evidence to support the idea that I’m a communist?

Can you see that it is not communism that I want to defend, but attack all the corrupt governments around the world!!!

[thelonious]

I’m just trying to make you see that the US (which you DO defend) is as guilty of the same sins as the communist dictatorships; which you refuse to accept.

That's because it is not true. While you claim I defend the US government, I'm actually a strong critic of it.

But at least I can criticize it without fear of being arrested, tortured, and/or shot. The same can not be said of any Communist country.

As a matter of fact: I’m the only one here who DOES NOT justify mass murder, neither the killing of the few for the good of the many.

I don't think that is as black and white as you think. You say for example that you opposed the US's use of atomic weapons on Japan. But the decision to *not* use those weapons would have resulted in mass murder as well. It is easy to criticize Truman, but if you had been president of the US, what would you have done?



Why do you keep on insulting me, misinterpreting me and putting words on my mouth that I never said? I expected it of Lightgiver (after all, that how he ends every discussion), but I thought better of you.

You claimed that the Cuban people were happy, that their government was honest with them, and that they overwhelmingly supported Raul Castro. I don't see how I misinterpreted you.

On the contrary, I claim that the Cuban people are for the most part miserable, that their government restricts all media in order to keep them away from the truth, and that if a truly free election were held, non-Communist candidates would win by an overwhelming landslide.

[flyermay]

That's because it is not true. While you claim I defend the US government, I'm actually a strong critic of it.

But at least I can criticize it without fear of being arrested, tortured, and/or shot. The same can not be said of any Communist country.

If that's true, show me were you have ever criticised the US government, or even acknowledge my criticism...

I don't think that is as black and white as you think. You say for example that you opposed the US's use of atomic weapons on Japan. But the decision to *not* use those weapons would have resulted in mass murder as well. It is easy to criticize Truman, but if you had been president of the US, what would you have done?

That's the trap you all fallen for. On the contrary, I would never accept the few being sacrificed for the welfare of the many, and there are no attenuating factors to that rule. If the troops from the US and Japan wanted to continue killing each other I would have left them do it (that's what they've been brainwashed for anyway).

Can't you see that all those deaths you talk about in communists dictatorships are also justified for the benefit of a supposed higher good (as well as the deaths you are justifying in Hiroshima and Nagasaki). It's the same principle with diffent rules and different ideologies; which I categorically oppose.

You claimed that the Cuban people were happy, that their government was honest with them, and that they overwhelmingly supported Raul Castro. I don't see how I misinterpreted you.

On the contrary, I claim that the Cuban people are for the most part miserable, that their government restricts all media in order to keep them away from the truth, and that if a truly free election were held, non-Communist candidates would win by an overwhelming landslide.

My point was that even though all politicians lie, our politicians are professional liers. About being unhappy in Cuba, I wouldn't bet too much on the fact that there are more unhappy citizens in the US than in Cuba. And that deesn't mean defending the Cuban dictatorship; it's just setting the record straight.

99.4% of the Cuban people seem to accept the restrictions of their government as well as you do accept the restrictions of yours (different rules, different methods, same purpose; defending an ideology and a way of life).

The 0.6% are the ones on the boat you posted; while you have in the US (and in any other occidental country) millions of unsatisfied protesters every other day on the streets; which are also violently repressed.

If you are not equally critical of both systems I can hardly see how you are ever going to make a fair judgment.

[thelonious]

If that's true, show me were you have ever criticised the US government, or even acknowledge my criticism...

Just search my posts. I've never denied that capitalism run amok is a big problem, and I am on the left of the political spectrum. I just don't think that enslaving people under communism is the right answer.



That's the trap you all fallen for. On the contrary, I would never accept the few being sacrificed for the welfare of the many, and there are no attenuating factors to that rule. If the troops from the US and Japan wanted to continue killing each other I would have left them do it (that's what they've been brainwashed for anyway).

So it's ok to let people die, as long as they are soldiers? Discounting the fact that most of the soldiers were civilian farm boys who had been drafted, here's some pretty important news: THE FASCISTS WEREN'T WORRIED ABOUT SPARING CIVILIANS. In fact, they were notorious for raping, torturing, and slaughtering civilians.

So, again, if you had been president, what would you have done? Germany and Japan had already made plans to occupy the United States after the war in Eastern Europe had been won. Do you really think they would have been nice to people just becuase they were civilians?

About being unhappy in Cuba, I wouldn't bet too much on the fact that there are more unhappy citizens in the US than in Cuba. And that deesn't mean defending the Cuban dictatorship; it's just setting the record straight.

If you want to set the record staright, ask 100 unhappy Americans and 100 unhappy Cubans where they'd rather be: the USA or Cuba. If I were wagering man, I'd bet the bank you'd have 200 USA's.

99.4% of the Cuban people seem to accept the restrictions of their government as well as you do accept the restrictions of yours (different rules, different methods, same purpose; defending an ideology and a way of life).

Again, you are comparing apples to oranges. 99.4% of Cubans don't have a choice. At least here in America, I can protest the things I disagree with, elect representatives who share my viewpoints, and run for office myself.

None of that can occur in Cuba, or in China, or in North Korea, or in Laos, or in Vietnam.

Do you not see the difference?


The 0.6% are the ones on the boat you posted;

So....if I were to go to Cuba with a million boats and the Cuban government said that anybody who wanted to leave on one could do so....how many takers do you think we'd have?

Personally, I estimate it at 99.4%.

On the other hand, Americans are free to go wherever they like, but for some odd reason, our problem is not with people leaving, but with so many people from other countries trying to get in.

Do you see the difference?

[flyermay]

Just search my posts. I've never denied that capitalism run amok is a big problem, and I am on the left of the political spectrum. I just don't think that enslaving people under communism is the right answer.

But enslaving them under capitalism is the right answer, isn’t it? Because that's what we are supporting, funding and spreading throuwout the world.

So it's ok to let people die, as long as they are soldiers? Discounting the fact that most of the soldiers were civilian farm boys who had been drafted, here's some pretty important news: THE FASCISTS WEREN'T WORRIED ABOUT SPARING CIVILIANS. In fact, they were notorious for raping, torturing, and slaughtering civilians.

It is ok to let people die, as long as they want to die for their leader’s interests (on both sides). I would rather go to prison that pickup an arm to defend the interests of the elite (and I demonstrated it by refusing to show up in the recruitment centre when threatened to do so).

About your fascist invasion, ask around who funded it (it's all very well documented).

If you want to set the record staright, ask 100 unhappy Americans and 100 unhappy Cubans where they'd rather be: the USA or Cuba. If I were wagering man, I'd bet the bank you'd have 200 USA's.

That's tipical, on top, moking up about what you did to Cuba. It is so easy to forget that Cuba has been under the oppression of the US and their Allies, and still kept on going with only internal resources for the last 50 years; while the US is allowed to do whatever they want around the world, and to exploit and slave every single country they set a foot in.

That question is like smashing an apple against the floor with your foot, and asking someone if they wouldn’t prefer a new one instead.

Again, you are comparing apples to oranges. 99.4% of Cubans don't have a choice. At least here in America, I can protest the things I disagree with, elect representatives who share my viewpoints, and run for office myself.

I imagine the sort of Cubans you know, but the many I met wouldn’t change 1 Fidel for 1000 US presidents (I wouldn’t either).

And in America, you are allowed to do as you are told; as everywhere else. The only difference that I see is that you are given the illusion of having any say in your politics (but at the end of the day it is the same shit everywhere; which you don’t want to admit).

So....if I were to go to Cuba with a million boats and the Cuban government said that anybody who wanted to leave on one could do so....how many takers do you think we'd have?

Personally, I estimate it at 99.4%.

Please see the example of the smashed apple above. And even then you would be surprised of the percentage!!!

… our problem is not with people leaving, but with so many people from other countries trying to get in.

Do you see the difference?

I can explain that: it’s called 100 years of lies and propaganda. That's why you need to keep on repeating to yourself that you live in the land of the free, so that you end up believing it.

Do you know why it’s called the “American Dream”: because it only happens while you are asleep.

http://www.davidicke.com/forum/picture.php?albumid=309&pictureid=3657

[lightgiver]

Lightgiver, I've seen that "Nothing is real" stuff being said all over. What exactly does it mean? If you don't mind me asking.

Nothing truly exists from its own side:)IE independently.

Oh and everything is just a label,it is how we interpret these labels what counts.

[kasalt]

"But if you go carrying pictures of Chairman Mao..."

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1jWDeOu4Rv4

[luciferhorus]

... several communist countries have individually killed more people in time of peace than the USA has in its entire history of war. These would be Communist China, Communist Russia, and Communist Cambodia.


Well since there seems to be a comparison between the blood shed by Christendom (a/k/a Capitalism) and Communism, I rather think that the rivers of blood and human suffering shed by Christian Capitalism throughout the long and bloody history of it's Capitalist god, speaks for itself and that quantitatively, the Christian Capitalist god's rivers of blood far outweigh that of any other known god in history, which is unsurprising since the biblical god himself is entirely genocidal and malevolent. As Richard Dawkin's points out:

"The God of the Old Testament is arguably the most unplesant character in all fiction: jealous and proud of it; a petty, unjust, unforgiving control-freak; a vindictive, bloodthirsty ethnic cleanser, a misogynistic, homophobic, racist, infanticidal, genocidal, filicidal, pestilential, megalomaniacal, sadomasochistic, capriciously malevolent bully."

and further:

http://japan.indymedia.org/usermedia/image/10/large/popebenedictgeorgebush.jpg

"Bush and bin Laden are really on the same side: the side of faith and violence against the side of reason and discussion. Both have implacable faith that they are right and the other is evil. Each believes that when he dies he is going to heaven. Each believes that if he could kill the other, his path to paradise in the next world would be even swifter. The delusional "next world" is welcome to both of them. This world would be a much better place without either of them. "


Frankly 'taking the advice' of the Biblical god has led to the last two millenia of religious wars, crusades, inquisitions, holocausts and the rule of numerous tyrants and priests claiming to represent this "capriciously malevolent bully" of a god, and today the heads of state (Obama and Windsor) of the most powerful Capitalist nations on earth both claim to represent this state-terrorist, narco-terrorist, money obsessed god of Capital; it is frankly in my judgement (a discernment of good and evil) a morally worthless god, and perhaps a central reason for existance of billions of suffering victims of the Capitalist system.

http://www.excatholicsforchrist.com/images/priest.JPG
Above: A Masonic Christian Chaplain; a devotee of the god of Capital.


Since this is the 'David Icke' forum, I should point out that Icke generally considers this 'god' to be the god of the political, religious and economic establishment in whose name humanity is controlled and hypnotised (and I entirely concur); this is the god of Masonry and Christianity; it is the god of Capital; which might explain why there are so many Masons and Christians (see the 'religion' forum here) are here to defend their Capitalist god.

I should point out further that the most common holy book for Masons to swear their blood oaths upon is the Judaeo-Christian Bible, and that 'all' members of the 10th level English rite (York rite) must profess faith in Christianity, and that further if one examines this cult it is clear that they are both a Capitalist cult 'and' a cult of Capitalists; I think it folllows that their god is the god of Capital.

http://www.creative-i.info/wp-content/uploads/2008/10/mammon-euro-dollar1.jpg

Since you Thelonious ('Theolonious:' lit, 'Ruler of the people,' or 'master') are apparently here to defend Masonry and your malevolent and morally repugnant Capitalist god from the defenders of Icke's analysis of Masonry, I think that it would be appropriate if you compared the blood shed throughout history, and indeed in the world today by the defenders of the god of Capital, with the blood shed by the enemies of the God of Capital, and I hardly think that the enemies of your Capitalist god (I include myself in this category) are able to compete thus far with thise rivers of blood shed by the devotees of your Capitalist deity.

Futher it is not merely the matter of the genocide of the enemies of the god of Capital, but the effects of their slave trades (the African slave trade certainly being financed to a great extent by Masonic cultists such as the 'Lloyds of London / Liverpool' loan sharks), opium wars, sex slavery and today the economic slaves of globablisation; such human suffering cannot be measured quantitatively merely in blood.

http://www.christianhistorysociety.com/image/slaveposter.jpg

Even if the enemies of your Capitalist cult and Capitalist god had shed more blood (which is hardly the case) than the militant defenders of the god of Capital, it is further a 'moral' issue' rather than merely a quantitative issue; just as, for example, if the Cubans and Angolans had killed more South Africans during the Angolan war, it would be considered a point of 'victory' and something to celebrate; similarly if similarly if Ho Chi's Vietnamese army had killed more Americans (which was not the case) than they did and dropped more napalm on American civillians (which they did not), a judgement (a discernment of good and evil) is not a quantitative matter but a moral one.

http://cryptome.info/ik46/pict1.jpg
Above: Grand Master of the god of Capital.

We live in a Capitalist world where billions are enslaved and starved in the name of the god of Capital and where 20,000 children die each day (due to the effects of poverty) in Capitalism's holocaust; if your enemies consider the devotees of your god to be evil; any amount of blood shed to eradicate such cultists from the face of the earth, would, I am sure be considered a relative detail of history

Shame.

Lux

'I am not for the masters who are the chaff of humanity but for the enslaved who shall inherit the earth'


“Religion is regarded by the common people as true, by the wise as false, and by the rulers as useful.”
Seneca

[thelonious]

Well since there seems to be a comparison between the blood shed by Christendom (a/k/a Capitalism) and Communism, I rather think that the rivers of blood and human suffering shed by Christian Capitalism throughout the long and bloody history of it's Capitalist god, speaks for itself and that quantitatively, the Christian Capitalist god's rivers of blood far outweigh that of any other known god in history, which is unsurprising since the biblical god himself is entirely genocidal and malevolent.

I'm neither a Christian nor a capitalist, nor am I a supporter of either of those systems. But I certainly don't support Communism either. While capitalism and Christianity have killed numerous innocent people, communism has even killed more.

[flyermay]

I'm neither a Christian nor a capitalist, nor am I a supporter of either of those systems. But I certainly don't support Communism either. While capitalism and Christianity have killed numerous innocent people, communism has even killed more.

No ideology or religion gets even close to the number of murders and torture done in the name of the God from the old testament (murders and torture that still goes on today). Communists have a lot of catching up to do just to be in the same league.

[thelonious]

No ideology or religion gets even close to the number of murders and torture done in the name of the God from the old testament (murders and torture that still goes on today). Communists have a lot of catching up to do just to be in the same league.

Not at all. Pol Pot himself killed more people than that died in all the wars in the Old Testament combined.

Besides, most secular archaeologists deny the historical accuracy of much of the Old Testament, and the general consensus is that all the stories of war were just boisterous nonsense, and that the early Hebrews peacefully assimilated with other Semitic cultures.

[kasalt]

Since this is the 'David Icke' forum, I should point out that Icke generally considers this 'god' to be the god of the political, religious and economic establishment in whose name humanity is controlled and hypnotised (and I entirely concur); this is the god of Masonry and Christianity; it is the god of Capital...

Lux,

I ran a search of the word "communism" on David Icke's homepage. The results are interesting and worth taking a look at:

http://www.davidicke.com/index.php?searchword=communism&option=com_search&Itemid=

[flyermay]

Not at all. Pol Pot himself killed more people than that died in all the wars in the Old Testament combined.

I'm sorry, but Pol Pot was only an apprentice compared with those who go around the world imposing the word (sorry, the "sword") of their lord.

Pol Pot, with a score of between 750,000 to 1.7 million deaths, is nothing compared with all the killings just done during biblical times in the name of God. Not only during holy wars, but also in every day life practices; like the death penalty for deviating from the law of God.

And if by any chance that number is not enough to compete with the whole of communism together, then you should also account for all those killings done while spreading and defending the name of the lord all around the world until these days.

As a small example: Just Cortés and a small group of men killed an estimate 80% of the 300.000 aztecs, and only from the city of Tenochtitlan, with the object of converting the Aztec civilazation into Christiandom. As a matter of fact the conquest of the Americas has a death toll of circa 100,000,000 men, women and children (yes, I double checked the number of zeros).

As I said, communism still is in the regional league (fortunately).

[kasalt]

Links of interest to the topic at hand:

Communism - A Ruse for Illuminati Jewish Theft & Murder (http://www.henrymakow.com/communism_disguises_illuminati.html)

Che! The West's Fatal Embrace of Communism (http://www.savethemales.ca/the_death_wish_of_western_civi.html)

Communism & NWO: Wall Street's Utopian Hoax (http://www.savethemales.ca/160303.html)

Hitler Used Rothschild Banker's Typewriter (http://www.savethemales.ca/002071.html)

Rothschilds Conduct "Red Symphony" (http://www.savethemales.ca/000275.html)

[luciferhorus]

On Pol Pot


The Friends of Pol Pot
by John Pilger
The Nation magazine, May 11, 1998



What is remarkable about the U.S. ..........is the omission of U.S. complicity in his (Pol Pot's) rise to power, a complicity that sustained him for almost two decades. For the truth is that Pol Pot and the Khmer Rouge would be historical nonentities-and a great many people would be alive today- had Washington not helped bring them to power ....

http://zfacts.com/metaPage/lib/Cambodia-Map.jpg

To hear Henry Kissinger deny recently that the United States and especially the Nixon Administration bore any responsibility for Cambodia's horror was to hear truth denigrated and our intelligence insulted. .....

For Cambodia's nightmare did not begin with Year Zero but on the eve of the U.S. land invasion of neutral Cambodia in 1970.....

http://imgs.sfgate.com/c/pictures/2002/06/09/csp_b52.jpg

Between 1969 and 1973, U.S. bombers killed perhaps three-quarters of a million Cambodian peasants in an attempt to destroy North Vietnamese supply bases, many of which did not exist.....

http://images-cdn01.associatedcontent.com/image/A3060/30601/300_30601.jpg

During one six-month period in 1973, B-52s dropped more bombs on Cambodians, living mostly in straw huts, than were dropped on Japan during all of World War II, the equivalent of five Hiroshimas.....

http://www.acig.org/artman/uploads/aag05.jpg

Evidence from U.S. official documents, declassified in 1987, leaves no doubt that this U.S. terror was critical in Pol Pot's drive for power.....

What Kissinger and Nixon began, Pol Pot completed. Had the United States and China allowed it, Cambodia's suffering could have stopped when the Vietnamese finally responded to years of Khmer Rouge attacks across their border and liberated the country in January 1979. ......

But almost immediately the United States began secretly backing Pol Pot in exile. Direct contact was made between the Reagan White House and the Khmer Rouge when Dr. Ray Cline, a former deputy director of the C.I.A., made a clandestine visit to Pol Pot's operational base inside Cambodia in November 1980. .....

http://lcmedia.typepad.com/photos/memorabilia/nixoncambodia.jpg

Cline was then a foreign policy adviser to President-elect Reagan. Within a year some fifty C.l.A. and other intelligence agents were running Washington's secret war against Cambodia from the U.S. Embassy in Bangkok and along the Thai-Cambodian border. ....

Cambodia was now America's "last battle of the Vietnam War," as one U.S. official put it, "so that we can achieve a better result."
Two U.S. relief aid workers, Linda Mason and Roger Brown, later wrote, "The U.S. government insisted that the Khmer Rouge be fed.. .the U.S. preferred that the Khmer Rouge operation benefit from the credibility of an internationally known relief operation."..........

In 1980, under U.S. pressure, the World Food Program handed over food worth $12 million to pass on to the Khmer Rouge. In that year, I traveled on a U.N. convoy of forty trucks into Cambodia from Thailand and filmed a U.N. official handing the supplies over to a Khmer Rouge general, Nam Phan, known to Western aid officials as The Butcher........

.... If the U.S. bombing was the first phase of Cambodia's holocaust and Pol Pot's Year Zero the second, the third phase was the l use of the United Nations by Washington, its allies and China as the instrument of Cambodia's, and Vietnam's, punishment............

With Vietnamese troops preventing the return of the Khmer Rouge and a Hanoi-installed regime in Phnom Penh, a U.N. embargo barred Cambodia from all international agreements on trade and communications, even from the World Health Organization...........

The U.N. withheld development aid from only one Third World country: Cambodia, which lay unreconstituted from the years of bombing and neglect. For the United States the blockade was total. Not even Cuba and the Soviet Union were treated this way............

I watched Khmer Rouge officials welcomed back to Phnom Penh by U.N. officials who went to astonishing lengths not to offend them. Khieu Samphan, Pol Pot's henchman who once said that the only mistake the Khmer Rouge had made was not killing enough people, took the salute of U.S. and other U.N. troops as a guest of honor on United Nations Day in Phnom Penh.

.....Are the Khmer Rouge now finished? I doubt it. The more pertinent question is: Will those foreign governments that backed Pol Pot while wringing their hands now help rebuild the country they helped devastate? Henry Kissinger appeared to answer this when he said, "Why should we flagellate ourselves for what the Cambodians did to each other?"

John Pilger

John Pilger has twice won Britain's highest award for journalism. His documentary films have won awards in the United States and Britain.


Entire article on:
http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Global_Secrets_Lies/Friends_PolPot.html


____________


http://funkhundd.files.wordpress.com/2009/02/nixon1.jpg


Perhaps the classic one-liner from Oliver Stone's 'Nixon (the dialogue was taken verbatim from the Nixon White House tapes)' is where Kissinger says to Nixon (I paraphrase from memory): 'If you start bombing Cambodia, the world will think you have gone totally insane.' Nixon replied 'That is exactly what I want them to think.'

The war is not over.

Commandante Lucifer

http://cidc.library.cornell.edu/dof/students/cjr11/hoposter.gif

You can kill ten of my men for every one I kill of yours, but even at those odds, you will lose and I will win.”
Ho Chi Minh

__________________


Addendum

Theolonious, since we are also discussing on another thread your allegation that Icke is colourful conman who is making money off the gullible vs. my position that Masons are rather 'dull,' boring and pompous conmen who sell very expensive military and esoteric titles to the gullible, might I ask if you know anything about the Duke of Kent's dispay of 'military medals' and which wars he fought in to obtain such medals and any details as to the acts of bravery, heroism or narco-terrorism this pompous old conman engaged in, in order to convince the gullible that he is a decorated (colorful) con-man rather than a rather boring and pompous conman?

Frankly, while there are numerous individuals on this forum who defend David Icke and his analysis of Masonry from Masons of your ilk, I find it surprising that nobody here rushes to the defense of the puppet cult leader of the English Masons; most cultists are generally rather psychophantic about their beloved leaders.

http://cryptome.info/ik46/pict1.jpg

Prince Edward George Nicholas Patrick Paul, Duke of Kent

Grand Master of the United Grand Lodge of England and First Grand Principal of the Supreme Grand Chapter of Royal Arch Masons of England; Grand Master of the Order of St Michael and St George; Royal Knight of the Garter; Knight Grand Cross of the Royal Victorian Order; Personal Aide-de-Camp to the Queen; Order of St George and St Constantine, 1st Class; The Most Illustrious Order of Tri Shakti Patta, 1st Class; Knight Grand Band; the Order of the Star of Africa, Grand Cordon; the Order of the Renaissance, Grand Cross; the Order of St Olav, Grand Cross; Colonel, of the Scots Guards; Colonel-in-Chief, of the Royal Regiment of Fusiliers; Royal Colonel, of the 1st Battalion, The Rifles; Deputy Colonel-in-Chief, of the Royal Scots Dragoon Guards; Honorary Air Commodore, RAF Leuchars; Honorary Air Chief Marshal, Royal Air Force; Colonel-in-Chief, of The Lorne Scots (Peel, Dufferin and Halton Regiment); Chancellor of the University of Surrey
and 'President of The Scout Association'



http://www.keepmilitarymuseum.org/images/gallery/primary/rwg07144.jpg


vs:

http://www.greatdreams.com/reptlan/davidi~1.jpg

David Icke (no titles)

I think generally it boils down to the gullibe pompous devotees of the Duke of Kent, and other similar masonic cults, who have bought their miltiary and esoteric titles from some very expensive Capitalist cults who are here to defend their ridiculous cults from the ridicule of numerous anti-religious, anti-cult Freethinkers who happen to have read some Icke books (or down-loaded them free) or watched his videos on Youtube.

[kasalt]

Mao made some mistakes in his agricultural revolution, as have I, but not out of premeditation.

Mao and I were and are now far from the premeditated genocide and torture of innocents...

I consider it anachronistic to criticse Mao too severely...I wil always love Mao and Che and will defend them, now and in eternity against morally worthless Christian / Masonic devils...

I worry that the spirit of Mao shall always love me, as I love him...I shall be redeemed by Mao.

I find it strange that here you defend Mao, while in other posts you condemn homophobia--which you attribute to the Christian capitalist mentality--but historically, homophobia was considered to be part and parcel of communist ideology:I remember reading years ago a chilling account of the summary execution of a gay inmate in a labor camp. It is in Prisoner of Mao, a book highly regarded by the late China scholar John King Fairbank (source (http://www.encyclopedia.com/doc/1P2-785772.html)).

Almost all the old communist regimes criminalized homosexuality (source (http://atheism.about.com/b/2008/05/19/communists-agree-with-christians-on-criminalizing-homosexuality.htm)).

All Communist states have banned associations of lesbians and gays, whether social or political, and have outlawed the publication of gay and lesbian materials. Often, particularly during the 1950s and 60s, lesbians and gays have been denounced, fired from their jobs, imprisoned, deported, and, in some cases, castrated or even executed...
The low point in the history of the relationship between socialism and lesbians, gays, bisexuals and transpeople undoubtedly begins with the rise of Joseph Stalin in the USSR and continues through the era of Communist state power in the USSR, East Germany, China, Cuba and North Korea. In all cases, conditions for sexual minorities and gender variant people worsened under post-Stalin Communist states. Some in the West withdrew their support for Communism after seeing the severity of repression in the USSR, including gay writer André Gide (source (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socialism_and_LGBT_rights#Socialist_states)).
The Communist regime saw homosexuality as a product of a capitalist society and imprisoned homosexuals in forced labor camps in the 1960s, where they were subject to medical-political "reeducation". The regime banned homosexuals from any position in which they might "corrupt minors" or have a negative influence on building the "new man". (source (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LGBT_rights_in_Cuba)).
Jeffrey Weeks noted in 1989, a belief that homosexuality is "something to be reviled and prevented" may be one of the few political viewpoints shared by both Fidel Castro and Margaret Thatcher (source (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socialism_and_LGBT_rights)).
The few recorded statements Vladimir Lenin made about sexuality are devoted to criticising arguments for sexual freedom as a legitimate issue for the Left. One group of leftist writers wrote: "According to Lenin, the very notion of sexual emancipation was typical of capitalist societies and a symptom of bourgeois degeneracy."(source (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socialism_and_LGBT_rights#Lenin)).

[foobar]

The Nepalese are Hindus, not Buddhists.

The Emperor worship of Japan is a Shinto, not a Buddhist phenomenon.

[luciferhorus]

I find it strange that here you defend Mao, while in other posts you condemn homophobia--which you attribute to the Christian capitalist mentality--but historically, homophobia was considered to be part and parcel of communist ideology.

I am not uncritical of Mao and I am not a Maoist; I simply admire certain aspects of the Maoist ideology; further this is the 21st century and generally anti-homophobia is now part and parcel of Leftist, anti-Capitalist ideology;' sexual revolution and liberation further is much more ingrained into Anarchist ideology.

Generally for those who defend Capitalism, for example if I suggest that since they believe in Capitalism so much, that they should sell their mother to a Thai brothel and go and live in a shantytown outside Johannesburg, they generally decline to do this, since their Capitalist ideal is that of being a 'master' of Capitalism at the top of the food chain; similarly with the proponents of slavery; they generally do not wish to be slaves but rather masters; they wish to enjoy the 'ideal' Capitalist scenario.

Similarly with anti-Capitalism; it is an evolving ideology whose proponents generally wish to distance themsleves from the mistakes and abuses of past dictators and point to a more 'ideal form,' parcticularly with Anarchists; if you point to past events or attitudes which have occurred in the history of anti-Capitalism which modern anti-Capitalists are critical of, it is generally a 'straw man' argument.

With regards to Cuba, it has been widely rumoured for many years that the current president, Raul Castro is either gay, or at the very least, bisexual.

Lux

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/24685283/
Cuba holds large gay rights rally
Raul Castro's daughter presides at government-backed event

The Nepalese are Hindus, not Buddhists..

Yes the majority of the population are 'allegedly' Hindus, but you will find that wherever there are Buddhists in the world, they are generally in a minority; however there are still 3-4 million Buddhists in Nepal and it is very much one of their havens.

By the majority of the population being 'allegedly 'Hindu' I mean that they are 'culturally' Hindu in the sense that their ancestors were Hindu, but in the recent elections the Maoists have taken over the parliament with the popular vote, and Maoism is an evangelically anti-Hindu ideology, since Hindusim is a Brahministic (i.e., racist) ideology of the ancient economic and racial elites.

I do also have a 'Summa Contra Hinduism' essay; Hinduism is essentially a classist, racist human sacrifice cultist ideology; indeed Nazism is essentially a modern form of Brahminism; and one of the main spiritual and intellectual gurus of Nazism was the evangelical Hindu 'Savitri Devi;' her writings can be found on many Neo-Nazi internet sites including www.stormfront.org.. I have travelled throughout India and it is full of tourists marvelling at the temple architecture who seem to be totally unaware that such temples were used for human sacrifices; generally there is a great lack of understanding of this in the New age movement where it is often the case that Hinduism is considered 'a great spiritual tradition;' whereas Nazi spiritualism is frowned upon; frankly they are both equally morally repugnant religions / ideologies in my judgement.


The Emperor worship of Japan is a Shinto, not a Buddhist phenomenon.

I think I could have made myself clearer on this; in Japan, some polls (see below (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buddhism_by_country#cite_note-89)) estimate that up to 96% of the Japanese population are Buddhist; this statistic is too high to be believable, however this is clearly 'cultural' Buddhism rather than religious Buddhism; just as the English mostly identify with Christianity as their ancestor's religion.

The point I was making was that while Buddhism has been the prevailing religion of the vast majority of Japanese, it did not seem to stop the Japanese behaving in a racist and genocidal manner towards the Koreans and Chinese during their 20th century invasions of these countries; just as the anti-Capitalist sayings of Jesus, do not stop Christians propagating Capitalist Imperialism; even today military chaplains bury the dead of the Anglo-American state terrorist militia offering prayers that such Capitalists shall enter 'Heaven' in the afterlife as a reward for torturing, murdering and bombing innocents in the name of Capitalist Imperialism.

Generally Jesus and Buddha are just used by the priesthood of Capital as objects of idolatry (hypnotic tools) to propagate the anti-thesis (opposite idea) of their teachings.

Lux

[kasalt]

I am not uncritical of Mao and I am not a Maoist; I simply admire certain aspects of the Maoist ideology; further this is the 21st century and generally anti-homophobia is now part and parcel of Leftist, anti-Capitalist ideology.

Anti-homophobia could only have evolved within a framework which allowed enough freedom for it; in this case, classical liberalism (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Classical_liberalism), and only later did those who call themselves communists start to follow the trend, hence they were followers, not leaders. Such a radical divergence from established thought would not likely have been allowed to originate under communism due to its inherently totalitarian and dictatorial nature, and those who did dare to buck that system found themselves a bloody victim of it.

With regards to Cuba, it has been widely rumoured for many years that the current president Raul Castro is either gay, or at the very least, bisexual.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/24685283/
Cuba holds large gay rights rally
Raul Castro's daughter presides at government-backed event

It is certainly the case that Raul Castro has instituted reforms with regard to what the Cuban people are now officially allowed to think about homosexuality. Even Fidel has modified his own views on the subject. Let us stop and think for a moment about how magnanimous these men are whenever they deign to allow their minions to think and express themselves differently about any particular subject, especially this one.

Nevertheless, those who forget history are doomed to repeat it, so it is in this spirit that I offer the following:Gay writer and Cuban revolutionary Reinaldo Arenas (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reinaldo_Arenas) recalled that soon after Castro's Communist government came to power, "the persecution started and concentration camps were opened... the sexual act became taboo while the 'new man' was being proclaimed and masculinity exalted." (source (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socialism_and_LGBT_rights#Socialist_states))
Castro's admiring description of rural life in Cuba ("in the country, there are no homosexuals"[18] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LGBT_rights_in_Cuba#cite_note-Tatchell-17)) reflected the idea of homosexuality as bourgeois decadence, and he denounced "maricones" (faggots (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Faggot_%28slang%29)) as "agents of imperialism".[26] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LGBT_rights_in_Cuba#cite_note-25) Castro explained his reasoning in a 1965 interview:
[H]omosexuals should not be allowed in positions where they are able to exert influence upon young people. In the conditions under which we live, because of the problems which our country is facing, we must inculcate your youth with the spirit of discipline, of struggle, of work... [W]e would never come to believe that a homosexual could embody the conditions and requirements of conduct that would enable us to consider him a true Revolutionary, a true Communist militant. A deviation of that nature clashes with the concept we have of what a militant Communist must be. (Source (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LGBT_rights_in_Cuba#Cuban_socialism_and_masculinit y))

[luciferhorus]

Anti-homophobia could only have evolved within a framework which allowed enough freedom for it; in this case, classical liberalism (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Classical_liberalism), and only later did those who call themselves communists start to follow the trend, hence they were followers, not leaders. Such a radical divergence from established thought would not likely have been allowed to originate under communism due to its inherently totalitarian and dictatorial nature, and those who did dare to buck that system found themselves a bloody victim of it.



http://bashbacknews.files.wordpress.com/2008/07/cropped-bbmil.jpg

What you are doing is making an argument against totalitarian Communism, which as an Anarchist I am not going to attempt to defend; you will need to take the matter up with the Marxists and other Communists who do believe in forms of dictatorship and totalitarianism.

With regards to 'liberalism' the term implies 'to liberate' whereas with 'conservatism' the term implies 'to conserve the values of the past.'

The ancient Greek and Roman empires were largely bisexual cultures, particularly among males; thus when we use the term 'morally conservative' it does not imply 'to conserve the sexual values of the ancient Greeks and Romans;' on the contrary it implies to "conserve the sexual values of Christian totalitarianism and the priesthood of Christ,' and of course Communists in the last century have still been affected by the hypnosis of the Christian priesthood and have often imported many of their conservative values; this is no longer the case.

Probably a major factor in the change of attitudes is that a great many Anarchists and even Marxists have been gay, lesbian or bisexual and have infiltrated the anti-Capitalist movement and influenced it. Homophobia has never really been an issue among Anarchists as far as I am aware, but certainly among Marxists it has been the case in the past.

Anti-Capitalists now generally attack 'Neo-Liberalism,' but 'Neo-Liberalism' is simply a term of Orwellian Newspeak which refers to 'opening up markets' internationally in order that Capitalist Corporations of the First World can further exploit the Third World, and it really is the same term as 'Neo-Conservatism.'

Ultimately 'Freedom' is an Anarchist mantra; the 'freedom' which Capitalists speak of is the 'freedom' to enslave and to exploit; it is the freedom a master wished to have to do as he wills with his slaves; Capitalist 'freedom' also includes religious freedom which should not be confused with freedom of thought, but rather it is the freedom to start Capitalist religious cults and to propagate what Crowley defined as the 'sin of restriction,' and what Nietzsche defined as 'the morality of a slave;' since you seem to prefer the 'straw man' method of debate to debating with real people, I must point out that I do not suspend criticism on either Nietzsche or Crowley; I simply find commonalities between Crowley's Thelemic Law and Nietzsche's anti-Christianity as an Anarchist, since neither were Anarchists; on the contrary.

A truly sexually 'liberated' person would not judge another person as 'evil' because of their sexual lifestyle, unless of course they were physically harming others or there was a non-consensual element.

When you have a 'dictator' and a 'state' this is usually accompanied by a myriad of laws which tell you what you can and cannot do, and usually the sexual morality of the dictator is imposed on the masses; this has nothing to do with Anarchism, on the contrary; however all Anarchists historically have been Communists until very recently where we see the rise of the most vile economic philosophy in all of history which is termed Anarcho-Capitalism.

In debates between anti-Communists and Anarcho-Communists, generally the most common 'straw man' argument made by the anti-Communists is to attack totalitarian statist Communism and to seek to associate this with Anarchism; whereas Anarchists have an entire 'package' of political positions which constitute the most extreme blasphemy to devotee of the god of Capital and which could be fairly attacked instead, including the total eradication of the state.

http://themustardseed.files.wordpress.com/2008/12/zapatista-babe.jpg

If you are going to attack a Christian, it will do you no good to criticise the Koran; similarly if you place yourself on an Anarchist forum and start attacking Mao or Stalin, despite any commonalities in ideology.

I should point out that Marx was an anti-Communist until he migrated to France and started hanging out with the French Anarchists; Marx was actually converted to Communism by the Anarchist Proudhon; Marxism (not to be confused with Leninist state Captialsim) is simply pure Anarchism with one single addition, the proletarian dictatorship; the state in other words, so criticising Communist 'governments' is only fair game if you are debating with a Marxist. I think it was Bakunin who stated 'Give me a 100 Tsars rather than one Karl Marx,' and that was decades before the first Communist dictatorship.


Since this is the David Icke forum I should point out that Icke is an overtly declared State Capitalist who believes that the State Terrorists should nationalise loan sharking; never the less I admire Icke in many ways, just as I admire Fidel, Mao and Ho Chi, but I do not suspend criticism; it is rather an easy target to attack private Capital; to offer the correct counterproposal is quite another matter.

If the Anglo-American state terrorists nationalised loan-sharking, they would not have to pay a third or more of their revenue to the loan sharking elites, and it would simply further enrich the states and their military; it would simply be like a palace revolution, disempowering one set of militant Capitalist masters and empowering another; it would not be a revolution against the ultimate evil; the state.

Lux

http://nihilpress.subvert.info/love2.jpg

Our Word is our Weapon

What Is Communist Anarchism?(1929)
By Alexander Berkman (In 31 chapters)
http://dwardmac.pitzer.edu/anarchist_archives/bright/berkman/comanarchism/whatis_toc.html

http://www.margencero.com/Magazine/machine/ezln_subcomandante_marcos.jpg

Or alternatively

What is Anarchism? Capital, Property, Will and Law (revised 2009)
By Lucifer (simplified in a single page)

http://www.davidicke.com/forum/showthread.php?t=62778


“To be governed is to be watched, inspected, spied upon, directed, law-driven, numbered, regulated, enrolled, indoctrinated, preached at, controlled, checked, estimated, valued, censured, commanded, by creatures who have neither the right nor the wisdom nor the virtue to do so. To be governed is to be at every operation, at every transaction noted, registered, counted, taxed, stamped, measured, numbered, assessed, licensed, authorized, admonished, prevented, forbidden, reformed, corrected, punished. It is, under pretext of public utility, and in the name of the general interest, to be placed under contribution, drilled, fleeced, exploited, monopolized, extorted from, squeezed, hoaxed, robbed; then, at the slightest resistance, the first word of complaint, to be repressed, fined, vilified, harassed, hunted down, abused, clubbed, disarmed, bound, choked, imprisoned, judged, condemned, shot, deported, sacrificed, sold, betrayed; and to crown all, mocked, ridiculed, derided, outraged, dishonored. That is government; that is its justice; that is its morality.”

P.-J. Proudhon, "General Idea of the Revolution in the Nineteenth Century"

[zero1]

Generally Jesus and Buddha are just used by the priesthood of Capital as objects of idolatry (hypnotic tools) to propagate the anti-thesis (opposite idea) of their teachings.

Yes. I've rarely seen it put so simply or so well, that really does sum it up.

Is there no hope to rescue the real Jesus & the real Buddha from their believers and those who claim to teach in their names?

[zero1]

No reply again? What happened to "Commandante Lucifer"? Suddenly quiet?

[thelonious]

No reply again? What happened to "Commandante Lucifer"? Suddenly quiet?

Maybe he got purged by the Politburo, and is now an unperson? :eek:

[zero1]

Maybe he got purged by the Politburo, and is now an unperson? :eek:

He hasn't spoken to me since I disagreed with him about the meaning of Zion.

I should have respected my initial impression of my "brother" and "commandante" that he will not brook being disagreed with, even by an "ally".

Oh well, there goes another enormous ego...not like I haven't seen a few of them in my time anyway...

:rolleyes:

[lightgiver]

Yes. I've rarely seen it put so simply or so well, that really does sum it up.

Is there no hope to rescue the real Jesus & the real Buddha from their believers and those who claim to teach in their names?

Isn't Idolatry frowned upon in Christianity?

and in Buddhism there is no Idol worship.

BTW Zero everyone has Buddha nature.

All know the Way, but few actually walk it.

If you don't find a teacher soon, you'll live this life in vain. It's true, you have the buddha-nature. But without the help of a teacher
you'll never know it. Only one person in a million becomes enlightened without a teacher's help.
If, though, by the conjunction of conditions, someone understands what the Buddha meant, that person doesn't need a teacher. Such a person has a natural awareness superior to anything taught. But unless you're so blessed, study hard, and by means of instruction you'll understand.

[lightgiver]

He hasn't spoken to me since I disagreed with him about the meaning of Zion.

I should have respected my initial impression of my "brother" and "commandante" that he will not brook being disagreed with, even by an "ally".

Oh well, there goes another enormous ego...not like I haven't seen a few of them in my time anyway...

:rolleyes:

Such is the fickleness of the EGO:D,

Conquer the angry man by love.
Conquer the ill-natured man by goodness.
Conquer the miser with generosity.
Conquer the liar with truth.
The Dhammapada

[zero1]

Isn't Idolatry frowned upon in Christianity?

Yes, but it depends on how you define idolatry; the Catholic Christians have a flexible definition of it; worship of 'false gods', but not the true One (hence JC & Mary statues).

Idolatry - worshipping the created (or a created being) instead of the True Creator and author of that which is created.

Eg. pantheism & Earth-worship are idolatry.

and in Buddhism there is no Idol worship.

Well, sure, sort of. They do put Buddha figurines on pedestals and offer prayers to him, and they do have Bodhisattvas like Buddha Tara and Kwan-Yin who are basically goddesses. Not that there's anything wrong with that, just saying.

BTW Zero everyone has Buddha nature. All know the Way, but few actually walk it.

I know. I like Buddhism, I studied it for a long time, I took Refuge in the Buddha, Dharma & Sangha; I'm entitled to consider myself a Buddhist just as much as you, friend Lightgiver.

If you don't find a teacher soon, you'll live this life in vain. It's true, you have the buddha-nature. But without the help of a teacher
you'll never know it. Only one person in a million becomes enlightened without a teacher's help.

Could I be that one-in-a-million you speak of, Lightgiver..?

But I see what you say about having a teacher, a leader, a father-figure to guide me; this now in hindsight I would have greatly appreciated, for even the enlightened can be lonely and directionless, however much wisdom is its own reward. This desire to be led, to have a focus of worship, something that affirms a higher purpose, it is still there in me sometimes.

If, though, by the conjunction of conditions, someone understands what the Buddha meant, that person doesn't need a teacher. Such a person has a natural awareness superior to anything taught. But unless you're so blessed, study hard, and by means of instruction you'll understand.

I thank you for the advice. Now I shall return to being a lonely, poor, directionless nobody who is conspired against and villified and lied about, knowing no-one will approach me, and I have no-one to turn to. Boo-hoo.

[lightgiver]

Yes, but it depends on how you define idolatry; the Catholic Christians have a flexible definition of it; worship of 'false gods', but not the true One (hence JC & Mary statues).

Idolatry - worshipping the created (or a created being) instead of the True Creator and author of that which is created.

Eg. pantheism & Earth-worship are idolatry.



Well, sure, sort of. They do put Buddha figurines on pedestals and offer prayers to him, and they do have Bodhisattvas like Buddha Tara and Kwan-Yin who are basically goddesses. Not that there's anything wrong with that, just saying.



I know. I like Buddhism, I studied it for a long time, I took Refuge in the Buddha, Dharma & Sangha; I'm entitled to consider myself a Buddhist just as much as you, friend Lightgiver.



Could I be that one-in-a-million you speak of, Lightgiver..?

But I see what you say about having a teacher, a leader, a father-figure to guide me; this now in hindsight I would have greatly appreciated, for even the enlightened can be lonely and directionless, however much wisdom is its own reward. This desire to be led, to have a focus of worship, something that affirms a higher purpose, it is still there in me sometimes.



I thank you for the advice. Now I shall return to being a lonely, poor, directionless nobody who is conspired against and villified and lied about, knowing no-one will approach me, and I have no-one to turn to. Boo-hoo.

I like you;):D

I know what its like to be lonely,poor etc etc,Boo Hoo,and I am sure there are many others to.

The Buddha figures are not there to be Idolised,but as a reminder as to what we are capable of becoming,and the figures do represent certain symbolism and states of mind to achieve,as below the figure of vajrayogini is not just to become like her,but her posture and ornaments reveal mastery over samsara and nirvana,but to the untrained eye the ornaments ,just look like ornaments ,but to the trained eye the ornaments have a deeper meaning,

http://img514.imageshack.us/img514/5903/artvygold.jpg (http://img514.imageshack.us/my.php?image=artvygold.jpg)

Each aspect of Vajrayogini's form and mandala is designed to convey a spiritual meaning. For example, her brilliant red-colored body symbolizes the blazing of her inner fire (Tib. tummo). Her single face symbolizes that she has realized that all phenomena are of one nature in emptiness. Her two arms symbolize her realization of the two truths. Her three eyes symbolize her ability to see everything in the past, present and future. She looks up to space, demonstrating her attainment of outer and inner Pure Dakini Land, and indicating that she leads her followers to these attainments. Her right hand holds a curved knife to show her power to cut the continuum of the delusions and obstacles of her followers and of all living beings. Her left hand holds a skullcup filled with blood, which symbolizes her experience of the clear light of bliss.

http://www.borntoinspire.com/id40.html

Buddha Never Bowed Before a Statue, and Jesus Never Kneeled Before a Cross

[luciferhorus]

Is there no hope to rescue the real Jesus & the real Buddha from their believers and those who claim to teach in their names?

Yes of course. I consider the approximately one billion Christians and the well over one billion Buddhists (culturally speaking) to be an untapped resource.

Most of our ancestors were illiterate and uneducated agriculturalists; their access to the teachings of Jesus and Buddha were likely only to be perceived through the priesthood; with the introduction of the printing press, the rise of mass literacy, public libraries, the competing Enlighenment philosophies and now today the ultimate communications revolution, the Internet, each person has access to the greatest ever research library in human history. The ridiculous idea of Jesus and Buddha being utilised by Capitalists and anti-Communists as icons is under increasing attack; such revisionism is entirely progressive and slowly merging into the mass consciousness; however there is still a great battle ahead and much work to be done in attacking the proponets of hypocrisy.

Since this discussion group shows up in Google searches for 'Communist Jesus' and 'Communist Buddha' for example, and a host of other subjects, and since some threads get 10's of thousands of hits, despite their being only a few active debaters, bear in mind that it is not merely a matter of the intellectual conversion of the handful of arrogant Christians debating here to Communism; we speak from the sky to all peoples and nations as the lightening flashes from the east to the west, and to the myriads; our judgements on the living and the dead, on Capitalist, anti-Communist forms of Christianity and Buddhism are not unheeded pearls, irrespective of the arrogance of our opponents; it is they whom the children of the present and future worlds will condem and villify, and we whom history will whom history will resolve of any guilt.

http://g-ec2.images-amazon.com/images/I/41RY97F83XL._AA240_.jpg
More on: http://www.leonardoboff.com/


Liberation Theology.

Since the 60's we have witnessed the rise of the Liberation Theology movement, particularly in Latin America, Africa and the Third World, and in the universities of the world, it is an ideology which has taken over many of the departments of Theology / Religious studies; few campuses are unnafected and those which are generally the private evangelical colleges of the American Right.

Generally the most educated, intelligent and 'honest' Christians have already made the intellectual conversion to Liberation Theology; what remains outside this are the hypnotised masses who still relate to the myth of the 'Anti-Communist Jesus' which suits the economic and religious establishment.

http://aftermathnews.files.wordpress.com/2006/11/castro_chavez_military_dictators.jpg
Above: Castro and Chavez

Probably one of the most prominent adverts for Liberation Theology is the pro-Cuban Venezuelan president 'Hugo Chavez,' who is openly a Christian and who is considered a 'dictator,' a 'terrorist' and a 'Communist' by the Christian Capitalists of the Far Right (i.e., those who are hellbound, according to the curse of Jesus on they who misrepresent him).

THE REVOLUTION WILL NOT BE TELEVISED: The Venezuelan Revolution
http://video.google.co.uk/videoplay?docid=5832390545689805144&ei=YxsUSsytNobt-AaapshY&q=venezuela&hl=en

http://www.commondreams.org/files/article_images/hugolugo.jpg
Above: Fernando Lugo with Chavez

And then last year Fernando Lugo was elected president of Paraguay; he is an ex Catholic Bishop, and a Marxist who was nicknamed the 'Bishop of the Poor.'

Latin America has in recent years witnessed a swing to the 'Left' after decades of far Right governments and I believe that the Liberation Theology movement has had much to do with this; however in reaction to this we also see the curse of evangelical Capitalist cults in Latin America, but at the voting booths, the masses have eagerly elected Leftists such as Evo Morales in Bolivia and the Marxist 'Lulu' in Brazil, however their policies are generally more reformist than revolutionary and there is still a long march ahead to complete the 'Great Work of the Ages;' this being the manifestation world revolution, the eradication of Capital and indeed ultimately all government, swords to ploughshares, etc.

No reply again? What happened to "Commandante Lucifer"? Suddenly quiet?


I leave my computer swithced on all the time, even if I am out, so forums such as this one will show that I am online when I am often far away. I am also dutybound to engage in socialising, the drinking of many ales, and satisfying the demands and the domestic and sexual duties of my feminist witch of a girlfriend who has enslaved me; I also sleep occasionally and have other projects I am working on; asides from about 500 other discussion groups which I am subscribed to; though at the moment I seem to be mostly hanging out with y'all here.


I should have respected my initial impression of my "brother" and "commandante" that he will not brook being disagreed with, even by an "ally".

Oh well, there goes another enormous ego...not like I haven't seen a few of them in my time anyway...


Not at all commandante Zero; I have been debating on discussion groups almost since the beginnings of the Internet in the early 90's. Even on anti-capitalist groups, debaters are hardly uncritical of each other, and I generally also have sought out hostile territory among the Christian, Islamic and Nazi groups, etc; intelligent criticism is not be feared but rather encouraged; it is after all how we develop spiritually and intellectually through a dialectical process of study and debate; it is how we test our philosophies, by arguing them and responding to criticisms.

I have responded to and initiated so many threads in the forums here that it would be a full time process to respond to every post; the limitations of time and my enslavement to my mistress forbid me from doing so.

Frankly it is good to find other intelligent Anarchists on this board debating with opponents rather than merely hanging out on Anarchist groups preaching to the converted.

To summarise my position on this thread and the 'Communist Jesus' thread, since both Buddha and Jesus were clearly anti-Capitalist ancestors, and indeed proto-Anarchists in rebellion against the economic and religious Archons of their age; their ultimate enemies in this age are not those who understand them and look to them as examples, but rather those who misrepresent them and who propagate anti-Communist forms of Christianity and Buddhism; frankly most Buddhists and Christians are simply the victims of religious hypnosis and are barely educated; not so for most Capitalist Christians on the Internet and on this forum here, who are simply personifications of arrogance; however I further entirely suspect that among the many debaters here are 'professional' bloggers in the employment of the state terrorists themselves whose mission is simply to 'confuse,' beguile, hypnotise and deceive.

http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y38/pfallon/starving_child.jpg

A billion children await economic salvation; no Capitalist Christs nor Maitrayas shall be able to satisfy them; the disease of Capitalist forms of Buddhism and Christianity is entirely responsible; if there were a billion Communist Christians and a billion Communist Buddhists dedicated to the fulfillment of the teachings of their mentors, this would would be economic heaven, not hell as it currently is.

Love to you Commandante Zero.

Lux

[kasalt]

I am not uncritical of Mao and I am not a Maoist

What you are doing is making an argument against totalitarian Communism, which as an Anarchist I am not going to attempt to defend; you will need to take the matter up with the Marxists and other Communists who do believe in forms of dictatorship and totalitarianism.

If that is in fact the case, I look forward to reading future essays from you entitled "Summa Contra Maoism" and "Summa Contra Totalitarian Communism".

[luciferhorus]

If that is in fact the case, I look forward to reading future essays from you entitled "Summa Contra Maoism" and "Summa Contra Totalitarian Communism".

My essay: What is Anarchism? On Capital, Property, Will and Law. What is to be done? which has been posted on this forum and has been posted on a myriad of other forums in various forms over the years could be also subtitled "Summa Contra Maoism" and "Summa Contra Totalitarian Communism"

To restate, Anarchists take numerous positions which are blasphemous to evangelical Capitalists, such as the abolition of private property, the sharing of all property in common in a collective (commune), the abolition of money and tokens of exchange, the abolition of organised religion, marraige and the numerous sexual laws of the 'slave morality' of the priesthood etc., and thus to attack such ideas are perfectly fair, but to continually rant on about the abuses of our Marxist / Leninist state Capitalist, totalitarian comarades with whom we admittedly share common ideas, is simply a 'straw man' argument since Anarchists are universally opposed to any form of statist tyranny whatsoever. The ideological tyranny of anti-Capitalism, anti-statism and opposition to organised religion is a mandate which must be imposed by militant will in the face of the tyranny of militant apocalyptic Capitalism and the international dictatorship of Capital, which is a genocidal dictatorship whose victims are in their billions; however this should not be confused with the tyranny of a 'state;' on the contrary.

http://tomdavis.typepad.com/tom_daviss_blog/images/starving_children_1.jpg

Regards

Lux
__________________

“We are advocates of the abolition of war, we do not want war; but war can only be abolished through war, and in order to get rid of the gun it is necessary to take up the gun…………. Communism is a hammer which we use to crush the enemy”-- Mao Tse-tung
.
What is Anarchism? On Capital, Property, Will and Law. What is to be done?

http://www.luciferia.tv/1ChildrenOftheSlaves/66666666.gif

Lucifer
http://www.luciferia.tv/animation/A.gif
Light of the World.

The 1000 Year Agricultural and Scientific Revolution; the Revolution of Light
The Final Revolutionary War of Economic Salvation.

For a world without money, government or nations.
For Apocalyptic Guerrilla War against Christendom (i.e., Capitalism).
No mercy on they who deserve none.

http://www.luciferia.tv/1ChildrenOftheSlaves/nkorea_missile.gif

Gr. Anarchos. "without archons (rulers) and without arche (government)"


Firstly to simplify, Anarchist Communism is merely 'moneyless stateless collectivism (kibbutzim)' and it is as simple as that. No further defintion is required for those who understand this; however as Anarchism as a political philosophy is generally misunderstood, I will unpack and explain this further.

Primitivism and Syndicalism.

There are the primitivists who emphasise agricultural revolution and the non miracle of the feeding of the 6 billion and then there are the syndicalists who seek technological revolution also. The Israeli Communists (kibbutzists) for example are syndicalists since some kibbutzes manufacture arms and others manufacture food. I share the view of primitivists that agricultural revolution is a priority, however tractors, labour saving machines, computers, medical technology and other products of scientific revolution represent progress and would form part of a future Communist paradise; they are not merely products of Capitalism but of a new scientific and technological humanity; this however would require syndicalism and the division of labour into ‘specialist’ non agricultural fields.

Other types of Anarchists:

Anarcho-Capitalists and 'Libertarians'.

Well obviously Anarcho-Capitalists are not Anti-monetarists (Capital - money) and thus not traditional Anarchists; simply put they are pure Capitalists (monetarists) who don't want any state interfering with private Capitalism; which is pretty close to a definition of neo-conservatism. There would be private police and armies to protect the rich etc. All members of organised crime syndicates (i.e. the mafia) are by default Anarcho-Capitalists whether they define themselves as such or not; after all they want to be free to enslave, bully and oppress others without government interference. Russia today is pretty close to Anarcho-Capitalist (i.e., ruled by the mafia). Anarcho-Capitalism is essentially 'organised crime,' where the criminals don't have to bribe the government or the police since there would be no government and the police would be their employees.

Libertarianism is slightly different, however the consequences would be similar.



Anarcho-capitalism, in my opinion, is a doctrinal system which, if ever
implemented, would lead to forms of tyranny and oppression that have few
counterparts in human history. There isn't the slightest possibility that
its (in my view, horrendous) ideas would be implemented, because they would
quickly destroy any society that made this colossal error. The idea of "free
contract" between the potentate and his starving subject is a sick joke,
perhaps worth some moments in an academic seminar exploring the consequences
of (in my view, absurd) ideas, but nowhere else.

I should add, however, that I find myself in substantial agreement with
people who consider themselves anarcho-capitalists on a whole range of
issues; and for some years, was able to write only in their journals. And I
also admire their commitment to rationality -- which is rare -- though I do
not think they see the consequences of the doctrines they espouse, or their
profound moral failings.
….Noam Chomsky

Punk rockers.

They are mostly just music fans who despise all authority and are not all political Anarchists, however since some punk rockers such as the Sex Pistols defined themselves as Anarchists, in the mind of many, Anarchism is thus associated with them, however few of them in practice advocate Communist collectivism.

Marxists.

Marx who was converted to Communism by the Anarchist Proudhon, held that the Capitalist state must be replaced with a worker's state which would 'wither away' eventually into Anarchist, stateless,moneyless collectivism. Marx was not a total anti-Capitalist (anti-monetarist) since he did suggest replacing money with labour vouchers as a form of temporary rationing, which is still a form of money, however most Marxists do not seem to favour this.

Trotskyists / Leninists

They do not seem to believe that 'state' must wither away eventually, since they are neo-Marxists rather than fundamentalist Marxists, but they are not anti-Capitalists (anti-monetarists) but state capitalists who believe in the nationalisation of banking, as it is Cuba and North Korea today where there is still a money system.

Chomskyism

Chomsky defines himself as an Anarchist, but but when asked what type of system will replace Capitalism he tends to give confusing or vague answers to the effect of 'well we shall have to wait and see,' so strictly speaking he does not openly propose Anarchist Communism (stateless collectivism) and indeed often criticises Communism. Chomskyism is thus a rather vague and confused form of Anarchism and not traditional Anarchism.

National Anarchists

See for example http://www.folkandfaith.com National Anarchists are political Anarchists and do not believe in nation states but they describe themselves as ‘racial separatists’ and are essentially white supremacists and racists. Fortunately they represent only a tiny minority among the Anarchist movement, since the vast majority of Anarchists are also anti-racists.

Anarchists who believe in Anarchist government.

This is a relatively new phenomenon and not really a political movement; indeed I don’t know of any serious writings by a non statist statist, but I have come across such individuals in Internet debates. These are of course non-Anarchists and indeed the most confused kind among all the above groups who claim to be some sort of Anarchist. They are much like the Christians who propagate Capitalism in the name of Jesus (an anti-monetarist, anti-propertyist, anti-religionist, proto-Anarchist Communist) or the Trotskyists who claim to be anti-monetarists (anti-Capitalists) when in fact they are monetarists albeit state monetarists. Since the term Anarchist is defined in the political sense as the absence of government and Archon (rulers / tyrants), one cannot have a non-government government anymore than one can have an anti-Communist Communist, but this argument seems to mean very little to ‘pro-statist anti-statists (????)’ whatever that means.

Anarchist Christians.

Anarchist Christians tend to view Jesus as an anti-propertyist and an anti-monetarist. Since they are essentially anti-Capitalists, they tend to be viewed by Capitalist Christians as heretics who reject the Capitalist interpretation of Christianity , and by many Anarchists as genuine political Anarchists, though some Anarchists consider ‘god’ to be an ultimate ‘Archon (tyrant). Christian Anarchists reject organised religion, but are theists. Anarchist Communism is a purely political solution and unlike Marxism has no rigid dogmatic metaphysics so it appeals to non-religious Pagans, New Age spiritualists, agnostics ‘and’ atheists alike, however ‘organised religion’ or the rule of the priesthood (who are Archons / authority figures) has no place whatsoever in an Anarchist world.

Governments ‘withering away’

States (tyrannies) do not wither away; they have to be brought down by armed violent revolution.

Thelemites.

Thelemites disregard all laws of state and religion and pursue their own sacrd and natural will, without interfering with the will of others (unless they militantly resist thelemic revoution and in this case Crowley held that cuh heretics should be rightfully executed). While this is certainly Anarchist with regards to the rejection of all written laws, not all are Anarcho-Communists (collectivists), in fact very ferw are; indeed Crowley who was an anti-Communist foresaw a future world ‘ruled’ by a group of ‘spiritual masters,’ which pretty much describes the current world with it’s numerous organised religions which generally defend Capitalism. Never the less almost all Anarchists apart from religious Anarchists are Thelemites whether they define themselves as such or not, since they reject all the laws of the police states and religions and believe that humanity should be free to follow their own natural and therfore sacred intuition.

Anarchist political parties and infiltration by the State Terrorists.

Such organisations are easily infiltrated by the state terrorists, as has been the case for example with the Anarchist ‘Class War’ in the UK. Anarchism is a political philosophy not a ‘political party.’ I know many Anarchists in London and on the Internet but I don’t know anyone personally who belongs to a political party. For example the UK Anarchist Federation is a political cult with 66 members in the UK on the last (and only) time I attended a meeting and yet there are probably 10’s of thousands of Anarchists in London alone. The fact that the Anarchist Federation considers state terrorist black operations such as 911 and 7/7 to be ‘conspiracy theories’ and seems to go along with the government propaganda is entirely suspect.

I speak from a European perspective, and most anti-Capitalists in Europe among the young generation (I am 50) appear to be Anarchists who have rejected Marxist statism and materialistic dogmatism. If you are in London for a week you will find numerous Anarchist events, squat parties etc, but among the Marxists, you will have to look very hard for them. Take a look at myspace for example, there are more Anarchist groups than there are Marxist groups and there are more groups who are anti-Capitalist in general than there are groups who propagate Capitalism.

The World Socialist Movement

In London if one hangs out at Speakers Corner or attends anti-Capitalist rallies it is hard not to bump into the World Socialist Movement http://www.worldsocialism.org/ whom I would describe as 'puritanical Marxists and anti-Leninist Communists' who consider themselves to be Anarchists and consider Marx to have been ultimately an Anarchist (anti-statist), however this all hangs on Marx's 'the state shall wither away' position. I have been excommunicated from their Internet debating forum years ago, so it clear that they don't agree with my politics, nor me with theirs, however since I understand the arguments made by Marxist puritans, let me say this.

Marxist Labour vouchers vs. Anarchist Communist 'rationing.'

Marx claimed 'ultimately (in the end)' that he was a non-monetarist, as are all Anarchist Communists. The WSM rightfully defines all forms of 'State Capitalism (where the state takes over the issue of money) as Leninism and as anti-Marxism. Marx's position was that in the early stages of revolution, the people would starve (and probably revolt against the new proletarian dictatorship) unless 'labour vouchers' were introduced to replace money.

For example if the dictators (the economic masters) work 40 hours they would receive 40 labour vouchers and ditto for factory workers (the economic slaves). However this was merely meant to be temporary and transitionary since Marx was ultimately a non-monetarist. Of course in the Soviet Union the alleged proletarian dictatorship simply took over banking, avoided the introduction of 'labour vouchers' became corrupt and tyrannical and eventually some had more money than others (including dollar shops in Moscow), and you had to bribe an 'official' if you wanted a flat or a telephone etc. I really don't see how 'labour vouchers' would stop corruption any more than state Capitalism, since labour vouchers are still a form of money. Obviously in the early stages of revolution, some form of rationing would be necessary, leading to possible corruption among the rationers and their possible transition into a new police state which would have to be resisted.

Rationing in Capitalism through the use of 'money.'

In Capitalism of course the private Usuryists (loan sharks) are the 'rationers,' and this has led to a situation where something like 0.01% or less of the population are the rationers and the majority of the world starves and suffers extreme poverty, so this is 'extreme' corruption. We in the First World are mostly the beneficiaries of this system so we suffer less economically.


Marxist Statism. 'The state will wither away'

The 'contradiction:' if on one hand the police states of the armed violent monetarists (Capital=money or property that has a Capitalist value) can 'only' be overthrown by armed violent anti-monetarists, why then is it that it will not be necessary to overthrow the dictatorship of armed violent so called anti-monetarists? Realistically can you imagine Kim Jong Il's police state just 'withering away' into independent collectives? The Soviet Union did not 'wither away' into independent collectives, but into hardcore Capitalism and the rule of the bankers, pims and the mafia; Gorbachev is now a multi-millionaire (he was bribed); the state withered away into an elite of corrupt billionaires leaving the male proletariat often destitute and unemployed, and the women often fleeing economic hardship into a life a sex slavery in the brothels of Western Europe.

No, the state will not wither away. States will have to be eradicated.

Statists (tyrants) will have to be fought by armed violent revolutionaries, however in the age of nuclear guerrilla weapons where there exists a universal knowledge of practical physics, the anti-Statists should in the end always have the upper hand. The problem is not merely monetarism but statism (tyranny). There have been after all, non-monetarist systems which were simply 'slave societies' with a monarch, and though Marx ultimately believed in total non-monetarism, he had an unrealistic faith in the power of ‘temporal’ tyranny.

Materialism and non-spiritualism.

Dialectical Materialism is a 19th century pre-Einsteinian, pre-quantum physics position. Materialism in the philosophical sense is also a position of faith. Mass can be converted to Energy and Light, and it is by no means a fact that the ‘stuff’of the universe is mass (matter). Marxists insist on atheism, apart from some Liberation Theologians (Christian Communists) who accept Marxist economics and reject his atheism.

Marx's essential Communist beliefs (armed violent revolution and 'eventually' anti-monetarism and 'eventually' anti-statism) which all Anarchist Communists may sympathise with, Marx plagiarised from the Anarchist Communists anyway. Away with Marx; most young anti-Capitalists in Europe are now anti-Marxist Anarchists anyway; it is growing trend.

Ultimately in the aftermath of the inevitable forthcoming nuclear war, the Marxists, the Anarchists and even the Muslims may form ‘ad hoc’ alliances against the police / military / statists but in the end they are destined to clash.

The Anarchist Communist Kropotkin's three categories of Laws.

1: Laws to protect the government.

The definition of an Anarchist region is one where there would be no statists, thus there would be no need for laws to protect the tyrants and their mercenaries (their police state, military, tax collectors and assorted bureaucracy / useless eaters etc.).

2: Laws to protect private property.

Similarly with propertyism, one cannot be a propertyist unless one is militant and have mercenaries (police) to protect one's property. Since the masses will always in their hearts seek to disempower those who enslave them for the purposes of exploiting their labour, leaving the labour slaves impoverished at the expense of a few, and since private propertyism is a militant ideology, the propertyists would have to be eliminated, thus there would be no need to have laws to protect them.

3: Laws to protect the individual from harm (Natural Law).

This is simply common sense. There is no need to create written laws to this extent. This is as it would have been in the mythical Garden of Eden. For example in a world without religious, private property and statist laws, a mother will still demand ‘do not harm my children, do not enslave them, do not starve them, etc., etc., these are of course not the written laws of a police state, but never the less most mothers, unindoctrinated by religion and police statism would probably agree with them.

What is Authority (tyranny)?

The Anarchist (against the Archons / authority figures) Kropotkin once stated that he would never challenge the ‘authority’ of an engineer, since was not an engineer; he did not have that type of expertise and would rather leave bridge building and construction to the trained experts; an engineer is an expert in a certain type of science, not an Archon (tyrant) who claims to be an expert in enslaving people and ruling over them or an expert in God or religious morality

4: Sexual Laws

In addition to Kropotkin’s 3 types of law, we also have to consider the eradication of the millions of religious laws (I will not elaborate), and especially sexual laws; these are simply laws which produce an effective and miserable slave




Sex is the most powerful instinct in man. The politician and the priest have understood from the very beginning that sex is the most driving energy in man. It has to be curtailed, it has to be cut. If man is allowed total Freedom in sex, then there will be no possibility to dominate him. To make a slave out of him will be impossible.

Have you not seen it being done? When you want a bull to be yoked to a cart, what do you do? You castrate him, you destroy his sex energy. And have you seen the difference between a bull and an ox? What a difference! An ox is a poor phenomenon, a slave. A bull is a beauty; a bull is a glorious pheonomenon, a great splendor. See a bull walking, how he walks like an emperor! And see an ox pulling a cart.

The same has been done to man. The sex instinct has been curtailed, cut, crippled. Man does not exist as the bull now, he exists like the ox, and each man is pulling a thousand and one carts. Look and you will find behind you a thousand and one carts, and you are yoked to them.

Why can’t you yoke a bull? The bull is too powerful. If he sees a cow passing by, he will throw both you and the cart, and he will move to the cow! He will not bother a bit about who you are, and he will not listen. It will be impossible to control the bull. Sex energy is life energy; it is uncontrollable. And the politician and the priest are not interested in you, they are interested in channeling your energy into other directions. So there is a certain Mechanism behind it--it has to be understood.

Sex repression, tabooing sex, is the very foundation of human slavery. Man cannot be free unless sex is free. Man cannot be really free unless his sex energy is allowed natural growth.

These are the five tricks through which man has been turned into a slave, into an ugly phenomenon, a cripple.

The first is:
Keep man as weak as possible if you want to dominate him. If the priest wants to dominate you or the politician wants to dominate you, you have to be kept as weak as possible. And the best way to keep a man weak is not to give love total freedom. Love is nourishment..."

"...Second:
Keep man as ignorant and deluded as possible so that he can easily be deceived..."

"...The third secret:
Keep man as frightened as possible. And the sure way is not to allow him love, because love destroys fear--’love casteth out fear.’ When you are not in love you become more interested in security, in safety. When you are in love you are more interested in adventure, in exploration...."

"...The Fourth:
Keep man as miserable as possible--because a miserable man is confused, a miserable man has no self-worth, a miserable man is self-condemnatory, a miserable man feels that he must have done something wrong. A miserable man has no grounding--you can push him from here and there, he can be turned into driftwood very easily. And a miserable man is always ready to be commanded, to be ordered, to be disciplined, because he knows ’On my own I am simply miserable. Maybe someody else can discipline my life.’ He is a ready victim."

"And the fifth:
Keep men as alienated from each other as possible, so that they cannot band together for some purpose of which the priest and the politician may not approve. Keep people separate from each other. Don’t allow them too much intimacy. When people are separate, lonely, alienated from each other, they cannot band together. And there are a thousand and one tricks to keep them apart.

For example, if you are holding the hand of a man--you are a man and you are holding the hand of a man and walking down the road, singing--you will feel guilty because people will start looking at you. Are you gay, homosexual or something? Two men are not allowed to be happy together. They are condemned as homosexuals. Fear arises. If your friend comes and takes your hand in his hand, you look around: ’Is somebody looking or not?’ And you are just in a hurry to drop the hand..." Osho


Lucifer
Fire plague and poisoned waters

www.myspace.com/luciferhorus



Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the Law."
—AL. I. 40.
"thou hast no right but to do thy will. Do that, and no
other shall say nay." —AL. I. 42–3.
"Every man and every woman is a star." —AL. I. 3.
There is no god but man.
..>..>
..> 1. Man has the right to live by his own law—to live in the way that he wills to do:to work as he will:to play as he will:to rest as he will:to die when and how he will.
2. Man has the right to eat what he will:to drink what he will:to dwell where he will:to move as he will on the face of the earth.
3. Man has the right to think what he will:to speak what he will:to write what he will:to draw, paint, carve, etch, mould, build as he will:to dress as he will.
4. Man has the right to love as he will:—"take your fill and will of love as ye will,when, where, and with whom ye will." —AL. I. 51.
5. Man has the right to kill those who would thwart these rights...>

"Love is the law, love under will." —AL. I. 57

____________________________



'The revolution will have to be (Anarchist) Communist or it will be drowned in blood and will have to begin all over again'


'Either the State forever, crushing individual and local life, taking over in all fields of human activity, bringing with it its wars and its domestic struggles for power, its palace revolutions which only replace one tyrant with another.....Or the destruction of all states and new life starting again in thousands of centres on the principle that the lively initiative of the individual and groups of that Free Arrangement The choice lies with you'.Kropotkin, 'Conquest of Bread'

On the Pan-German banner is written: Retention and strengthening of the State at any cost. On our banner, the social-revolutionary banner, on the contrary, are inscribed, in fiery and bloody letters: the destruction of all States, the annihilation of bourgeois civilization, free and spontaneous organization from below upward, by means of free associations, the organization of the unbridled rabble of toilers, of all emancipated humanity, and the creation of a new universally human world....Bakunin

ZEITGEIST 2:ADDENDUM The Money System

http://video.google.com/googleplayer.swf?docid=7065205277695921912&hl=en&fs=true


Addendum

Alternatives to Capitalism.


1: Labour Theory of Value.

There are fundamentalist Marxists who wish to see an allegedly temporary government introduce a form of rationing termed ’labour vouchers.’ Marx equated labour hours with value and went to great lengths calculating how much labour would go into a particular machine or a commodity; this became it’s calculatable ’value.’ Clearly, in ideal conditions you would not swap a kilo of marijuana for a kilo of potatoes (some people might if they were starving, but not in ideal conditions); neither would you swap a kilo of gold for a kilo of marijuana (well ’I’ certainly would if I had an abundance of gold, but not in ’ideal conditions).


2: Sharing and Bartering

Bartering certainly occurs on a primitive scale among farmers in the Somerset countryside where I live. Favours are exchanged and there is mutual co-operation.
I am not sure how many chickens you could get for a pig, or how many pigs for a horse, but it is quite an effective system on a primitive level. Two farmers might have two different machines that each wants to use occasionally, so they share.

This might work out quite well among agriculturalists sharing potatoes for carrots, but for other items, such a system would be much less straightforward.

Les us say you wish to buy a tractor or a combine harvester. You would have to pay the tractor dealer with something with which he could pay the manufacturer for the tractor, and this would have to be something with which the manufacturer would be able to pay his electricity bills, his workers in wages etc.

So at this point it all sounds very messy and quite unrealistic.

3: Anarcho-Capitalism.

So here we are again back to Anarcho-Capitalism.

Here there are no government regulations. No banking regulations. No banking licences. Anyone could theoretically start their own loan sharking institution and issue currency. It seems rather confusing.

In addition, there would still be private property, rich and poor, land owners and the landless and homeless. There would be those who would have to become labour slaves for food and those who would be labour masters and demand labour slavery in return for some form of Capital which could be exchanged for food.

But ultimately the question still has to be asked, how would a particular currency in a world of millions of currencies be considered valuable?

Capital as ’Promissary Notes’ for ’anything.’

A farmer in Texas who issues currency would have to state on the currency what the paper I.O.U. is exchangable for. His currency might state ’I promise to pay the bearer a ton of potatoes, ’ or a ’ton of beef’ or its equivalent in labour hours. This system is of course open to fraud, since he could simply write out more I.O.U’s that he is capable of producing. Further if a farmer in New York was offered this I.O.U, it would be a complex matter since he would have to ensure that the farmer in Texas was capable of making good his promissary notes. Further all persons and companies who supplied the farmer with electricity, phone, computers, tractors, labour would have to go through the same process and take the same risk of ending up with a ton of rotting potatoes dumped on their premises. It is a rather messy and impractical solution which I think most farmers and their suppliers would simply laugh at.

Capital as Precious metal promissary notes.

The current system we have is one where only a select few elite bankers can issue such promissary notes; originally they were backed by precious metals, but even this original system was subject to fraud and the creation of ’reserve banking, ’ where only a small percentage of the precious metals were held in reserve.

There are elite banks and non-elite banks. Today elite banks do not work on a reserve system, they simply issue currency at the touch of a computer mouse. Thus have the Capitalists taken over the world though ’confidence (a ’con’) in their paper and credit.

The Anarcho-Capitalist counterproposal to such a confidence trick by a few elite bankers would seem to lead to a world where there were millions of such confusing confidence tricks.

In summary, Anarcho-Communism is a rejection of forms of bartering, token-ism, Capitalism in any form or labour vouchers; it is quite simply about collectives sharing resources, much as it was in the early days of the Israeli kibbutz.

Love and Light

Lucifer
http://www.luciferia.tv/animation/A.gif

Fire, plague and poisoned waters.



___________

"Every man and every woman is a star." That is to say, every human being is intrinsically an independent individual with his own proper character and proper motion.

Every man and every woman has a course, depending partly on the self, and partly on the environment which is natural and necessary for each. Anyone who is forced from his own course, either through not understanding himself, or through external opposition, comes into conflict with the order of the Universe, and suffers accordingly. Illustration: A man may think it his duty to act in a certain way, through having made a fancy picture of himself, instead of investigating his actual nature. For example, a woman may make herself miserable for life by thinking that she prefers love to social consideration, or "vice versa". One woman may stay with an unsympathetic husband when she would really be happy in an attic with a lover, while another may fool herself into a romantic elopement when her only true pleasures are those of presiding at fashionable functions. …….
A Man whose conscious will is at odds with his True Will is wasting his strength. He cannot hope to influence his environment efficiently. Illustration: When Civil War rages in a nation, it is in no condition to undertake the invasion of other countries….A man who is doing this True Will has the inertia of the Universe to assist him. Illustration: The first principle of success in evolution is that the individual should be true to his own nature, and at the same time adapt himself to his environment….. Man is ignorant of the nature of his own being and powers. Even his idea of his limitations is based on experience of the past, and every step in his progress extends his empire. There is therefore no reason to assign theoretical limits to what he may be, or to what he may do…. The question of Magick is a question of discovering and employing hitherto unknown forces in nature. We know that they exist, and we cannot doubt the possibility of mental or physical instruments capable of bringing us into relation with them.

Aleister Crowley
Magick In Theory And Practice

________________

Nb., I should point out that Mao, Crowley and Osho (cited in the above essay) were not Anarchists: I merely cite points of agreement.

[zero1]

Yes of course. I consider the approximately one billion Christians and the well over one billion Buddhists (culturally speaking) to be an untapped resource.

Most of our ancestors were illiterate and uneducated agriculturalists; their access to the teachings of Jesus and Buddha were likely only to be perceived through the priesthood; with the introduction of the printing press, the rise of mass literacy, public libraries, the competing Enlighenment philosophies and now today the ultimate communications revolution, the Internet, each person has access to the greatest ever research library in human history. The ridiculous idea of Jesus and Buddha being utilised by Capitalists and anti-Communists as icons is under increasing attack; such revisionism is entirely progressive and slowly merging into the mass consciousness; however there is still a great battle ahead and much work to be done in attacking the proponets of hypocrisy.

Since this discussion group shows up in Google searches for 'Communist Jesus' and 'Communist Buddha' for example, and a host of other subjects, and since some threads get 10's of thousands of hits, despite their being only a few active debaters, bear in mind that it is not merely a matter of the intellectual conversion of the handful of arrogant Christians debating here to Communism; we speak from the sky to all peoples and nations as the lightening flashes from the east to the west, and to the myriads; our judgements on the living and the dead, on Capitalist, anti-Communist forms of Christianity and Buddhism are not unheeded pearls, irrespective of the arrogance of our opponents; it is they whom the children of the present and future worlds will condem and villify, and we whom history will whom history will resolve of any guilt.

Liberation Theology.

Since the 60's we have witnessed the rise of the Liberation Theology movement, particularly in Latin America, Africa and the Third World, and in the universities of the world, it is an ideology which has taken over many of the departments of Theology / Religious studies; few campuses are unnafected and those which are generally the private evangelical colleges of the American Right.

Generally the most educated, intelligent and 'honest' Christians have already made the intellectual conversion to Liberation Theology; what remains outside this are the hypnotised masses who still relate to the myth of the 'Anti-Communist Jesus' which suits the economic and religious establishment.

Probably one of the most prominent adverts for Liberation Theology is the pro-Cuban Venezuelan president 'Hugo Chavez,' who is openly a Christian and who is considered a 'dictator,' a 'terrorist' and a 'Communist' by the Christian Capitalists of the Far Right (i.e., those who are hellbound, according to the curse of Jesus on they who misrepresent him).

And then last year Fernando Lugo was elected president of Paraguay; he is an ex Catholic Bishop, and a Marxist who was nicknamed the 'Bishop of the Poor.'

Latin America has in recent years witnessed a swing to the 'Left' after decades of far Right governments and I believe that the Liberation Theology movement has had much to do with this; however in reaction to this we also see the curse of evangelical Capitalist cults in Latin America, but at the voting booths, the masses have agerly elected Leftists such as Evo Morales in Bolivia and the Marxist 'Lulu' in Brazil, however their policies are generally more reformist than revolutionary and there is still a long march ahead to complete the 'Great Work of the Ages;' this being the manifestation world revolution, the eradication of Capital and indeed ultimately all government, swords to ploughshares, etc.

Amen, brother. Let us hope that when their time is up, the Capitalist pigs do not go down without a fight. Putting them to the sword will be scant reward for Communists who have suffered millenias of abuse and disenfranchisement @ their hands. The true Christian anarchists and Buddhist anarchists shall bless us before and after battle in the apocalyptic war of revelation to come.

I leave my computer swithced on all the time, even if I am out, so forums such as this one will show that I am online when I am often far away. I am also dutybound to engage in socialising, the drinking of many ales, and satisfying the demands and the domestic and sexual duties of my feminist witch of a girlfriend who has enslaved me; I also sleep occasionally and have other projects I am working on; asides from about 500 other discussion groups which I am subscribed to; though at the moment I seem to be mostly hanging out with y'all here.

Of course, I understand; forgive me if I came over as unduly impatient or petulant.

It is good hearing that you do your duty in regards to your girlfriend (and social merriment involving ale :D); the demands of domineering feminist witches must, after all, be met with good cheer. ;)

Not at all commandante Zero; I have been debating on discussion groups almost since the beginnings of the Internet in the early 90's. Even on anti-capitalist groups, debaters are hardly uncritical of each other, and I generally also have sought out hostile territory among the Christian, Islamic and Nazi groups, etc; intelligent criticism is not be feared but rather encouraged; it is after all how we develop spiritually and intellectually through a dialectical process of study and debate; it is how we test our philosophies, by arguing them and responding to criticisms.

I have responded to and initiated so many threads in the forums here that it would be a full time process to respond to every post; the limitations of time and my enslavement to my mistress forbid me from doing so.

Quite understandable, brother. I am not the only one here grateful to have one so experienced as youself debating openly and fearlessly. :)

Frankly it is good to find other intelligent Anarchists on this board debating with opponents rather than merely hanging out on Anarchist groups preaching to the converted.

To summarise my position on this thread and the 'Communist Jesus' thread, since both Buddha and Jesus were clearly anti-Capitalist ancestors, and indeed proto-Anarchists in rebellion against the economic and religious Archons of their age; their ultimate enemies in this age are not those who understand them and look to them as examples, but rather those who misrepresent them and who propagate anti-Communist forms of Christianity and Buddhism; frankly most Buddhists and Christians are simply the victims of religious hypnosis and are barely educated; not so for most Capitalist Christians on the Internet and on this forum here, who are simply personifications of arrogance; however I further entirely suspect that among the many debaters here are 'professional' bloggers in the employment of the state terrorists themselves whose mission is simply to 'confuse,' beguile, hypnotise and deceive.

Then there is hope for the economic and spiritual salvation of lay Christians and Buddhists, through anarcho-communism. Good. Sobeit.

And as for the "professional bloggers" ie. disinformation agents, I have learnt to quickly indentify them, here and elsewhere.

A billion children await economic salvation; no Capitalist Christs nor Maitrayas shall be able to satisfy them; the disease of Capitalist forms of Buddhism and Christianity is entirely responsible; if there were a billion Communist Christians and a billion Communist Buddhists dedicated to the fulfillment of the teachings of their mentors, this would would be economic heaven, not hell as it currently is.

Love to you Commandante Zero.

Lux.

And much love to you in return, Commandante Lucifer.

The disease of Capitalism with all of its inhuman, artificial, cancerous systems that have long infected Christianity, Buddhism and (by extension) the world shall be cured in time, and we shall be the heroes of salvation once again.

Take care, brother. Be vigilant, be brave and behave. ;)

[thelonious]

A "capitalist roader" murdered by Communists:

http://www.tuolsleng.com/previews/S-21_0177.jpg

Enemy of the state murdered by Communists:

http://www.tuolsleng.com/previews/S-21_0162.jpg

"Capitalist pig" murdered by the Communist Party of Cambodia in a torture camp:

http://www.tuolsleng.com/previews/S-21_0155.jpg

Workers meeting real Communist "justice":

http://members.libreopinion.com/memoriapamiat/26europeos.jpg

Communist justice for exercising freedom of speech in China:

http://members.libreopinion.com/memoriapamiat/34chino.jpg

Another capitalist roader killed by Cambodian Communists:

http://members.libreopinion.com/memoriapamiat/41ninaantes.jpg

Communism means starvation

http://www.libreopinion.com/members/memoriapamiat/ucrania11.jpg


Have a taste of your own medicine, Che:

http://www.argentour.com/images/che_guevara_cadaver.jpg

[zero1]

"Capitalist pig" murdered by the Communist Party of Cambodia in a torture camp:

http://www.tuolsleng.com/previews/S-21_0155.jpg

Look @ this child, Thelonius.

A victim of Pol Pot's killing fields? Maybe.

An innocent and ignorant child who probably never knew what "Capitalism" really meant?

Almost certainly.

Yet you have him labelled here as a Capitalist Pig, when clearly only one who in (bad) conscience chooses deliberately the ways of Capitalism can be so.

Regardless, there is no need to defend this sort of violence when it is done against the Capitalist.

As part of the workings of Revolution, it is reactionary (against the violence and repressiveness of the Capitalists) and so justified both in defence of righteousness and as a means to an end.

[luciferhorus]

A "capitalist roader" murdered by Communists:

Enemy of the state murdered by Communists:



"Capitalist pig" murdered by the Communist Party of Cambodia in a torture camp:

Workers meeting real Communist "justice":


Communist justice for exercising freedom of speech in China:


Another capitalist roader killed by Cambodian Communists:

Communism means starvation




Have a taste of your own medicine, Che:




Dear Thelonious,

On Despair

http://www.itvs.org/bombies/photos/phBombs1.jpg

You are far too educated and intelligent to continue with this form of non-argument and I am neither impressed, nor amused; on the contrary; you are not a clown; you are entirely capable of much better than this.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/0/0a/B1-B_Lancer_and_cluster_bombs.jpg

I consider the 'straw man' argument to be one of the last cries of 'desperation ' in debate, and a 'conceding' of points to the opponent, since the debater fails to address the position of their opponent entirely and rambles on about something else; it is a cry of the desperate, a swansong, if you like; the last despairing cry at the point of death.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/ni/cluster-bombs.jpg

You and I have already discussed the matter of Pol Pot in some depth, and I note that you did not respond to my posting of John Pilger's (who has been to Cambodia on a number of occasions and fully researched the subject) position on the subject, with regards to the 'fact' that the Americans and indeed the CIA supported Pot's rise to power in Cambodia, other than to merely 'contradict' him; which is a poor substitute for evidence and argument.

http://hi-octanecreative.com/__GNN/SabrinaHarmanDeadTortureVictim.jpg

I and other Anarchists here cannot be held morally responsible for any acts of genocide committed by the Marxists and the assorted variety of State Capitalists, whereas, for example, we can be held morally responsible for the deaths of many pro-Franco supporters in the Spanish revolution etc., since we generally defend the executions of such Capitalist vermin who are unfit for life.

http://sirenschronicles.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/01/torture-by-us-soldiers.jpe

With regards to Che, I do not fully concur with him ideologically, since I refer to the Anarchist Communists ideologically and have nothing new to add to Anarchist thought, but rather I merely consider myself to represent the purity and continuation of this ideology and tradition; but never the less I consider Che to be an eminent saint and martyr, and I conside my robes to be dipped in the blood of his enemies, and I fully support his executions of the assorted chaff of the Cuban revolution. I say this despite any ideological differences; he was very much a creation of his age, whereas I abandoned propagandising for statist Communism some six years ago, since I could not withstand the criticism, hostility and superior arguments from the Anarchists, and I had to submit to their intellectual and moral barrage, and to concede all points and retract / recant, repent and change my position, and I have been doing penance for this for these past years.

http://www.chronogram.com/image/url/2617/thumbs/N_P-torture2-562x373.jpg

Whereas I cannot be held responsible for the sins of the Marxists and State Capitalists (David Icke is a state Capitalist by the way), you can be held entirely responsible for the current Capitalist holocaust and the billions of impoverished victims of the god of Capital, since this is an ideology which you defend, and yet I consider you much as I do my past self, committed to an worthless ideology; I demand only your repentance; all sins of devotion to the god of Capital shall be be forgiven and your 144 virgins (or whatever; I will beat any reward offered by the priesthood of Captial) await you.

Lux

http://lawanddisorder.org/wp-content/uploads/torture1.JPG



We go to laugh, to cry and to learn. To learn especially how to marry Heaven and Earth, namely, how to combine daily life with the surprising, the opaque immanence of the days with the radiant transcendence of the spirit, life at full freedom with death symbolized as to join the ancestors, the discrete happiness of this world with the great promise of eternity. And finally we will have discovered thousands of reasons to live more and better, all together, like a great family, in the same beautiful, generous and Common Village, the planet Earth. "

[flyermay]

Regardless, there is no need to defend this sort of violence when it is done against the Capitalist.

As part of the workings of Revolution, it is reactionary (against the violence and repressiveness of the Capitalists) and so justified both in defence of righteousness and as a means to an end.

Please Zero, don't make the same mistake as Thelonious does: confusing a ruthless right-wind dictatorship with communism.

I lived in more than 10 different countries, but I never had such a hard time talking about communism with anyone as with an American (it is just beyond their comprehension -with exceptions-). I really don't know what they are told about communism since they are born, but it surely is stamped with fire on their minds.

[zero1]

Please Zero, don't make the same mistake as Thelonious does: confusing a ruthless right-wind dictatorship with communism.

I lived in more than 10 different countries, but I never had such a hard time talking about communism with anyone as with an American (it is just beyond their comprehension -with exceptions-). I really don't know what they are told about communism since they are born, but it surely is stamped with fire on their minds.

Quite. None of these historical examples (Pol Pot's Cambodia, Vietnam, Soviet Russia, China etc) have actually ever achieved real Communism, or had any intention of attempting to do so; that would require the abolition of money & private property. Absolutely, that is the truth.

At best, these so-called "communist" countries are Right-Wing totalitarian dictatorships or State Capitalist monopolies on the other side of the same coin as Fascism, merely disguised as communism.

As for Americans, they are told Communism is an evil ideology which will see their wealth confiscated, their rights negated and a brutal totalitarian regime put in place to oppress them. And that's only understandable to the one's who have the capacity to think...the rest just believe what the President says.

[flyermay]

Quite. None of these historical examples (Pol Pot's Cambodia, Vietnam, Soviet Russia, China etc) have actually ever achieved real Communism, or had any intention of attempting to do so; that would require the abolition of money & private property. Absolutely, that is the truth.

At best, these so-called "communist" countries are Right-Wing totalitarian dictatorships or State Capitalist monopolies on the other side of the same coin as Fascism, merely disguised as communism.

Absolutely. The same happens with what everyone understands as "democracy" nowadays; when in fact, our system couldn't further away from it.

As for Americans, they are told Communism is an evil ideology which will see their wealth confiscated, their rights negated and a brutal totalitarian regime put in place to oppress them. And that's only understandable to the one's who have the capacity to think...the rest just believe what the President says.

Right. Just look at the prosecution that communists suffered in the US during the 40s and 50s (known as the last "witch-hunt"). They simply made sure that no one got the record straight on communism.

[thelonious]

Please Zero, don't make the same mistake as Thelonious does: confusing a ruthless right-wind dictatorship with communism.

I lived in more than 10 different countries, but I never had such a hard time talking about communism with anyone as with an American (it is just beyond their comprehension -with exceptions-). I really don't know what they are told about communism since they are born, but it surely is stamped with fire on their minds.

Anyone who thinks Communism is cool, or just, or even ok, knows nothing of history. Without exception, in every land where the Communists have gained power, there has been genocide, through both murder and starvation.

You are far too intelligent to be suckered in by their propaganda, please don't allow yourself to do so.

"Capitalism", as was known in Marx's day, no longer exists. Modern Communists have only their straw man argument. Classical Communists like Marx and Engels would have been bowled over by the idea that a balance, or harmony, could be reached between capitalism and socialism, and that "capitalist" nations would provide social security benefits, unemployment benefits, minimum wages, and health care.

The so-called "capitalist" nations of the west are the only places in the world where the poor people are as obese as the rich.

[kasalt]

Just look at the prosecution that communists suffered in the US during the 40s and 50s (known as the last "witch-hunt").

Just look at the prosecution that communists imposed on one another in the Soviet Union during the 30s (known as the "Great Purge"):

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_purge

Not much different from the Nazi's Night of the Long Knives (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Night_of_the_Long_Knives), as waves of backstabbing seem to be inherent in all political movements that rely upon murder as a means to power. Think also of the Reign of Terror (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reign_of_Terror) re the French Revolution.

The "Great Purge"
The "Night of the Long Knives"
The "Reign of Terror"

I'm sure you can see the trend there.

[flyermay]

Anyone who thinks Communism is cool, or just, or even ok, knows nothing of history. Without exception, in every land where the Communists have gained power, there has been genocide, through both murder and starvation.

Again, you are mixing right-wind regimes disguised as communists with communism (which I agree is confusing, but I assure you it's not the same thing –as in the example of “democracy” posted above-).

You are far too intelligent to be suckered in by their propaganda, please don't allow yourself to do so.

I don't believe that any system that imposes any form or government or leadership can be perfect. Therefore, I will never accept being a communist.

However; since the world is not ready to even grasp what real freedom means (much less put it into practice), I'm forced to look for the benefits that various political ideologies have to offer, as compared to our unjust, corrupt and unfair system.

"Capitalism", as was known in Marx's day, no longer exists. Modern Communists have only their straw man argument. Classical Communists like Marx and Engels would have been bowled over by the idea that a balance, or harmony, could be reached between capitalism and socialism, and that "capitalist" nations would provide social security benefits, unemployment benefits, minimum wages, and health care.

So what’s so wrong about extending that list to its full potential? It certainly can be done; we have the resources and technology to put it into practice. Most of the world would certainly benefit from it (except for the elite, who casually also have the power neccesary to do it).

Can’t you see you are defending the elite against an equalitarian system? And please, don’t start again with your far-right-wing idea of communism –you have to get out of that erroneous paradigm-.

____________________________

The so-called "capitalist" nations of the west are the only places in the world where the poor people are as obese as the rich.

Sorry, I misunderstood this last phrase.

That’s called “bread and circus”, and it is an old tactic used in ancient Rome to keep the population out governmental and political affairs. I assure you it is not real advantage to the population.

[zero1]

Anyone who thinks Communism is cool, or just, or even ok, knows nothing of history. Without exception, in every land where the Communists have gained power, there has been genocide, through both murder and starvation.

You are far too intelligent to be suckered in by their propaganda, please don't allow yourself to do so.

"Capitalism", as was known in Marx's day, no longer exists. Modern Communists have only their straw man argument. Classical Communists like Marx and Engels would have been bowled over by the idea that a balance, or harmony, could be reached between capitalism and socialism, and that "capitalist" nations would provide social security benefits, unemployment benefits, minimum wages, and health care.

The so-called "capitalist" nations of the west are the only places in the world where the poor people are as obese as the rich.

So what would you suggest is the ideal balance or harmony achievable between Capitalism & Socialism?

Democratic Socialism perhaps?

Or are you merely using the old formula of thesis + antithesis = synthesis?

Also, why do you seem to be suggesting that any kind of argument for anarcho-communism is "propaganda" that intelligent people should not supposedly be "suckered" by, when Western Capitalism practically subsists on constant unrelenting Propaganda which propegates the status-quo system by internally self-consistent hypnosis through the media?

Lastly, shouldn't a Freemason be expected to say what you're saying? Isn't it kind of unremarkable?

[zero1]

Also, noting that this thread has now become a political discussion somewhat off-topic as regards the Communist Buddha, I offer an apology for my part to Lucifer.

[flyermay]

Just look at the prosecution that communists imposed on one another in the Soviet Union during the 30s (known as the "Great Purge"):

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_purge

Not much different from the Nazi's Night of the Long Knives (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Night_of_the_Long_Knives), as waves of backstabbing seem to be inherent in such movements. Think also of the Reign of Terror (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reign_of_Terror) re the French Revolution.

The "Great Purge"
The "Night of the Long Knives"
The "Reign of Terror"

I'm sure you can see the trend there.

But then, tell me of any country that didn't killed each other during a civil war or a revolution???

[kasalt]

But then, telling of any country that didn't killed each other during a civil war or a revolution???

During? All of those purges occurred well after the time of civil war/revolution. The "Great Purge" occurred some 20 years after the Russian Revolution, and fully a dozen years after Joseph Stalin became General Secretary.

Purging is endemic to all political movements that rely upon murder as a means to power.

[luciferhorus]

Also, noting that this thread has now become a political discussion somewhat off-topic as regards the Communist Buddha, I offer an apology for my part to Lucifer.

Nothing to forgive, comandante Zero.



http://fmso.leavenworth.army.mil/documents/mexico/EZLN.JPG

[flyermay]

During? All of those purges occurred well after the time of civil war/revolution. The "Great Purge" occurred some 20 years after the Russian Revolution, and fully a dozen years after Joseph Stalin became General Secretary.

Purging is endemic to all political movements that rely upon murder as a means to power.

Some civil wars and revolutions take longer to settle down than others. But again, Stalin was a far-right-wing dictator (very little to do with pure communist ideals).

[kasalt]

Some civil wars and revolutions take longer to settle down than others.

Political repression in the Soviet Union did not end with the "Great Purge", on the contrary, it was a never-ending process:
Throughout Soviet history millions of people became victims of Soviet political repression, which in various degrees was an instrument of the internal politics of the Soviet Russia and Soviet Union since the first days after the October Revolution. Culminating during the Stalin era, it still existed during the "Khrushchev Thaw," followed by increased persecution of Soviet dissidents (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet_dissidents) during Brezhnev stagnation, and didn't cease to exist even during Gorbachev's perestroika. Its heritage still influences the life of the modern Russia.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet_political_repression

[flyermay]

Political repression in the Soviet Union did not end with the "Great Purge", on the contrary, it was a never-ending process:
Throughout Soviet history millions of people became victims of Soviet political repression, which in various degrees was an instrument of the internal politics of the Soviet Russia and Soviet Union since the first days after the October Revolution. Culminating during the Stalin era, it still existed during the "Khrushchev Thaw," followed by increased persecution of Soviet dissidents (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet_dissidents) during Brezhnev stagnation, and didn't cease to exist even during Gorbachev's perestroika. Its heritage still influences the life of the modern Russia.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet_political_repression

You deleted the most significan part of my post; the one that explains that Stalin was a ruthless right-wing dictator, who imposed a brutal regime on the USSR (not my idea of communism).

[thelonious]

So what would you suggest is the ideal balance or harmony achievable between Capitalism & Socialism?

Democratic Socialism perhaps?

The mixed economy, somewhat similar to democratic socialism. Private service industries and public big industry.


Also, why do you seem to be suggesting that any kind of argument for anarcho-communism is "propaganda" that intelligent people should not supposedly be "suckered" by, when Western Capitalism practically subsists on constant unrelenting Propaganda which propegates the status-quo system by internally self-consistent hypnosis through the media?

"Anarcho-communism" is a pipe dream. From the earliest age of mankind, our species had to gather in tribes and establish a form of government. Anarcho-communism is not feasible from any perspective, and if experimented, the strongest in the group will eventually dominate it. Thus the need for democratic government.

Lucifer can extol the pseudo-virtues of anracho-communism all he wants. The fact is, is that he also has no qualms talking about executing all sorts of people, which is typical Communist procedure. Obviously, if his "anarcho-Communism" were to come to fruition, he expects that he himself would be running the show, allowing him the authority to execute supposed enemies.

Thus through reflection, we see it's the same old Stalinism. The Soviets also claimed (as did Marx) that the state would "wither away". In reality, Orwell saw it more accurately. To paraphrase: "If you want to see the future, imagine a boot stomping on a human face - forever!" (1984).

Lastly, shouldn't a Freemason be expected to say what you're saying? Isn't it kind of unremarkable?

Since Freemasons were murdered in large numbers by Communists, Nazis, and Fascists, and because the study and practice of Freemasonry can only be undertaken in a free society, then yes, I would expect Freemasons to be opposed to all totalitarian forms of statehood.

[eternal_spirit]

I heard that a Communist slogan was "Don't trust anyone over 30"

Younger people are more willing to go to war, some they think they are invincible and if anyone gets killed it won't be them.

They are also indoctrinated easier into ideologies, and are not as worldly wise, not had time to study, see, hear live understand other groups ideologies/reasons etc, they are not as set in their ways/habits as older people, makes the young easier to manipulate/programme.

They live in fantasy land of TV and movies good cop bad cop, revolutionary heroes nonsense and that helps forms their idea of
their own illusions of invicibility.
Older people most are wiser and know different, they understand the consequences of War and have children and wives.

The military/miltia etc rarely recruit older people some of the reasons are listed above.

[flyermay]

I heard that a Communist slogan was "Don't trust anyone over 30"

Younger people are more willing to go to war, some they think they are invincible and if anyone gets killed it won't be them.

They are also indoctrinated easier into ideologies, and are not as worldly wise, not had time to study, see, hear live understand other groups ideologies/reasons etc, they are not as set in their ways/habits as older people, makes the young easier to manipulate/programme.

They live in fantasy land of TV and movies good cop bad cop, revolutionary heroes nonsense and that helps forms their idea of
their own illusions of invicibility.
Older people most are wiser and know different, they understand the consequences of War and have children and wives.

The military/miltia etc rarely recruit older people some of the reasons are listed above.

I always wondered why the state-terrorists seem to recruit only young people into the military. Now I know :rolleyes:

[zero1]

The mixed economy, somewhat similar to democratic socialism. Private service industries and public big industry.



"Anarcho-communism" is a pipe dream. From the earliest age of mankind, our species had to gather in tribes and establish a form of government. Anarcho-communism is not feasible from any perspective, and if experimented, the strongest in the group will eventually dominate it. Thus the need for democratic government.

Lucifer can extol the pseudo-virtues of anracho-communism all he wants. The fact is, is that he also has no qualms talking about executing all sorts of people, which is typical Communist procedure. Obviously, if his "anarcho-Communism" were to come to fruition, he expects that he himself would be running the show, allowing him the authority to execute supposed enemies.

Thus through reflection, we see it's the same old Stalinism. The Soviets also claimed (as did Marx) that the state would "wither away". In reality, Orwell saw it more accurately. To paraphrase: "If you want to see the future, imagine a boot stomping on a human face - forever!" (1984).



Since Freemasons were murdered in large numbers by Communists, Nazis, and Fascists, and because the study and practice of Freemasonry can only be undertaken in a free society, then yes, I would expect Freemasons to be opposed to all totalitarian forms of statehood.

Fair enough, thanks for responding.

The same old problems (money, capitalism, exploitation, master/slave dichotomy etc) will persist then, you hope; like a hero of the status quo, you proudly proclaim that long into the future we will not face new problems, only old ones in new guises. Very well, sobeit...

But allow some of us to dare to dream, still...

[zero1]

http://www.buddhistchannel.tv/picture/upload/buddha-coaster-s.jpg

http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1119/710397487_cc37a47145.jpg?v=0

Let us note that images posted by Lucifer and others on this thread are currently showing as the first search results for "Communist Buddha" on Google Images.

Also, Thelonius's avatar -

http://www.davidicke.com/forum/image.php?u=12744&dateline=1202410197

- shows up linked there to this thread...:p A Mason's name besmirched then!

:D

[luciferhorus]

Anarcho-communism" is a pipe dream. From the earliest age of mankind, our species had to gather in tribes and establish a form of government.
.

I think that early tribalism bears very little resemblance to the modern state.

Further 'progressive' political thinking by defintion is the attempt to look back at past mistakes in the history of human organisation and to resolve them whereas 'conservativism' by defintion seeks to conserve the values and politics of the past; if our ancestors were ruled by priests, shamans, god kings, tryants, witch-doctors and the assortment of slavemasters, the progressive thinker attempts to resolve this and to offer a more 'progressive' and better solution to social organisation.

.
Anarcho-communism is not feasible from any perspective, and if experimented, the strongest in the group will eventually dominate it.
.

This kind of 'thug' mentality is typical of those who have been conditioned by Capitalism, which is a dog eat dog society of economic slaves and masters which encourages individual selfishness.

In practical collectivism such as the 'Israeli Kibbutz' children are environmentally conditioned to think as Communists, and if one person were to seek to take over and enslave the commune, they would soon face the militant resistance of the masses, just as in a school, if you have a 'bully,' the bully will generally target weaker individuals but he will tend to stay away from larger organised groups, since he may incur the wrath of many.

Generally it is the Communist perpspective that the dictatorship of Capital is that of the very few; a tiny percentage of the population control the majority of the wealth; the conditions for revolution are created when the 'majority' are sufficiently enraged to rise in up in revolution and overthrow the majority.

It seems to me Thelonious that you are simply pessimistic and believe that evil and tyranny shall always prevail, and that you speak about this as if it were a 'truthism' but it is simply your own pessimism.

.
Thus the need for democratic government.
.

This is simply Orwellian Newspeak for the dictatorship of Capital; today the Anglo-American state terrorists constitute probably the most evil imperialistic military alliance in all of history, and they constantly use terms such as 'democracy' to describe the dictatorship of Capital; I live in Britain which is a monarchy with a 'Prime Minister (First Servant)' who is the Monarch's servant; the parliament is entirely the Queen's parliament, the army is entirely her army; for her first servant to wage war, he only needs consult her, not the demos; the statue of Oliver Cromwell (who was a Republican) with his sword held high which sits outside the parliament is simply there for propaganda purposes; that is not Cromwell's parliament; his sword and robes were dipped in the blood of the monarchists, and his followers were hunted down, brutally tortured and murdered by the monarchists, not that I am fan of Cromwell due to his holocaust of the Irish.

Similarly in America, you have a presidential republic whose 'Patriot Act' gives the president all the powers of Hitler's Third Reich; it is only a 'democracy' to those who accept the 'doublespeak' defintions of Orwellian Newspeak.


The rule of the demos

In the Greek Democracy there were no elected representatives and each citizen had a right to vote on each issue of the day; it was simply the tyranny of the majority, not the tyranny of a monarch or a president or a group of representatives (a republic).

In a democracy, for the nation to go to war, a majority of the population would have to vote for it; if the majority (who are mostly poor) wished to disempower the rich, that is what would occur, and since the elites understand that this would occur, since the elites are the few and the masses are the many, democracy is the last thing they want.

Over here in Britain, I doubt if any of the members of parliament would wish to see their privileges and their half million dollar salaries and expenses withrdrawn, and power handed over to the masses, the only honest Republicans we have as members of parliament are the Irish Republicans (Shin Fein) who are considered terrorists by the monarchists, and as they refuse to swear an oath to the Queen, they are forbidden to enter parliament.

Lucifer can extol the pseudo-virtues of anracho-communism all he wants. The fact is, is that he also has no qualms talking about executing all sorts of people, which is typical Communist procedure. Obviously, if his "anarcho-Communism" were to come to fruition, he expects that he himself would be running the show, allowing him the authority to execute supposed enemies.

Not at all; I am simply a directionist and a propagandist; I have no political party and like the vast majority of British Anarchists I am not a member of one; Anarchism is a political philosophy, my intent is merely the dissemination of Anarchist thought to which I have nothing to add and I refer only to an accepted tradition from which I do not deviate

I think you will find that Anarchists in general are philosophers, intellectuals, students, academics, much like the Marxist crowd; they are generally rather gentle souls and quite the opposite of the 'football hooligans' who are the recruting grounds for both the far Right and the armies of the state terrorists.

http://www.casa115.com/blog/zapatistas-thumb.jpg

I am generally quite typical of Anarchists in that I am simply a 'propagandist;' in real life I too am a rather gentle soul; I grew up in the 'love and peace' hippy movement of the 60's and I have rather a great love and compassion for suffering humanity; personally I am not at all a violent person, however I am morally obligated to respond to Anglo-American Christian state terrorism, which is a militant, apocalyptic and genocidal ideology; the victims of their many wars, black operations, palace revolutions and coups to advance Capitalist narco-terrorist revolution, are in their millions, and their victims must further include the millions who die each year due to the effects of poverty which are directly related to the international dictatorship of Capital.

http://img2.timeinc.net/people/i/2008/news/080310/prince_harry2_320.jpg

One cannot fight a Christian armed with weapons of mass destruction and a police state with a peace flag; just as the sword is an innapropriate weapon to use against a tank.

http://www.jesus-is-savior.com/Disturbing%20Truths/starving_child-sudan2.jpg


.
Thus through reflection, we see it's the same old Stalinism. The Soviets also claimed (as did Marx) that the state would "wither away". In reality, Orwell saw it more accurately. To paraphrase: "If you want to see the future, imagine a boot stomping on a human face - forever!" (1984).
.

You obviously have a 'thug' mentality and believe that tyranny shall always prevail; I beg to differ. Marxist states have not withered away into Anarchism, but rather into something resembling almost Anarcho-Capitalism, the rule of the mafia, the pimps and the bankers where the governments are merely the bribed and corrupted. Capitalist Police states do not wither away; they generally have to be overthrown by the masses; a good example of this is the Venezuelan counter-revolution against the CIA backed coup where millions took to the streets.

.

Since Freemasons were murdered in large numbers by Communists, Nazis, and Fascists, and because the study and practice of Freemasonry can only be undertaken in a free society, then yes, I would expect Freemasons to be opposed to all totalitarian forms of statehood.

What utter nonesense; the British Masons have among their cultists numerous members of the aristocracy who are evangelical monarchists; indeed their current Grand Master is our tyrant Elizabeth's first cousin, and their are numerous masons who serve in her terrorist militia and police and who are among the assorted chaff of Crown collaborators; they would be more likely to fight to the death to resist 'democracy.'
Similarly in America, I find no evidence of Masons committed to the overthrowal of the dictatorship of Capital; on the contrary.



http://bristol.indymedia.org/attachments/oct2007/major_tim_saunders_briefs_hrh_the_duke_of_kent.jpg
Above the Masonic Grand Master; Field Marshal His Royal Highness Prince Edward George Nicholas Patrick, Duke of Kent, Earl of Saint Andrews, Baron Downpatrick, Royal Knight of the Most Noble Order of the Garter, Knight Grand Cross of the Most Distinguished Order of Saint Michael and Saint George, Knight Grand Cross of the Royal Victorian Order, Aide-de-Camp to Her Majesty, Grand Master of the United Grand Lodge of England and First Grand Principal of the Supreme Grand Chapter of Royal Arch Masons of England, President of The Scout Association?

http://content9.clipmarks.com/blog_cache/www.dailymail.co.uk/img/D2E42AC6-CE7A-4B0F-A81D-A95E147C5E14

The dictatorship of Capital is entirely a dictatorship where the economic elites throw hundreds of millions of dollars into political campaigns to ensure that usually one of two pro-Capitalist candidates gets elected; you can have the simple choice between either a Capitalist or a Capitalist.

Lucifer

http://th05.deviantart.com/fs25/300W/f/2008/148/2/8/Sigil_of_Lucifer_by_Monation.jpg
lux e tenebris
Prince of the Angels, Lord of Lords, Master and Commander of the 7 angels of the Apocalypse and the 72 Goetic demons, bearer of the Key of Solomon, etc., etc.

Ex offico (in the office of) Christ, Pontifex Maximus, Servus Servorum Dei, Grand Master of Masters and numerous other pompous titles.

http://www.piusxiipope.info/popeseal.gif


Nb. I have spoken here 'ex cathedra' (from the seat) and thus I speak infallibly against all other blasphemies, heresies and competing 'World Saviours,' Grand Masters, Messiahs, Maitreyas, prophets, madhi's etc; accept no cheaper or higher priced substitutes.

Disclaimer:

Please refrain from executing any Christian priest or Masonic cultist until the conditions for revolution appear and the 'actual' separation of the wheat from the chaff (i.e., the execution of my infallible judgements) begins; in the meantime, open hostility towards them, exposure of their cults and the dissemination of anti-Masonic and anti-Christian propaganda (i.e., education) shall be considered mandatory throughout Eden, on penalty of death and the abandonment to eternal hell for the unpenitent wretches who disobey my sacred and infallible dictates.

I, have sent my angel to testify these things to you for the assemblies. I am the root and the offspring of David, the Bright and Morning Star."



Let us note that images posted by Lucifer and others on this thread are currently showing as the first search results for "Communist Buddha" on Google Images.

A yes commandante; I have been an Internet propagandist almost since the Internet began and it is entirely premeditated; it is how the Vanguard of Revolution speaks to all peoples and nations as the lightening flashes from the east to the west in judgement on the living and the dead. They who are caught up in the sky to meet us are the peoples and nations and the myriads of the world.

Google is not a person of course but a computer program and it is entirely succeptible to the repetition of phrases such as:

Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha


Let me say that again in case you missed that one:

Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha

To advertise a lie in the Capitalist media, it requires millions of dollars; the truth travels freely and like lightening.

Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha

Propaganda is the first stage of war. Words are weapons.

Addendum (edit)

I just re-checked on Google and 'Communist Buddha' is linked to 334,000 pages on the web, but this thread is in number 1 and number 2 position. On Google images it shows 6 times on the first page. We are also number one on Yahoo for 'Communist Buddha'

With regards to the thread On Communist Jesus. An Anarchist Perspective - on this forum, the phrase 'Communist Jesus' is linked by google to 1.7 million web pages, but the essay here shows up on the frontpage of Google.

I wonder why? :-)

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_AVvqjU8Jdzg/SYyJXHSWdjI/AAAAAAAAACk/LwrRVmUyDp8/s320/Google+Search.bmp

Please keep talking about Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha Communist Buddha and Communist Jesus Communist Jesus Communist Jesus Communist Jesus Communist Jesus and we might take over the Internet and I may not have to release my giant death ray for a while.

http://joeposnanski.com/JoeBlog/wp-content/uploads/2009/03/austin-powers-mike-myers-as-dr-evil4.jpg

[thelonious]

you proudly proclaim that long into the future we will not face new problems, only old ones in new guises.

There is nothing new under the sun.

Just for the record, I do not condone the excesses of capitalism. Nor do I condone the excesses of Communism.

As a Kabalist, I always seek the Middle Path, where the Tao is found.

On a side note, my avatar, the lit chalice, is the symbol of the Unitarian Universalist Church, of which I am a member.

http://www.uua.org/

[flyermay]

Just for the record, I do not condone the excesses of capitalism. Nor do I condone the excesses of Communism.

So, in your opinion, have we reached an acceptable "balance"???

[thelonious]

So, in your opinion, have we reached an acceptable "balance"???

No.

One of the major problems, if not the worse problem, is the fact that hundreds of trillions of dollars are being squandered in militarism. Nations face off against each other, and pour money into their war efforts, which, if the world were at perpetual peace, this money could be used to feed, clothe, and house everybody.

It's not that we need a bunch of commie dictators telling us what to do. It's just that it's time for us to start behaving as adults instead of a bunch of looney children. There are enough resources for everbody. We just need to begin using them to help each other, instead of using them to kill each other.

Thus another reason I firmly support the concept of Freemasonry. Masonic philosophy recognizes the Brotherhood of Man as an ideal. If this ideal were to be put into practice, and Masonic theory adopted by everyone, there would be no more room for war or greed, and everyone would have something to eat tonight.

[kasalt]

One of the major problems, if not the worse problem, is the fact that hundreds of trillions of dollars are being squandered in militarism. Nations face off against each other, and pour money into their war efforts, which, if the world were at perpetual peace, this money could be used to feed, clothe, and house everybody.

It's not that we need a bunch of commie dictators telling us what to do. It's just that it's time for us to start behaving as adults instead of a bunch of looney children. There are enough resources for everbody. We just need to begin using them to help each other, instead of using them to kill each other.

Thus another reason I firmly support the concept of Freemasonry. Masonic philosophy recognizes the Brotherhood of Man as an ideal. If this ideal were to be put into practice, and Masonic theory adopted by everyone, there would be no more room for war or greed, and everyone would have something to eat tonight.

I agree with this, but you are defending Freemasonry by saying, "Masonic philosophy recognizes the Brotherhood of Man as an ideal. If this ideal were to be put into practice, and Masonic theory adopted by everyone, there would be no more room for war or greed, and everyone would have something to eat tonight." My question is, what is Freemasonry really doing to promote "the Brotherhood of Man"? How do you respond, especially in light of Lux's quote here:[T]he British Masons have among their cultists numerous members of the aristocracy who are evangelical monarchists; indeed their current Grand Master is our tyrant Elizabeth's first cousin, and their are numerous masons who serve in her terrorist militia and police and who are among the assorted chaff of Crown collaborators; they would be more likely to fight to the death to resist 'democracy.'
Similarly in America, I find no evidence of Masons committed to the overthrowal of the dictatorship of Capital; on the contrary.

[flyermay]

One of the major problems, if not the worse problem, is the fact that hundreds of trillions of dollars are being squandered in militarism. Nations face off against each other, and pour money into their war efforts, which, if the world were at perpetual peace, this money could be used to feed, clothe, and house everybody.

Agreed, but I would also add the trillions of dollars spent in excesses, showing off, political campaigns, unnecessary opulence, media propaganda, religious/consumer festivities, fashion, entertainment, advertising and all other vanities commonly encouraged in any capitalist society.

It's not that we need a bunch of commie dictators telling us what to do. It's just that it's time for us to start behaving as adults instead of a bunch of looney children. There are enough resources for everbody. We just need to begin using them to help each other, instead of using them to kill each other.

But you have just described communism. You can check on any dictionary and you will find that communism is: “any political philosophy or ideology advocating holding the production of resources collectively”. I don’t see where you fit the ‘commie dictators’ in those descriptions; at the contrary, a ‘communist’ society, as well as a ‘democracy’, is supposed to be ruled by the people for the people (though I know we can both find many examples of the contrary; both in communist and democratic nations).

Totalitarian rulers –that is: dictators, monarchs and caciques- are common in most undeveloped countries, whether or not they are communists. However, they are not common in any modern society with a fair level of education (at least not openly proclamed as dictators). So I don’t understand what makes you think that modern communism necessary implies a dictatorship. For example: throughout South America, Africa and Asia, totalitarian governments were common before the introduction of communism (as well as in all European countries just a few centuries ago), and I don’t see how communism could be blamed for it. Don't you think that a dictatorship in a communist country has more to do with traditional government systems and underdevelopment? I agree that there are very few examples of peaceful communist governments (though there are, if you are really interested in finding them); nevertheless, the ratio is casually proportional to the level of development in thouse countries/communities.

The bottom line is that: until you don’t break that imaginary link between communism and a dictatorship, you will never be able to judge it from an impartial point of view (like I do; as I’m neither a communist nor a capitalist).

Thus another reason I firmly support the concept of Freemasonry. Masonic philosophy recognizes the Brotherhood of Man as an ideal. If this ideal were to be put into practice, and Masonic theory adopted by everyone, there would be no more room for war or greed, and everyone would have something to eat tonight.

You are mixing a religious cult with a political ideology. You could actually say that every other mayor cult also promises eternal peace and global welfare; just if everyone simply followed their divine laws without deviation. And in that case, I doubt that freemasonry would be anywhere near the top of the list.

[luciferhorus]

There is nothing new under the sun.

As a Kabalist, I always seek the Middle Path, where the Tao is found.

On a side note, my avatar, the lit chalice, is the symbol of the Unitarian Universalist Church, of which I am a member.

http://www.uua.org/

Dear Thelonious,

Many years ago when I lived in America in the 90's had an 'aquaintance' who was a gay Unitarian Universalist pastor in New Jersey.

I found the Unitarian Universalists in general to be a rather interesting and full of love, unlike their Christian counterparts.

The UUC seems to me to be neither a Christian Church nor a religious organisation; in many ways it is a satire of Christendom, and I mean this in the most positive sense, since it offers a forum for gays, lesbians, communists, socialists, atheists, theists, humanists, new agers, pagans, and all the kindly, gentle and compassionate souls of the races of America to congregate together, and to discuss a variety of spiritual, moral and political (i.e., philosophical) issues, while at the same time, maintaining the same tax free status of their Christian adversaries (which I fully support); and I say 'adversaries' since you UUC-ers are universally condemned as heretics by the Christian Right, as of course am I.

My apologies Theolonious for not recognising your UUC logo; it has been almost two decades since I have known any UUC-ists personally, and they are a rarity in Britain, but you do not assist yourself in this understanding since you are on an anti-masonic forum and 'out' yourself as an American Mason.

As a Mason you seem to have very 'liberal' views which frankly are not entirely 'kosher' in the Masonic sense, at least on my side of the Atlantic, since the Masons over here, appear in the most part to be the dross of the Capitalist state terrorist apparatus, the army, the police, the City of London, the aristocracy and the British Crown; they appear mostly as the current advocates of war in Iraq and World Capitalist Revolution, etc. I very much doubt if your will find any UUC activists or clergy who would support the current Anglo-American state terrorist war; if I am incorrect on this, please inform me.

You must understand that my harshness on you here is simply necessary for the dialectical process of debate, since you identify yourself as a Mason, and David Icke's views on that cult are well known, as are mine.

I am glad to find another intelligent defender of the Kabbalistic and Thelemic tradition here such as yourself, but it seems to me that most Masons (unlike yourself) are entirely confused about this tradition and indeed are the definition of Kabbalistic heretics and anti-thelemites.

In my essays which attempt to simplify the Kabbalah, I believe that I have been entirely orthodox and I have not added anything, but I have only subtracted a mountain of sophistry and confusion in order that they who do not understand this path, can perceive it more clearly and judge it as one of innocence.

Do not mistake this for flattery; I may flatter my Anarchist comrades to encourage them and to send them some love and recognition that they walk upon the one true narrow path, but I never suspend criticism of anyone, and I am not a member of the UCC and I am an evangelical Pagan and Anarchist.

But pleased to meet you here.

So, on to further questions...What essentially are your criticisms of David Icke's general analysis and judgement on the Freemasons; summarise this and discuss....

Love and Light to you brother.


http://www.luciferia.tv/animation/A.gif
Lucifer

93

[thelonious]

Agreed, but I would also add the trillions of dollars spent in excesses, showing off, political campaigns, unnecessary opulence, media propaganda, religious/consumer festivities, fashion, entertainment, advertising and all other vanities commonly encouraged in any capitalist society.

Agreed.

But you have just described communism.

I disagree. I think I simply described common sense. But see below.



Totalitarian rulers –that is: dictators, monarchs and caciques- are common in most undeveloped countries, whether or not they are communists. However, they are not common in any modern society with a fair level of education (at least not openly proclamed as dictators). So I don’t understand what makes you think that modern communism necessary implies a dictatorship.

Under any communist system, there has to be somebody who sets the production levels; otherwise, not everyone would be provided for. Further, someone would also have to be in charge of distributing commodities; again, to guarantee everyone would be provided for. Also, someone has to have authority to decide just who needs what, and who is able to do which sort of work.

Now, even if this fellow is a nice guy, he nevertheless has been given dictatorial powers by default. And the maxim goes that absolute power corrupts absolutely.

Plato saw this internal contradiction in the communist system, and suggested in the Republic overcoming it by telling the communist philosopher kings the so-called "noble lie". But these days, I don't think they'd buy it.


The bottom line is that: until you don’t break that imaginary link between communism and a dictatorship, you will never be able to judge it from an impartial point of view (like I do; as I’m neither a communist nor a capitalist).

Neither am I. But communists themselves wish to establish the "dictatorship of the proletariat".



You are mixing a religious cult with a political ideology. You could actually say that every other mayor cult also promises eternal peace and global welfare; just if everyone simply followed their divine laws without deviation. And in that case, I doubt that freemasonry would be anywhere near the top of the list.

Maybe. But perhaps it should be?

[thelonious]

The UUC seems to me to be neither a Christian Church nor a religious organisation; in many ways it is a satire of Christendom, and I mean this in the most positive sense, since it offers a forum for gays, lesbians, communists, socialists, atheists, theists, humanists, new agers, pagans, and all the kindly, gentle and compassionate souls of the races of America to congregate together, and to discuss a variety of spiritual, moral and political (i.e., philosophical) issues, while at the same time, maintaining the same tax free status of their Christian adversaries (which I fully support); and I say 'adversaries' since you UUC-ers are universally condemned as heretics by the Christian Right, as of course am I.

I agree with most of that except the "satire" part. Traditionally, both Unitarians and Universalists considered themselves Christians, but very liberal ones. Most UU's see the faith as the religion *of* Jesus instead of the religion *about* Jesus. We do not intend to satirize Christian churches, but we believe that there should also be a place of spiritual community for rejects like us.


My apologies Theolonious for not recognising your UUC logo; it has been almost two decades since I have known any UUC-ists personally, and they are a rarity in Britain, but you do not assist yourself in this understanding since you are on an anti-masonic forum and 'out' yourself as an American Mason.

Actually, many of the greatest Masonic minds have been Unitarians and/or Universalists. Benjamin Franklin was a Unitarian, as was the great Masonic scholar and occult researcher Albert G. Mackey. Dr. William Fox is a noted scholar of the Scottish Rite of Masonry, biographer of Albert Pike, and beloved UU minister. Indeed, one of the major condemnations that Christian evangelicals level against Masons is that we teach the "heresy" of Universalism.

As a Mason you seem to have very 'liberal' views which frankly are not entirely 'kosher' in the Masonic sense, at least on my side of the Atlantic

In the United States, Freemasonry is non-political as such. I have very little personal experience with English Masons in real life, but I personally believe your ideas about Freemasonry are based on false assumptions.


You must understand that my harshness on you here is simply necessary for the dialectical process of debate, since you identify yourself as a Mason, and David Icke's views on that cult are well known, as are mine.

I don't mind debates, and I have nothing personal against communist theorists. Like I've already mentioned, there are communists that I greatly admire, some of whom were Freemasons.


I am glad to find another intelligent defender of the Kabbalistic and Thelemic tradition here such as yourself, but it seems to me that most Masons (unlike yourself) are entirely confused about this tradition and indeed are the definition of Kabbalistic heretics and anti-thelemites.

Most Masons are just "club members". They are not state capitalist terrorists nor do they study the Kabalah or Hermetics. They come to the Lodge to hang out with friends and smoke cigars.

Nevertheless, Freemasonry *is* a Hermetic system, and has the potential to enlighten the right people if they are receptive to it. To the rest, it's just a club.

So, on to further questions...What essentially are your criticisms of David Icke's general analysis and judgement on the Freemasons; summarise this and discuss....

Love and Light to you brother.




To be honest, I don't know enough about Icke's position to rebut it. It is my understanding that he thinks we're shapeshifting lizard people or something to that effect, but I don't know his whole story.

[flyermay]

Under any communist system, there has to be somebody who sets the production levels; otherwise, not everyone would be provided for. Further, someone would also have to be in charge of distributing commodities; again, to guarantee everyone would be provided for. Also, someone has to have authority to decide just who needs what, and who is able to do which sort of work. Now, even if this fellow is a nice guy, he nevertheless has been given dictatorial powers by default. And the maxim goes that absolute power corrupts absolutely.

You are again stuck on the idea of a dictatorship. I don’t understand what makes you think that the only way of regulating production and distribution is through dictatorial powers; why not a regulating body, or a popular committee?

Please bear in mind that we do also have all types of commerce and industry regulatory bodies in practically every single sector; whether it is controlled by government, by international agreements and treaties, or simply self-regulated (controlled by an industry itself). But I don’t think you would say it is a ‘dictatorship’; would you?

Plato saw this internal contradiction in the communist system, and suggested in the Republic overcoming it by telling the communist philosopher kings the so-called "noble lie". But these days, I don't think they'd buy it.

I don’t see where the contradiction is, and what is there to buy…

But communists themselves wish to establish the "dictatorship of the proletariat".

According to any encyclopaedia, the ‘dictatorship of the proletariat’ is described as:
“The term does not refer to a concentration of power by a dictator, but to a situation where the proletariat would hold power and replace the current political, economic and social system controlled by the bourgeoisie.”
Which in a nutshell means: the people ruling themselves. Well, I don’t see how you can disagree with that idea; which by the way is the basis for democracy (the real one -even though many still believe we live in such a system-)

I really don't understand your point here; are you against a real “democracy”?

Maybe. But perhaps it should be?

Why do you think we would be better off by being governed back again by the clergy?

[thelonious]

You are again stuck on the idea of a dictatorship. I don’t understand what makes you think that the only way of regulating production and distribution is through dictatorial powers; why not a regulating body, or a popular committee?

That is exactly what a "soviet" is: a regulating body and popular committee of those who decide what is to be produced, who will produce it, and who will receive the commodities produced.

Please bear in mind that we do also have all types of commerce and industry regulatory bodies in practically every single sector; whether it is controlled by government, by international agreements and treaties, or simply self-regulated (controlled by an industry itself).

That is correct, but operates completely differently than in a communist society. In a free market society, production is determined by the so-called "invisible hand", based upon the relationship between supply and demand. In communist society, an arbitrary fixed number of any good will be produced then distributed through rationing.




Which in a nutshell means: the people ruling themselves. Well, I don’t see how you can disagree with that idea

I do not disagree with the idea of the people ruling themselves. I disagree with the idea of the fruit of a man's labor being stolen by the government under the pretense of "people ruling themselves".


I really don't understand your point here; are you against a real “democracy”?

Absolutely not. I firmly believe in democracy, which is the primary reason I oppose communism.

However, again, it must be pointed out that while many communist theoriticians of the past made some generally good points (and I include Marx, Engels, Lenin, Bakunin, Trotsky, DuBois, Sartre, and others), the main foundations of their philosophies are completely irrelevant and obsolete today.

In the advanced democracies of the west, the "capitalism" that those people criticized no longer exists. The "capitalist" as an individual tycoon has been replaced by a board of directors who issue ownership through the stock process. In most cases, the employees own stock as well, which eliminates the dividing line between proletariat and bourgeousie. Indeed, this is one of the prime reasons that the proletariat did not become revolutionary, as was prophesied by Marx: because they themselves have become part owners in the institution, and share profits (capital).

Lucifer continues to post photos of starving children in third world nations, and I do think he's doing the right thing, and people need to be aware of the mass suffering in the world, much of which is completely unnecessary. However, much of that suffering can be traced to former societies of communism (mass starvation in Ethiopia and Cambodia, for example, were direct results of communist collectivization). Furthermore, those societies are not industrialized and therefore have no "proletariat" in the Marxian sense, which means that those societies, according to classical Marxism, would not be able to support a communist system anyway.

The answer to feeding those kids is not communism: it's to stop wasting all our money on killing each other and using it to lift up each other.

Why do you think we would be better off by being governed back again by the clergy?

Why in the world would you think I would support such a looney idea? I was speaking of the Masonic principles, which are, in fact, products of the Age of Enlightenment: which eliminated rule by the clergy in the first place.

[flyermay]

That is exactly what a "soviet" is: a regulating body and popular committee of those who decide what is to be produced, who will produce it, and who will receive the commodities produced.

In a free market society, production is determined by the so-called "invisible hand", based upon the relationship between supply and demand. In communist society, an arbitrary fixed number of any good will be produced then distributed through rationing.

Russia passed from a monarchy, to a dictatorship, and ended up in capitalism; quite a bad example of communism, in my opinion.

Either way, what you call “offer and demand”, is no more than a rat race for the highest profits; and definitely not offering as much as it’s demanded. In practice, this system only satisfies does with sufficient wealth to acquire the products and services available, which by no means takes equality or demand into consideration.

Then we have the notion of a “free market”, which according to you is opposed to the idea of regulating production and resources. But, as is said in my previous post, the resources, production and distribution are *literally* regulated by governments, international bodies, and even through self-regulation. And you fail to understand that those regulations do not only seek homogeneity and control, but that also impose limits on production and distribution (a small example is milk production throughout the EU).

So, as you can see, both systems regulate production and distribution; but the communist system seeks equality, while the capitalist system seeks profitability (whatever the consequences).

I do not disagree with the idea of the people ruling themselves. I disagree with the idea of the fruit of a man's labor being stolen by the government under the pretense of "people ruling themselves".

Isn’t that statement a contradiction? I mean, how can the people rule themselves and at the same time being exploited by a government?

I can’t see a way of talking about communism if you don’t stop looking for examples in communist dictatorships. For example: would you say that Hitler’s Germany is a good example of a democracy? But yet, the Nazi government rose and ruled in the German “democratic” system.

Absolutely not. I firmly believe in democracy, which is the primary reason I oppose communism.

But yet, the main principle under communism is the idea of a “popular government” (or democracy). And that is exactly my point; there is no real communism without a literal democracy. So, looking for examples of communism in a dictatorship is of no use.

However, again, it must be pointed out that while many communist theoriticians of the past made some generally good points (and I include Marx, Engels, Lenin, Bakunin, Trotsky, DuBois, Sartre, and others), the main foundations of their philosophies are completely irrelevant and obsolete today.

Completely agreed; though it is clear that we disagree on which are the good points.

(Sorry, I'll break down this post in 2 and continue later)

[flyermay]

In the advanced democracies of the west, the "capitalism" that those people criticized no longer exists. The "capitalist" as an individual tycoon has been replaced by a board of directors who issue ownership through the stock process. In most cases, the employees own stock as well, which eliminates the dividing line between proletariat and bourgeousie. Indeed, this is one of the prime reasons that the proletariat did not become revolutionary, as was prophesied by Marx: because they themselves have become part owners in the institution, and share profits (capital).

I guess that with “advanced democracies” you are referring to the “elitist republics” of the west. Please correct me if I’m wrong, but I don’t think that having a limited choice of elitist political parties (funded by the wealthiest individuals, groups and organisations) every 4 years, who rule as they wish for a whole term, and who only look to benefit and defend the interests of those who funded their campaigns, can be tagged as a “democracy” (unlike a real communist "popular government").

Either way, about your mention of a “board of directors”, we are back to the discussion with GS on another thread about who works for who; the Queen for the government, or the government for the Queen. What difference does it makes having a board of directors when someone above owns the company (or has a majority of shares); the whole board can be simply influenced or replaced at convenience.

About employees owning stock or shares in a company, that’s unfortunately only true for cooperatives; as in private corporations they have to pay for each share with their own wages (as anyone else who wants to buy shares), whether it is part of the deal or not. So, ownership is not based on you working for a company, but on your level of investment.

But you see, the whole system is based on a lie and on playing with the population’s hopes and good faith. If people don’t revolt is simply because they have the false hope of one day being part of the elite, and therefore perpetuating this unjust and corrupt system.

Lucifer continues to post photos of starving children in third world nations, and I do think he's doing the right thing, and people need to be aware of the mass suffering in the world, much of which is completely unnecessary. However, much of that suffering can be traced to former societies of communism (mass starvation in Ethiopia and Cambodia, for example, were direct results of communist collectivization). Furthermore, those societies are not industrialized and therefore have no "proletariat" in the Marxian sense, which means that those societies, according to classical Marxism, would not be able to support a communist system anyway.

Yes, it might be true that many of those countries were communists, but it is also true that ALL of those countries suffered the consequences of western colonization; and that ALL of them now suffer the consequences of western globalization.

The answer to feeding those kids is not communism: it's to stop wasting all our money on killing each other and using it to lift up each other.

The truth is that no communist island can survive in a capitalist ocean. So the question would be, could it be possible in a world without capitalism?

Why in the world would you think I would support such a looney idea? I was speaking of the Masonic principles, which are, in fact, products of the Age of Enlightenment: which eliminated rule by the clergy in the first place.

Because that is the dream of every other single cult: take out all other and impose theirs as true enlightment.

[thelonious]

Russia passed from a monarchy, to a dictatorship, and ended up in capitalism; quite a bad example of communism, in my opinion.

I agree with you that it was a bad example, although it was a pretty good example of communism. Every communist state in the world followed that example.



So, as you can see, both systems regulate production and distribution; but the communist system seeks equality, while the capitalist system seeks profitability (whatever the consequences).

I call false premiss. The communist system seeks equality only in the Orwellian sense, as in "All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others".

In communist societies, there always has been (and always will be) a huge gulf between the living standards of the proletariat and that of the Party elites. In fact, it's just the same as in western economies with the exception that in free market economies, the proletariat still get to eat.



Isn’t that statement a contradiction? I mean, how can the people rule themselves and at the same time being exploited by a government?

Obviously, they cannot. In a free society, the people elect their representatives among whomever they want. In communist societies, the candidates for office must be approved by the government first, and must hold membership in the Communist Party.

I can’t see a way of talking about communism if you don’t stop looking for examples in communist dictatorships.

I don't understand your reasoning here. You want to talk about communism as long as we don't use real life examples?

For example: would you say that Hitler’s Germany is a good example of a democracy? But yet, the Nazi government rose and ruled in the German “democratic” system.

Nazi Germany was a totalitarian dictatorship, not a democratic system. And indeed, as much as Hitler despised the Communists, he certainly learned a lot from them as well.



But yet, the main principle under communism is the idea of a “popular government” (or democracy). And that is exactly my point; there is no real communism without a literal democracy. So, looking for examples of communism in a dictatorship is of no use.

But you're still thinking about abstract utopias, and not concrete realities.

[eternal_spirit]

quote thelonious

But you're still thinking about abstract utopias, and not concrete realities. Exactly, that's why the commies indoctrinate them young when possible.

First time I read about Communism (sounded great in theory) I was convinced that was the solution to the problems in England. My father looked at me like I'd gone nuts and said have you heard of Pol Pot and China/Cambodia etc.

Then I done some research and found out the reality of Communism and seen the theory put into practice. Individuality and choice of anything other than what the Government told you to do was a crime.

The only true solution is if everyone got paid the same wage. I think many would go for that, but of course not everyone would, that was once my ideal of what Communism should be, but it never was, never is and never will be.

If everyone got paid the same wage then a new word would have to be used to describe this ideal (Equality) sounds about right.

[flyermay]

I agree with you that it was a bad example, although it was a pretty good example of communism. Every communist state in the world followed that example.

They all followed a dictatorship, arguably based on communist ideals, and funded by foreign interests.

I call false premiss. The communist system seeks equality only in the Orwellian sense, as in "All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others".

If some are more equal than others (like in our “democracy”), then it cannot be communism.

In communist societies, there always has been (and always will be) a huge gulf between the living standards of the proletariat and that of the Party elites.

Agreed, then it cannot be communism when they have “elites”.

In fact, it's just the same as in western economies with the exception that in free market economies, the proletariat still get to eat.

That is indeed a false premise. Not everyone has to eat in a capitalist society (that’s obvious), and even some areas of the riches capitalist countries are literally considered by human rights organisations as “third world” (i.e. many African American and native American communities in the US).

Obviously, they cannot. In a free society, the people elect their representatives among whomever they want. In communist societies, the candidates for office must be approved by the government first, and must hold membership in the Communist Party.

That is indeed how it happens in a dictatorship (I know it because I lived many years in one), but it is definitely not how it should be in a communist society; as the government would be truly popular.

Nazi Germany was a totalitarian dictatorship, not a democratic system. And indeed, as much as Hitler despised the Communists, he certainly learned a lot from them as well.

Exactly, bad choice for a democracy; though you cannot deny they won the general democratic elections and kept on using the division of powers of such a democracy throughout their government.

But you're still thinking about abstract utopias, and not concrete realities.

Well, you cannot accuse me for your choices of communist dictatorships.

I don't understand your reasoning here. You want to talk about communism as long as we don't use real life examples?

There is nothing to understand: what’s the point on you looking at obvious dictatorships (funded by foreign capitalist interests) when I’m talking about communism. It would be the same as talking about democracy and me choosing the US or the UK as an example.

___________________________

So let’s recap the main points of what you call communism:

A totalitarian dictatorship
Where some are more equals than others
Having an elite
With an unpopular government (in both senses)
Where some get full access to all the resources, while other don’t even get the most basic

I still can’t understand why you tag such a system as communism; I would definitely be in complete agreement with you to oppose it.

But in contrast, this is what communism should be:

Popular share of obligations, responsibilities and rights
Where everyone is equal in all senses
Where there are no elites
Formed by a popular government (a true democracy)
With equal access to resources


See the difference?

[luciferhorus]

Originally Posted by thelonious
Lucifer continues to post photos of starving children in third world nations, and I do think he's doing the right thing, and people need to be aware of the mass suffering in the world, much of which is completely unnecessary. However, much of that suffering can be traced to former societies of communism (mass starvation in Ethiopia and Cambodia, for example, were direct results of communist collectivization). Furthermore, those societies are not industrialized and therefore have no "proletariat" in the Marxian sense, which means that those societies, according to classical Marxism, would not be able to support a communist system anyway.

The problems of Collectivisation.

The problems in China and Cambodia were due to the 'speed' of collectivisation.

Agricultural Collectivism generally occurs during the post revolutionary attempt to focus on agricultural revolution; it is very simple idea based on the view that agricultural self sufficiency requires very little effort from each individual if the mass of the population collectively contribute labour; however some technology is required such as tractors; since the ox and the plough is certainly pre-industrial; this also requires some form of technological revolution, fuel etc.

Israeli Collectivism.

For many years up unitl around 2003, I was an agricultural import agent for Carmel Agrexico which at that time was a nationalised corporation of the Israeli government (it has now been privatised), which exported to Europe the produce of the Israeli collectives.

What we see in Occupied Palestine (aka Israel) is relatively a small handful of collectivists in the deserts exporting agriculture which fills the supermarket shelves of every European country; meanwhile in Europe farmers are paid $15,000 per hectare 'not' to grow food on their land, since this is apparently cheaper than paying them subsidies on produce; this in a world where a billion people are constantly hungry and where millions of people die each year due to the effects of poverty, simply because they do not have Capital to buy food.

Collectivisation 'works;' it requires very little effort to grow food; here in Somerset farms are often run by one person with a tractor; I rarely ever see a farmer doing manual labour these days.

With simple modern agricultural technology we could grow enough food in a corner of the Sahara the size of Texas which would feed humanity, but such an abundance would mean that food would become worthless as a commodity; the problem is not that the technology does not exist, but that it would not benefit the Capitalists.

The desert farms of Israel and Saudi Arabia are a testimony to polyhouse farming, hydroponics and aeroponics. Since plants take in about 90% of their water through humidity; humidity trapped in a greenhouse in a desert means that very little water is required to hydroponically grow plants, and even that water can be constantly recycled. This method of farming can produce up to ten tons of crop per acre instead of 1-2 tons.

The technology for agricultural revolution and the non-miracle of the feeding of the 6 billion is with us; we have the means, but there does not exist the political will.

When the ANC took power in South Africa, and the far left in Venezuela, there was simply no sign of collectivisation in these resource rich nations, and the consequence is the continuation of poverty.

It is my view that every nation in the world should begin to slowly collectivise, but this is not occurring.

Thus in the aftermath of the forthcoming inevitable nuclear guerilla war, unfortunately this will produce a Cambodian scenario in the currently rich nations; those who flee to the countryside cannot be expected to simply produce an instant abundance of crops; it is thus the speed of collectivisation which causes genocide and starvation, not collectivism which produces an abundance of agriculture.

In Africa and Latin America there should be an abundance of agriculture; it should have the least amount of starvation; there is abundant land and an ideal climate; there is simply not the political will to collectivise.

The starvation of humanity is simply deliberate and willfull; food is used as a commodity in the Capitalist market places where futures are traded and where where food can be held back from the market to increase the price; scarity produces profit for the masters of Capital, while abundance is undesirable.

If we look to Cuba and to the Israeli collectives, we see an abundance of agriculture; Cuba is the first nation on earth to criminalise the growing of anything other than organic produce, whereas we in Capitalism grow sick on the poisoned foodstuffs in our supermarkets, laden with chemcial insecticides and atrificial fertilisers; the result of which is a very physically sick nation; however the Israeli experiment and the Cuban experiment have taken time; and that is what the post-apocalyptic population of the First World will not have on the Day of Judgement; long have I cried out in warning.

Hopefully before I leave this world it is my intention to emigrate to India and to initiate a collectivist project, but my time is not yet for a number of reasons; however this will not feed 6 billion people, for my resources are limited; when the apocalypse hits the First World, millions will starve and the old shall eat their young; it shall simply be because of a lack of prudence, of foresight, the lack of collectivisation; in other words it shall not be 'because' of collectivisation but because of the absence of it.

Lux
http://www.luciferia.tv/animation/A.gif

The Return to Year Zero.
The 1000 year Agricultural Revolution.
The Revolution of the many points of Light.

[kasalt]

The problems of Collectivisation.

The problems in China and Cambodia were due to the 'speed' of collectivisation.

Forced starvation has been the primary weapon of International Communism since its inception:

http://www.distributedrepublic.net/archives/2005/05/01/communist-cannibalism/

[luciferhorus]

Forced starvation has been the primary weapon of International Communism since its inception:


Forced starvation has never been an objective of Communist revolution, the abuses of Stalin and Pot Pot certainly created that however, but in China is was entirely not deliberate.

I would say that forced starvation is a primary weapon of International Capitalism whose genocide of tends of millions each year is ocurring daily as we speak.

Lux

[thelonious]

They all followed a dictatorship, arguably based on communist ideals, and funded by foreign interests.

Not really. Most of the funding for the Bolsheviks came from their own bank robbing teams, of which Stalin was an early leader. After the Bolsheviks consolidated power, they funded themselves by looting the old Russian aristocracy.



If some are more equal than others (like in our “democracy”), then it cannot be communism.

Sure it can. The basic fundamental of communism is overthrow of bourgeouis supremacy by the proletariat, with the latter establishing themselves as the ruling class. The result of the class struggle will be found in the proletariat's dominace of the bourgeouisie. Che Guevara himself said that a revolution can be judged successful by the number of people who have no place in the new society.



Agreed, then it cannot be communism when they have “elites”.

Not only can it have elites, it must have in order to function at all. Only in a free market society can the "invisiblle hand" operate. In communist society, there must of necessity be trained and indoctrinated cadres who set production goals, rationing, and determine who will work, what work will be done, and what goes where. This new class of communist economists become the new elite.



That is indeed a false premise. Not everyone has to eat in a capitalist society (that’s obvious), and even some areas of the riches capitalist countries are literally considered by human rights organisations as “third world” (i.e. many African American and native American communities in the US).

This is true, but a lot of it boils down to personal responsibility. For example, in the United States, everybody can be educated. If someone can't afford college tuition (and as I was one of the folks), federal grants are available (an example of socialism working for the good of everyone in a mixed economy). Student loans are available for the remainder.

Therefore, everybody has a chance. In large part, all we need to do is roll up our sleeves and get to work. The current President of the United States was raised by a single mother in relative poverty.



Exactly, bad choice for a democracy; though you cannot deny they won the general democratic elections and kept on using the division of powers of such a democracy throughout their government.

Hitler was appointed Chancellor by Hindenburg, and used the tactics of terror to squash opposition. The Nazi rise to power was parallel with most communist states throughout the years.


But in contrast, this is what communism should be:


I do understand what you're saying, but you are talking about what communism should be rather than what it is.

[flyermay]

I do understand what you're saying, but you are talking about what communism should be rather than what it is.

Sorry if I cut to your last phrase Thelonious, but we are just kicking the ball forth and backwards, and we are getting nowhere because we are talking about two completely different things.

What’s the point on judging communism based on examples that definitely do not fit the description of communism (even if they claim it). Just to make my point, you can check any encyclopaedia on communism, and then compare it with any of the examples you posted. For example:
“Communism is a socioeconomic structure and political ideology that promotes the establishment of an egalitarian, classless, stateless society based on common ownership and control of the means of production and property in general.”
Now, it is irrelevant if you cannot find any nation that was able to get close to that definition, not even if they call themselves “communists”. And the truth is that none of those dictatorships -where property and resources are not common, with differences between classes and elites that rule over the population- can be used as an example of how bad communism is.

If you are to judge communism, you should judge it for what it characterise it, and not for others’ malpractice or misinterpretation of it (purposely or not). Just think about democracy, you think it is the right way forward, right? But you wouldn’t use any occidental country as a good example, would you? And that’s exactly the same case: none of them would fit the description.

[thelonious]

From a satirist:

In the Democratic People's Republic of Korea under the wise leadership of Dear Leader Comrade Generalissimo Kim Jong Il the greatest political genius, brilliant statesman, invincible military commander, and prodigious humanist in the world, all political rights are enjoyed by the socialist comrades of the great Korean people's motherland of Juche.

In the DPRK all the comrades have the right to elect and be elected and political rights are protected by the Constitution.

This is completely the reverse of the "United States" where there are no guaranteed protected rights and thus secret CIA death squads roam the dark filthy streets of the dystopian hell on Earth that are US slums, randomly executing brave political dissident activists such as Comrade Noam Chomsky, brutally murdered by Bush the worst war criminal military totalitarian dictator in humankind history.

This is why all world progressives clearly realize that the DPRK is the Utopian Socialist Worker's Paradise while castigating Amerkkka as the country of the disgusting fat filthy fascist flubberite pigs who are the worst human rights abusers in humankind history.

DPRK is the beacon of equal political rights in the world, thanks to the great legacy of the Great Leader Eternal President Kim Il Sung and the flawless perfect omnipotent leadership of Dear Leader Comrade Generalissimo Kim Jong Il, Immortal Sun Of Juche and Lodestar of Humanity.

[kasalt]

What’s the point on judging communism based on examples that definitely do not fit the description of communism (even if they claim it)....

If you are to judge communism, you should judge it for what it characterise it, and not for others’ malpractice or misinterpretation of it (purposely or not).

If that is in fact the case, I should think that purging your ranks of heretics would be your first order of business.

[flyermay]

Really good... But, what's satirical about this part? :confused:

This is completely the reverse of the "United States" where there are no guaranteed protected rights and thus secret CIA death squads roam the dark filthy streets of the dystopian hell on Earth that are US slums, randomly executing brave political dissident activists such as Comrade Noam Chomsky, brutally murdered by Bush the worst war criminal military totalitarian dictator in humankind history.

It definitely matches what American human rights groups call "the ten steps towards fascism":


The patriot act
Secret prisons around the world (other concentration camps like Guantanamo)
Development of paramilitary forces (employing private security companies of mercenaries like Blackwater)
Surveillance of ordinary citizens (and adding innocents to suspect's lists)
Infiltration of citizen’s groups
Detention and release of innocent citizens (as a form of scare tactic)
Targeting key individuals (to silence them)
Restriction of the press
Recasting criticism as espionage, and dissent as treason
Subversion of the rule of law (disregarding congress and replacing US attorneys at convenience)
... (more to come)

[flyermay]

If that is in fact the case, I should think that purging your ranks of heretics would be your first order of business.

I don't understand what you mean, what ranks? what orders? and what business?

[kasalt]

It definitely matches what American human rights groups call "the ten steps towards fascism":


The patriot act
Secret prisons around the world (other concentration camps like Guantanamo)
Development of paramilitary forces (employing private security companies of mercenaries like Blackwater)
Surveillance of ordinary citizens (and adding innocents to suspect's lists)
Infiltration of citizen’s groups
Detention and release of innocent citizens (as a form of scare tactic)
Targeting key individuals (to silence them)
Restriction of the press
Recasting criticism as espionage, and dissent as treason
Subversion of the rule of law (disregarding congress and replacing US attorneys at convenience)
... (more to come)



Good list.

Sounds alot like what the Communists did (and still do today).

[flyermay]

Good list.

Sounds alot like what the Communists did (and still do today).

I'm glad you are finally able to see the similarities.

[luciferhorus]

I should think that purging your ranks of heretics would be your first order of business.


The 'purging' of heretical and totalitarian forms of Communism is certainly what occurs in debates between Anarchists and other Communist factions on the Internet; however this is an intellectual and philosophical matter; it regards compeling political philosophies with Final Solutions which seek the end of Capitalism; it is not yet a military 'purging.'


Originally Posted by flyermay
It definitely matches what American human rights groups call "the ten steps towards fascism":

The patriot act
Secret prisons around the world (other concentration camps like Guantanamo)
Development of paramilitary forces (employing private security companies of mercenaries like Blackwater)
Surveillance of ordinary citizens (and adding innocents to suspect's lists)
Infiltration of citizen’s groups
Detention and release of innocent citizens (as a form of scare tactic)
Targeting key individuals (to silence them)
Restriction of the press
Recasting criticism as espionage, and dissent as treason
Subversion of the rule of law (disregarding congress and replacing US attorneys at convenience)
... (more to come)
.


Good list.

Sounds alot like what the Communists did (and still do today). .

I think the problem here on this forum is that there are no representatives of Marxism here to defend the replacement of the dictatorship of Capital with the dictatorship of state Capitalism and state ownership, but these are matters which are better taken up with the ideological defenders of totalitarian forms of Communism.

Ad Hoc Alliances

In the Spanish Revolution the Stalinists behaved as if they were more concerned with fighting the Trotskyists and the Anarchists, rather than their common Christian enemies; i.e., Franco and the Catholics. I it is generally understood that this military disunity was one of a central causes of the failure of the Spanish revolution, which led to the 36 year reign of Franco.

Similarly today we find that the enemies of the current dictatorship of Capital are many, and come in many flavours from the New Age movement to Anarchists, Marxists and even the Muslims.

Replacing one flawed system with another flawed system is not acceptible; yet unfortunately as military technology progresses, the current world Capitalist dictatorship becomes more militarily powerful as each year and decade passes; the resistance shall be from many quarters and is important to encourage in order that this 'purging' of humanity of the dross of Capitalism shall take place as soon as is possible; but even assumming the collapse of International Capital in the inevitable apocalyptic war, competing ideologies will still remain.

Frankly I don't know of a single debater on this Icke forum who argues for the Marxist position, but the Internet is full of such individuals and Myspace alone has a myriad of Marxist discussion groups and political discussion groups where the Marxist Vanguard is present.

As for myself, I demand nothing less than the destruction of all states, the eradication of all forms of organised religion, the eradication of Capital and nothing less than the manifestation of the common agenda of all Anarcho-Communists.

Lux

___________


“We are advocates of the abolition of war, we do not want war; but war can only be abolished through war, and in order to get rid of the gun it is necessary to take up the gun…………. Communism is a hammer which we use to crush the enemy”-- Mao Tse-tung
.
What is Anarchism? On Capital, Property Will and Law. What is to be done?

http://www.luciferia.tv/1ChildrenOftheSlaves/66666666.gif

Lucifer
http://www.luciferia.tv/animation/A.gif
Light of the World.

The 1000 Year Agricultural and Scientific Revolution; the Revolution of Light
The Final Revolutionary War of Economic Salvation.

For a world without money, government or nations.
For Apocalyptic Guerrilla War against Christendom (i.e., Capitalism).
No mercy on they who deserve none.

http://www.luciferia.tv/1ChildrenOftheSlaves/nkorea_missile.gif

Gr. Anarchos. "without archons (rulers) and without arche (government)"


Firstly to simplify, Anarchist Communism is merely 'moneyless stateless collectivism (kibbutzim)' and it is as simple as that. No further defintion is required for those who understand this; however as Anarchism as a political philosophy is generally misunderstood, I will unpack and explain this further.

Primitivism and Syndicalism.

There are the primitivists who emphasise agricultural revolution and the non miracle of the feeding of the 6 billion and then there are the syndicalists who seek technological revolution also. The Israeli Communists (kibbutzists) for example are syndicalists since some kibbutzes manufacture arms and others manufacture food. I share the view of primitivists that agricultural revolution is a priority, however tractors, labour saving machines, computers, medical technology and other products of scientific revolution represent progress and would form part of a future Communist paradise; they are not merely products of Capitalism but of a new scientific and technological humanity; this however would require syndicalism and the division of labour into ‘specialist’ non agricultural fields.

Other types of Anarchists:

Anarcho-Capitalists and 'Libertarians'.

Well obviously Anarcho-Capitalists are not Anti-monetarists (Capital - money) and thus not traditional Anarchists; simply put they are pure Capitalists (monetarists) who don't want any state interfering with private Capitalism; which is pretty close to a definition of neo-conservatism. There would be private police and armies to protect the rich etc. All members of organised crime syndicates (i.e. the mafia) are by default Anarcho-Capitalists whether they define themselves as such or not; after all they want to be free to enslave, bully and oppress others without government interference. Russia today is pretty close to Anarcho-Capitalist (i.e., ruled by the mafia). Anarcho-Capitalism is essentially 'organised crime,' where the criminals don't have to bribe the government or the police since there would be no government and the police would be their employees.

Libertarianism is slightly different, however the consequences would be similar.



Anarcho-capitalism, in my opinion, is a doctrinal system which, if ever
implemented, would lead to forms of tyranny and oppression that have few
counterparts in human history. There isn't the slightest possibility that
its (in my view, horrendous) ideas would be implemented, because they would
quickly destroy any society that made this colossal error. The idea of "free
contract" between the potentate and his starving subject is a sick joke,
perhaps worth some moments in an academic seminar exploring the consequences
of (in my view, absurd) ideas, but nowhere else.

I should add, however, that I find myself in substantial agreement with
people who consider themselves anarcho-capitalists on a whole range of
issues; and for some years, was able to write only in their journals. And I
also admire their commitment to rationality -- which is rare -- though I do
not think they see the consequences of the doctrines they espouse, or their
profound moral failings.
….Noam Chomsky

Punk rockers.

They are mostly just music fans who despise all authority and are not all political Anarchists, however since some punk rockers such as the Sex Pistols defined themselves as Anarchists, in the mind of many, Anarchism is thus associated with them, however few of them in practice advocate Communist collectivism.

Marxists.

Marx who was converted to Communism by the Anarchist Proudhon, held that the Capitalist state must be replaced with a worker's state which would 'wither away' eventually into Anarchist, stateless,moneyless collectivism. Marx was not a total anti-Capitalist (anti-monetarist) since he did suggest replacing money with labour vouchers as a form of temporary rationing, which is still a form of money, however most Marxists do not seem to favour this.

Trotskyists / Leninists

They do not seem to believe that 'state' must wither away eventually, since they are neo-Marxists rather than fundamentalist Marxists, but they are not anti-Capitalists (anti-monetarists) but state capitalists who believe in the nationalisation of banking, as it is Cuba and North Korea today where there is still a money system.

Chomskyism

Chomsky defines himself as an Anarchist, but but when asked what type of system will replace Capitalism he tends to give confusing or vague answers to the effect of 'well we shall have to wait and see,' so strictly speaking he does not openly propose Anarchist Communism (stateless collectivism) and indeed often criticises Communism. Chomskyism is thus a rather vague and confused form of Anarchism and not traditional Anarchism.

National Anarchists

See for example http://www.folkandfaith.com National Anarchists are political Anarchists and do not believe in nation states but they describe themselves as ‘racial separatists’ and are essentially white supremacists and racists. Fortunately they represent only a tiny minority among the Anarchist movement, since the vast majority of Anarchists are also anti-racists.

Anarchists who believe in Anarchist government.

This is a relatively new phenomenon and not really a political movement; indeed I don’t know of any serious writings by a non statist statist, but I have come across such individuals in Internet debates. These are of course non-Anarchists and indeed the most confused kind among all the above groups who claim to be some sort of Anarchist. They are much like the Christians who propagate Capitalism in the name of Jesus (an anti-monetarist, anti-propertyist, anti-religionist, proto-Anarchist Communist) or the Trotskyists who claim to be anti-monetarists (anti-Capitalists) when in fact they are monetarists albeit state monetarists. Since the term Anarchist is defined in the political sense as the absence of government and Archon (rulers / tyrants), one cannot have a non-government government anymore than one can have an anti-Communist Communist, but this argument seems to mean very little to ‘pro-statist anti-statists (????)’ whatever that means.

Anarchist Christians.

Anarchist Christians tend to view Jesus as an anti-propertyist and an anti-monetarist. Since they are essentially anti-Capitalists, they tend to be viewed by Capitalist Christians as heretics who reject the Capitalist interpretation of Christianity , and by many Anarchists as genuine political Anarchists, though some Anarchists consider ‘god’ to be an ultimate ‘Archon (tyrant). Christian Anarchists reject organised religion, but are theists. Anarchist Communism is a purely political solution and unlike Marxism has no rigid dogmatic metaphysics so it appeals to non-religious Pagans, New Age spiritualists, agnostics ‘and’ atheists alike, however ‘organised religion’ or the rule of the priesthood (who are Archons / authority figures) has no place whatsoever in an Anarchist world.

Governments ‘withering away’

States (tyrannies) do not wither away; they have to be brought down by armed violent revolution.

Thelemites.

Thelemites disregard all laws of state and religion and pursue their own sacrd and natural will, without interfering with the will of others (unless they militantly resist thelemic revoution and in this case Crowley held that cuh heretics should be rightfully executed). While this is certainly Anarchist with regards to the rejection of all written laws, not all are Anarcho-Communists (collectivists), in fact very ferw are; indeed Crowley who was an anti-Communist foresaw a future world ‘ruled’ by a group of ‘spiritual masters,’ which pretty much describes the current world with it’s numerous organised religions which generally defend Capitalism. Never the less almost all Anarchists apart from religious Anarchists are Thelemites whether they define themselves as such or not, since they reject all the laws of the police states and religions and believe that humanity should be free to follow their own natural and therfore sacred intuition.

Anarchist political parties and infiltration by the State Terrorists.

Such organisations are easily infiltrated by the state terrorists, as has been the case for example with the Anarchist ‘Class War’ in the UK. Anarchism is a political philosophy not a ‘political party.’ I know many Anarchists in London and on the Internet but I don’t know anyone personally who belongs to a political party. For example the UK Anarchist Federation is a political cult with 66 members in the UK on the last (and only) time I attended a meeting and yet there are probably 10’s of thousands of Anarchists in London alone. The fact that the Anarchist Federation considers state terrorist black operations such as 911 and 7/7 to be ‘conspiracy theories’ and seems to go along with the government propaganda is entirely suspect.

I speak from a European perspective, and most anti-Capitalists in Europe among the young generation (I am 50) appear to be Anarchists who have rejected Marxist statism and materialistic dogmatism. If you are in London for a week you will find numerous Anarchist events, squat parties etc, but among the Marxists, you will have to look very hard for them. Take a look at myspace for example, there are more Anarchist groups than there are Marxist groups and there are more groups who are anti-Capitalist in general than there are groups who propagate Capitalism.

The World Socialist Movement

In London if one hangs out at Speakers Corner or attends anti-Capitalist rallies it is hard not to bump into the World Socialist Movement http://www.worldsocialism.org/ whom I would describe as 'puritanical Marxists and anti-Leninist Communists' who consider themselves to be Anarchists and consider Marx to have been ultimately an Anarchist (anti-statist), however this all hangs on Marx's 'the state shall wither away' position. I have been excommunicated from their Internet debating forum years ago, so it clear that they don't agree with my politics, nor me with theirs, however since I understand the arguments made by Marxist puritans, let me say this.

Marxist Labour vouchers vs. Anarchist Communist 'rationing.'

Marx claimed 'ultimately (in the end)' that he was a non-monetarist, as are all Anarchist Communists. The WSM rightfully defines all forms of 'State Capitalism (where the state takes over the issue of money) as Leninism and as anti-Marxism. Marx's position was that in the early stages of revolution, the people would starve (and probably revolt against the new proletarian dictatorship) unless 'labour vouchers' were introduced to replace money.

For example if the dictators (the economic masters) work 40 hours they would receive 40 labour vouchers and ditto for factory workers (the economic slaves). However this was merely meant to be temporary and transitionary since Marx was ultimately a non-monetarist. Of course in the Soviet Union the alleged proletarian dictatorship simply took over banking, avoided the introduction of 'labour vouchers' became corrupt and tyrannical and eventually some had more money than others (including dollar shops in Moscow), and you had to bribe an 'official' if you wanted a flat or a telephone etc. I really don't see how 'labour vouchers' would stop corruption any more than state Capitalism, since labour vouchers are still a form of money. Obviously in the early stages of revolution, some form of rationing would be necessary, leading to possible corruption among the rationers and their possible transition into a new police state which would have to be resisted.

Rationing in Capitalism through the use of 'money.'

In Capitalism of course the private Usuryists (loan sharks) are the 'rationers,' and this has led to a situation where something like 0.01% or less of the population are the rationers and the majority of the world starves and suffers extreme poverty, so this is 'extreme' corruption. We in the First World are mostly the beneficiaries of this system so we suffer less economically.


Marxist Statism. 'The state will wither away'

The 'contradiction:' if on one hand the police states of the armed violent monetarists (Capital=money or property that has a Capitalist value) can 'only' be overthrown by armed violent anti-monetarists, why then is it that it will not be necessary to overthrow the dictatorship of armed violent so called anti-monetarists? Realistically can you imagine Kim Jong Il's police state just 'withering away' into independent collectives? The Soviet Union did not 'wither away' into independent collectives, but into hardcore Capitalism and the rule of the bankers, pims and the mafia; Gorbachev is now a multi-millionaire (he was bribed); the state withered away into an elite of corrupt billionaires leaving the male proletariat often destitute and unemployed, and the women often fleeing economic hardship into a life a sex slavery in the brothels of Western Europe.

No, the state will not wither away. States will have to be eradicated.

Statists (tyrants) will have to be fought by armed violent revolutionaries, however in the age of nuclear guerrilla weapons where there exists a universal knowledge of practical physics, the anti-Statists should in the end always have the upper hand. The problem is not merely monetarism but statism (tyranny). There have been after all, non-monetarist systems which were simply 'slave societies' with a monarch, and though Marx ultimately believed in total non-monetarism, he had an unrealistic faith in the power of ‘temporal’ tyranny.

Materialism and non-spiritualism.

Dialectical Materialism is a 19th century pre-Einsteinian, pre-quantum physics position. Materialism in the philosophical sense is also a position of faith. Mass can be converted to Energy and Light, and it is by no means a fact that the ‘stuff’of the universe is mass (matter). Marxists insist on atheism, apart from some Liberation Theologians (Christian Communists) who accept Marxist economics and reject his atheism.

Marx's essential Communist beliefs (armed violent revolution and 'eventually' anti-monetarism and 'eventually' anti-statism) which all Anarchist Communists may sympathise with, Marx plagiarised from the Anarchist Communists anyway. Away with Marx; most young anti-Capitalists in Europe are now anti-Marxist Anarchists anyway; it is growing trend.

Ultimately in the aftermath of the inevitable forthcoming nuclear war, the Marxists, the Anarchists and even the Muslims may form ‘ad hoc’ alliances against the police / military / statists but in the end they are destined to clash.

The Anarchist Communist Kropotkin's three categories of Laws.

1: Laws to protect the government.

The definition of an Anarchist region is one where there would be no statists, thus there would be no need for laws to protect the tyrants and their mercenaries (their police state, military, tax collectors and assorted bureaucracy / useless eaters etc.).

2: Laws to protect private property.

Similarly with propertyism, one cannot be a propertyist unless one is militant and have mercenaries (police) to protect one's property. Since the masses will always in their hearts seek to disempower those who enslave them for the purposes of exploiting their labour, leaving the labour slaves impoverished at the expense of a few, and since private propertyism is a militant ideology, the propertyists would have to be eliminated, thus there would be no need to have laws to protect them.

3: Laws to protect the individual from harm (Natural Law).

This is simply common sense. There is no need to create written laws to this extent. This is as it would have been in the mythical Garden of Eden. For example in a world without religious, private property and statist laws, a mother will still demand ‘do not harm my children, do not enslave them, do not starve them, etc., etc., these are of course not the written laws of a police state, but never the less most mothers, unindoctrinated by religion and police statism would probably agree with them.

What is Authority (tyranny)?

The Anarchist (against the Archons / authority figures) Kropotkin once stated that he would never challenge the ‘authority’ of an engineer, since was not an engineer; he did not have that type of expertise and would rather leave bridge building and construction to the trained experts; an engineer is an expert in a certain type of science, not an Archon (tyrant) who claims to be an expert in enslaving people and ruling over them or an expert in God or religious morality

4: Sexual Laws

In addition to Kropotkin’s 3 types of law, we also have to consider the eradication of the millions of religious laws (I will not elaborate), and especially sexual laws; these are simply laws which produce an effective and miserable slave




Sex is the most powerful instinct in man. The politician and the priest have understood from the very beginning that sex is the most driving energy in man. It has to be curtailed, it has to be cut. If man is allowed total Freedom in sex, then there will be no possibility to dominate him. To make a slave out of him will be impossible.

Have you not seen it being done? When you want a bull to be yoked to a cart, what do you do? You castrate him, you destroy his sex energy. And have you seen the difference between a bull and an ox? What a difference! An ox is a poor phenomenon, a slave. A bull is a beauty; a bull is a glorious pheonomenon, a great splendor. See a bull walking, how he walks like an emperor! And see an ox pulling a cart.

The same has been done to man. The sex instinct has been curtailed, cut, crippled. Man does not exist as the bull now, he exists like the ox, and each man is pulling a thousand and one carts. Look and you will find behind you a thousand and one carts, and you are yoked to them.

Why can’t you yoke a bull? The bull is too powerful. If he sees a cow passing by, he will throw both you and the cart, and he will move to the cow! He will not bother a bit about who you are, and he will not listen. It will be impossible to control the bull. Sex energy is life energy; it is uncontrollable. And the politician and the priest are not interested in you, they are interested in channeling your energy into other directions. So there is a certain Mechanism behind it--it has to be understood.

Sex repression, tabooing sex, is the very foundation of human slavery. Man cannot be free unless sex is free. Man cannot be really free unless his sex energy is allowed natural growth.

These are the five tricks through which man has been turned into a slave, into an ugly phenomenon, a cripple.

The first is:
Keep man as weak as possible if you want to dominate him. If the priest wants to dominate you or the politician wants to dominate you, you have to be kept as weak as possible. And the best way to keep a man weak is not to give love total freedom. Love is nourishment..."

"...Second:
Keep man as ignorant and deluded as possible so that he can easily be deceived..."

"...The third secret:
Keep man as frightened as possible. And the sure way is not to allow him love, because love destroys fear--’love casteth out fear.’ When you are not in love you become more interested in security, in safety. When you are in love you are more interested in adventure, in exploration...."

"...The Fourth:
Keep man as miserable as possible--because a miserable man is confused, a miserable man has no self-worth, a miserable man is self-condemnatory, a miserable man feels that he must have done something wrong. A miserable man has no grounding--you can push him from here and there, he can be turned into driftwood very easily. And a miserable man is always ready to be commanded, to be ordered, to be disciplined, because he knows ’On my own I am simply miserable. Maybe someody else can discipline my life.’ He is a ready victim."

"And the fifth:
Keep men as alienated from each other as possible, so that they cannot band together for some purpose of which the priest and the politician may not approve. Keep people separate from each other. Don’t allow them too much intimacy. When people are separate, lonely, alienated from each other, they cannot band together. And there are a thousand and one tricks to keep them apart.

For example, if you are holding the hand of a man--you are a man and you are holding the hand of a man and walking down the road, singing--you will feel guilty because people will start looking at you. Are you gay, homosexual or something? Two men are not allowed to be happy together. They are condemned as homosexuals. Fear arises. If your friend comes and takes your hand in his hand, you look around: ’Is somebody looking or not?’ And you are just in a hurry to drop the hand..." Osho


Lucifer
Fire plague and poisoned waters

www.myspace.com/luciferhorus



Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the Law."
—AL. I. 40.
"thou hast no right but to do thy will. Do that, and no
other shall say nay." —AL. I. 42–3.
"Every man and every woman is a star." —AL. I. 3.
There is no god but man.
..>..>
..> 1. Man has the right to live by his own law—to live in the way that he wills to do:to work as he will:to play as he will:to rest as he will:to die when and how he will.
2. Man has the right to eat what he will:to drink what he will:to dwell where he will:to move as he will on the face of the earth.
3. Man has the right to think what he will:to speak what he will:to write what he will:to draw, paint, carve, etch, mould, build as he will:to dress as he will.
4. Man has the right to love as he will:—"take your fill and will of love as ye will,when, where, and with whom ye will." —AL. I. 51.
5. Man has the right to kill those who would thwart these rights...>

"Love is the law, love under will." —AL. I. 57

____________________________



'The revolution will have to be (Anarchist) Communist or it will be drowned in blood and will have to begin all over again'


'Either the State forever, crushing individual and local life, taking over in all fields of human activity, bringing with it its wars and its domestic struggles for power, its palace revolutions which only replace one tyrant with another.....Or the destruction of all states and new life starting again in thousands of centres on the principle that the lively initiative of the individual and groups of that Free Arrangement The choice lies with you'.Kropotkin, 'Conquest of Bread'

On the Pan-German banner is written: Retention and strengthening of the State at any cost. On our banner, the social-revolutionary banner, on the contrary, are inscribed, in fiery and bloody letters: the destruction of all States, the annihilation of bourgeois civilization, free and spontaneous organization from below upward, by means of free associations, the organization of the unbridled rabble of toilers, of all emancipated humanity, and the creation of a new universally human world....Bakunin

ZEITGEIST 2:ADDENDUM The Money System

http://video.google.com/googleplayer.swf?docid=7065205277695921912&hl=en&fs=true


Addendum

Alternatives to Capitalism.


1: Labour Theory of Value.

There are fundamentalist Marxists who wish to see an allegedly temporary government introduce a form of rationing termed ’labour vouchers.’ Marx equated labour hours with value and went to great lengths calculating how much labour would go into a particular machine or a commodity; this became it’s calculatable ’value.’ Clearly, in ideal conditions you would not swap a kilo of marijuana for a kilo of potatoes (some people might if they were starving, but not in ideal conditions); neither would you swap a kilo of gold for a kilo of marijuana (well ’I’ certainly would if I had an abundance of gold, but not in ’ideal conditions).


2: Sharing and Bartering

Bartering certainly occurs on a primitive scale among farmers in the Somerset countryside where I live. Favours are exchanged and there is mutual co-operation.
I am not sure how many chickens you could get for a pig, or how many pigs for a horse, but it is quite an effective system on a primitive level. Two farmers might have two different machines that each wants to use occasionally, so they share.

This might work out quite well among agriculturalists sharing potatoes for carrots, but for other items, such a system would be much less straightforward.

Les us say you wish to buy a tractor or a combine harvester. You would have to pay the tractor dealer with something with which he could pay the manufacturer for the tractor, and this would have to be something with which the manufacturer would be able to pay his electricity bills, his workers in wages etc.

So at this point it all sounds very messy and quite unrealistic.

3: Anarcho-Capitalism.

So here we are again back to Anarcho-Capitalism.

Here there are no government regulations. No banking regulations. No banking licences. Anyone could theoretically start their own loan sharking institution and issue currency. It seems rather confusing.

In addition, there would still be private property, rich and poor, land owners and the landless and homeless. There would be those who would have to become labour slaves for food and those who would be labour masters and demand labour slavery in return for some form of Capital which could be exchanged for food.

But ultimately the question still has to be asked, how would a particular currency in a world of millions of currencies be considered valuable?

Capital as ’Promissary Notes’ for ’anything.’

A farmer in Texas who issues currency would have to state on the currency what the paper I.O.U. is exchangable for. His currency might state ’I promise to pay the bearer a ton of potatoes, ’ or a ’ton of beef’ or its equivalent in labour hours. This system is of course open to fraud, since he could simply write out more I.O.U’s that he is capable of producing. Further if a farmer in New York was offered this I.O.U, it would be a complex matter since he would have to ensure that the farmer in Texas was capable of making good his promissary notes. Further all persons and companies who supplied the farmer with electricity, phone, computers, tractors, labour would have to go through the same process and take the same risk of ending up with a ton of rotting potatoes dumped on their premises. It is a rather messy and impractical solution which I think most farmers and their suppliers would simply laugh at.

Capital as Precious metal promissary notes.

The current system we have is one where only a select few elite bankers can issue such promissary notes; originally they were backed by precious metals, but even this original system was subject to fraud and the creation of ’reserve banking, ’ where only a small percentage of the precious metals were held in reserve.

There are elite banks and non-elite banks. Today elite banks do not work on a reserve system, they simply issue currency at the touch of a computer mouse. Thus have the Capitalists taken over the world though ’confidence (a ’con’) in their paper and credit.

The Anarcho-Capitalist counterproposal to such a confidence trick by a few elite bankers would seem to lead to a world where there were millions of such confusing confidence tricks.

In summary, Anarcho-Communism is a rejection of forms of bartering, token-ism, Capitalism in any form or labour vouchers; it is quite simply about collectives sharing resources, much as it was in the early days of the Israeli kibbutz.

Love and Light

Lucifer
http://www.luciferia.tv/animation/A.gif

Fire, plague and poisoned waters.



___________

"Every man and every woman is a star." That is to say, every human being is intrinsically an independent individual with his own proper character and proper motion.

Every man and every woman has a course, depending partly on the self, and partly on the environment which is natural and necessary for each. Anyone who is forced from his own course, either through not understanding himself, or through external opposition, comes into conflict with the order of the Universe, and suffers accordingly. Illustration: A man may think it his duty to act in a certain way, through having made a fancy picture of himself, instead of investigating his actual nature. For example, a woman may make herself miserable for life by thinking that she prefers love to social consideration, or "vice versa". One woman may stay with an unsympathetic husband when she would really be happy in an attic with a lover, while another may fool herself into a romantic elopement when her only true pleasures are those of presiding at fashionable functions. …….
A Man whose conscious will is at odds with his True Will is wasting his strength. He cannot hope to influence his environment efficiently. Illustration: When Civil War rages in a nation, it is in no condition to undertake the invasion of other countries….A man who is doing this True Will has the inertia of the Universe to assist him. Illustration: The first principle of success in evolution is that the individual should be true to his own nature, and at the same time adapt himself to his environment….. Man is ignorant of the nature of his own being and powers. Even his idea of his limitations is based on experience of the past, and every step in his progress extends his empire. There is therefore no reason to assign theoretical limits to what he may be, or to what he may do…. The question of Magick is a question of discovering and employing hitherto unknown forces in nature. We know that they exist, and we cannot doubt the possibility of mental or physical instruments capable of bringing us into relation with them.

Aleister Crowley
Magick In Theory And Practice

________________

Nb., I should point out that Mao, Crowley and Osho (cited in the above essay) were not Anarchists: I merely cite points of agreement.

[thelonious]

Really good... But, what's satirical about this part? :confused:

It's satirical because the accusations are true concerning North Korea, and not the United States.

[flyermay]

It's satirical because the accusations are true concerning North Korea, and not the United States.

I'm not sure about North Korea, but it is certainly quite an accurate description of the US and Bush.

[thelonious]

I'm not sure about North Korea, but it is certainly quite an accurate description of the US and Bush.

You're much too intelligent to say such a completely ignorant thing.

CIA death squads on US streets? Bush the worst criminal in history?

Gimme a break.

[flyermay]

You're much too intelligent to say such a completely ignorant thing.

CIA death squads on US streets? Bush the worst criminal in history?

Gimme a break.

The is no doubt that Bush (and Co.) need to be judged and convicted for what they've done; whether or not it he was the worst criminal in history.

And about the the death squads, you (and we) are definitely on our way...

[thelonious]

The is no doubt that Bush (and Co.) need to be judged and convicted for what they've done; whether or not it he was the worst criminal in history.

I think that George W. Bush was a sorry excuse for a leader, an immoral opportunist, and a general all-around buffoon.

As for being a criminal, he may be. I believe that he authorized the use of torture for POW's, and probably intentioanlly lied to the American public concerning his reasons for invading Iraq. For this, he should be held accountable.

However, on the flip side, Saddam Hussein should also have been held accountable for his crimes, and it's a good thing he's currently pushing up daisies.


And about the the death squads, you (and we) are definitely on our way...

We certainly will be if the Communists have their way.

[kasalt]

I'm not sure about North Korea

You're much too intelligent to say such a completely ignorant thing.

Of course he is; he just doesn't want to admit it because he knows it undermines his argument.

I'm sure that if he were to suddenly find himself in North Korea right now, he would be happy about it. "North Korea? Nothing to complain about there!" The "dear leader"? He probably secretly loves the guy.

[flyermay]

I think that George W. Bush was a sorry excuse for a leader, an immoral opportunist, and a general all-around buffoon.

So, what is Obama doing to take the US out of fascism; just "thinking" about closing Guantanamo and moving troops from one middle east country to another?

I'm sure that if he were to suddenly find himself in North Korea right now, he would be happy about it. "North Korea? Nothing to complain about there!" The "dear leader"? He probably secretly loves the guy.

The difference between you two and me is that I hate as much both the bastards calling themselves communists in Korea as their counterparts here affirming to be democrats.

You can argue as much as you want about how good one system is and how bad the other is; but at the end it really makes no difference. You just fail to understand something pretty simple, which I’ve been trying to tell you since the beginning: that the “democracy” and the “communism” we see around the world are just an illusion; a huge lie that we were told since we were born and that we grew up to believe. But the truth is that: neither one half the world lives under a “democracy”, nor the other half under “communism”; as both systems are ruled by an elite of corrupt and greedy hypocrites, that wouldn't hesitate to kill anyone who gets in their way.

The sooner people wake up, stop repeating both side’s propaganda like a mantra, start caring about what their “dear leaders” do in their name and with their taxes, and stop following and defending them with a blind faith for the sake of patriotism, the better we would all be.

[kasalt]

The difference between you two and me is that I hate as much both the bastards calling themselves communists in Korea as their counterparts here affirming to be democrats.

Hold on there, mate. Didn't you just get through telling us:

I'm not sure about North Korea

All of a sudden you know enough about the communists in North Korea to call them "bastards"? What's going on here? If you really hate the communists in Korea "as much as their counterparts here affirming to be democrats", why didn't you just say so in the first place, instead of feigning ignorance about it?

[flyermay]

Hold on there, mate. Didn't you just get through telling us:



All of a sudden you know enough about the communists in North Korea to call them "bastards"? What's going on here? If you really hate the communists in Korea "as much as their counterparts here affirming to be democrats", why didn't you just say so in the first place, instead of feigning ignorance about it?

I just saw on TV about their missiles tests and that he claims to be a communist, but got into power through a birth right (from his dad), which he will pass on his death (to his son). That's all I know about N. Korea, which is enough to judge their so called "communism".

Oh, and the only reason you think I'm defeding communists is simply because you didn't read the whole discussion with Thelonious.

Either way, isn't it obvious that what I'm doing is attacking our loved "democracy"?

[thelonious]

So, what is Obama doing to take the US out of fascism

I'm not even sure if you're joking, or if you just don't know what Fascism is. If you study the history of Fascism, and how Fascism operates both politically and economically, it is painfully obvious that the United States is not Fascist in either form.

just "thinking" about closing Guantanamo and moving troops from one middle east country to another?

I disapprove of closing Guantanamo, but I also disapprove of the the way the Bush administration handled it. The inmates should be formally charged and tried, and no torture used in accordance with both US and international law.

The President of the United States has a duty to protect the country he serves. If there is a legitimate reason to place troops in a middle eastern country, or elsewhere, I fully support him.

that the “democracy” and the “communism” we see around the world are just an illusion; a huge lie that we were told since we were born and that we grew up to believe.

Your statement is not true. Just because someone you don't like gets elected doesn't mean democracy is an illusion; it just means that most voters disagree with you.

Furthermore, anyone who cannot see the difference between a communist and democratic nation is being intentionally blind, and burying their heads in the sand. If you were in a communist nation, you would not even be allowed to post your thoughts on this Internet forum. To pretend there is no difference is not honest.

[luciferhorus]

And about the the death squads, you (and we) are definitely on our way...



We certainly will be if the Communists have their way.


http://www.therealcuba.com/che_01R.JPG

"Crazy with fury I will stain my rifle red while slaughtering any enemy that falls in my hands! My nostrils dilate while savoring the acrid odor of gunpowder and blood. With the deaths of my enemies I prepare my being for the sacred fight and join the triumphant proletariat with a bestial howl!"
Che Guevara



Fair Play. The Art of War.

Capitalist Revolution demands blood. The current World Capitalist Revolution is still shedding blood; all militant combatants who resist the Capitalists are executed without trial; the Anglo-American state terrorists train their soldiers to kill; not to play chess; this is the nature of war.

The future revolutions against Capitalism will demand blood. All militant combatants who resist Communist revolution must be and shall be executed without trial; this is the nature of war

The point of war is not endless martyrdom, but the total defeat of the enemy; victory is the point of War.

https://trcs.wikispaces.com/file/view/ernesto_che_guevara1.jpg

"Hatred as an element of struggle; unbending hatred for the enemy, which pushes a human being beyond his natural limitations, making him into an effective, violent, selective, and cold-blooded killing machine. This is
what our soldiers must become … " Che Guevara

http://themustardseed.files.wordpress.com/2008/12/zapatista-babe.jpg

Quantitative and 'Moral'

Quantitative.

http://i24.photobucket.com/albums/c49/IgnoranceIsntbliss/Biohazard/Depleted-Uranium.jpg

There is no doubt that victims of Capitalist revolution throughout history quantitatively exceed any victims of Communist revolution; to this we must add the millions who die each year (mostly women and children) from the effects of poverty in a world where food is sold for Capital and where many have no Capital. In addition to this quantifiable holocaust, there is the unquantifiable suffering of a billion people who are constantly hungry and the 200 million on the verge of starvation, again the majority of which are women and children.

http://maramenasyka.files.wordpress.com/2007/01/starving_baby.jpg

Moral.

http://www.photogenx.net/images/publish/voice_booklet/b2.jpg

A moral judgement is simply a subjective discernment of good and evil. The Capitalist believes that it is moral (i.e., good) to enslave humanity for the benefit of those at the top of the Capitalist food chain, and that a world of universal economic equality is immoral (i.e., evil), just as the slavemaster believes that it is moral (i.e., good) to enslave his slaves for his own benefit and that to free the slaves would be immoral (i.e., evil), since he would be denied his private property which he has legally purchased (i.e., his slaves, or their labour).

http://www.buckfush.com/images/North_Korean_Army_Officers.jpg

North Korea

http://farm1.static.flickr.com/87/267755775_63bbf24733_o.jpg

Few Communists would wish to live in the North Korean dictatorship; on the contrary they seek to create Communist paradise and the abundance of agriculture; similarly if I suggest to a Capitalist that since they believe in Capitalism so passionately, that they should sell their mother to a Cambodian brothel and go and live in a shanty town outside Sao Paulo, or a tower block in the South Bronx, or perhaps to go and fight Muslims in Afghanistan as an unpaid volunteer, the Capitalist will not comply, since the Capitalist wishes to live in Capitalist paradise as an economic slavemaster in the First World, not a slave in the Third World or even in the First World, just as the proponent of slavery does not wish to be a slave but rather a slavemaster, and generally they do not wish to sacrifice their own lives (unless paid as mercenaries) to expand Capitalist revolution, but rather to sacrifice the lives of others.

http://cache.daylife.com/imageserve/03ZEf9Sgbs7yq/610x.jpg

Genocide and the Art of War.

Militant evangelical Capitalism is a genocidal ideology. The Capitalist is constantly at war in their imperial colonies.

Militant evangelical Communism is a genocidal ideology which seeks to resist militant Capitalism. The Communist is constantly at war and views the world as being a world at war.

In war it is entirely appropriate to execute all enemies, all allies of one's enemies and to seek to destroy the economic command and control centres of one's enemy; this is how the Capitalists wage war; this is how the Communists must wage war. In the nuclear age this will require a moral commitment to genocidal militancy far greater than has ever been expected in the past, just as it is with the current poisoning of Iraq and Afghanistan with depleted uranium.

You can kill ten of our men for every one we kill of yours. But even at those odds, you will lose and we will win." Ho Chi Mihn

Ultimately, the point of revolutionary war is the total extermination of all militant Capitalists and allies of the Capitalist system who resist revolution.

It will simply do no good to state 'Oh the Communists wish to kill millions of people,' since that is entirely the point of revolutionary war

By the term 'Capitalist' I do not refer to people who merely live in the Capitalist system and are slaves of Capital, since many Communists in Europe are in this position, just as there are citizens in Cuba who wish to live as Capitalist slave masters (but incidentally who would never wish to emigrate to the slums of Johannesburg, or volunteer to be a sex slave in Cambodian brothel).

The critcisms of a cultist.

Thelonious: I think that George W. Bush was a sorry excuse for a leader, an immoral opportunist, and a general all-around buffoon.

As for being a criminal, he may be. I believe that he authorized the use of torture for POW's, and probably intentioanlly lied to the American public concerning his reasons for invading Iraq. For this, he should be held accountable.

However, on the flip side, Saddam Hussein should also have been held accountable for his crimes,

Saddam was an Anglo-American collaborator and ally for many years; when he invaded Iraq and waged war against Iraq, he was armed to the hilt by the Anglo-European state terrorists and arms' manufacturers for his war which cost the lives of 2 million Iranians; he was still an ally of Western capitalism when we was committing genocide against his own population including the Iraqi Communists, Kurds and any political opponents; it was only when he turned against his former masters that he became a problem.

http://www.mod.uk/NR/rdonlyres/B9305F0F-791A-4CB7-AEDC-B6E2D9433D39/0/DukeOfKentInIraq.JPG
Above: Masonic Grand Master, the Duke of Kent.

You may raise criticisms of Bush, but you are are member of a regular masonic lodge whose international Grand Master is Fieldmarshal, the Duke of Windsor, whose cousin Elizabeth is head of state and head of the army over here and it was entirely her decision to commit her army to the current war and nothing to do with her parliament who were denied the privelege of voting on whether to go to war; when you are in a cult with a Grand Master who offers obedience to the head of the army, your criticisms are essentially impotent.

Further since the Christian state terrorists believe that when they die, they end up in Capitalist heaven in the afterlife with their masters, and the Masons believe that they end up in the 'Grand Lodge in the afterlife,' why complain about any future martyrs of the god of Capital and religious hypocrisy; surely their Capitalist god will reward them in eternity; these subhuman Capitalist vermin are merely being dispatched to their Final Destination which they so long for anyway; the Communists and enemies of the Capitalist and military elites of future revolution wil simply be doing these devotees of Capital a favour, and at the same time doing the population of humanity a favour by culling such economic parasites and useless eaters.


LL.

Lux
Fire, plague and poisoned waters.
No mercy on they who deserve none

[flyermay]

I'm not even sure if you're joking, or if you just don't know what Fascism is. If you study the history of Fascism, and how Fascism operates both politically and economically, it is painfully obvious that the United States is not Fascist in either form.

Are you joking just because you thought I was joking?

I heard that in America you don’t care much about what they think of you in other countries. Besides, you also have a weird idea of what communism is, so I’m wondering if you think that fascism is what your government told you about Hitler (which, by the way, was funded through Prescott Sheldon Bush; former US senator, grandfather to former US president G. W. Bush, and also father to former US president G. H. W. Bush).

But just to show you a little example:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/f/f7/Italian_Fascist_flag_1930s-1940s.svg/150px-Italian_Fascist_flag_1930s-1940s.svg.png
Italian fascist flag with fasces on the middle

http://www.freedomfightersforamerica.com/yahoo_site_admin/assets/images/congress_fasces.195230645_std.jpg
US Congress podium with fasces on each side

http://aftermathnews.files.wordpress.com/2007/11/130105fasces3.jpg
Nazi stamp with fasces on the left

http://aftermathnews.files.wordpress.com/2008/01/bush_speech_fasces.jpg
G.W Bush in the US Congress

http://www.lewrockwell.com/long/130105fasces11.jpg
Back of a US silver dime with a fasces on the middle

http://www.jrguerra.com/images/130105fasces2.jpg
President Lincoln sitting on a throne with two fasces on each side

But even if you missed all those ‘fasces’ around, you surely noticed, or heard in the news, of the following changes (characteristic of every fascist nation) introduced by Bush and maintained in full by Obama until this day:

Homeland (Ger. ‘Heimatland’) security: The patriot act
Secret prisons and torture centres around the world (other concentration camps like Guantanamo)
Development of paramilitary forces (employing private security companies of mercenaries like Blackwater)
Surveillance of ordinary citizens (and adding innocents to suspect's lists)
Infiltration of citizen’s groups
Detention and release of innocent citizens (as a form of scare tactic)
Targeting key individuals (to silence them)
Restriction of the press
Recasting criticism as espionage, and dissent as treason
Subversion of the rule of law (disregarding congress and replacing US attorneys at convenience)


And to this list I have to add from the top of my head, though they existed previous to Bush and Obama:

The death penalty
Manipulation of the electoral system
Brutal repression by police forces (even on peaceful protesters)
Constant economic and political expansion


What do you think is missing from those lists to make you fully qualify as fascists: a clear statement from your own government admitting it, or maybe real CIA death squads on full daylight?

I disapprove of closing Guantanamo, but I also disapprove of the the way the Bush administration handled it. The inmates should be formally charged and tried, and no torture used in accordance with both US and international law.

So, let me repeat what you are saying: “you disapprove of closing Guantanamo”? You approve having a hidden (unaccountable under the US law) prison on foreign soil for the sole purpose of kidnapping innocent people? (Innocent, in any developed country as in: “innocent until proven otherwise” –I have to add that to the list above for future posts).

Have you gone mad? You know what I’m starting to think, that you either work for the US government, or serve in the armed forces (like Marpat).

The President of the United States has a duty to protect the country he serves. If there is a legitimate reason to place troops in a middle eastern country, or elsewhere, I fully support him.

Do you really want to go through the embarrassment of me describing in public to you the reasons and the circumstances surrounding the deployment of US troops on the Middle East? Take your pick; I can describe any of the two versions, they are equally embarrassing:

The weapons of mass destruction
Taking “democracy” and “freedom” to the Middle East


Your statement is not true. Just because someone you don't like gets elected doesn't mean democracy is an illusion; it just means that most voters disagree with you.

You really have a weird concept of what “democracy” means too, which explains why you still think we live in such a system.

I’m really sorry for bringing down the fairy tale, but:

First, we live in a one party system with two possible real choices
Second, neither of those possible choices serve nor represent you or me, but those who have funded and supported their expensive campaigns
Third, if you think that you have an equal chance of accessing power, you are up for a big surprise (though I don’t think you would be that naïve).
And fourth, what you call a democracy is no more than an “elitist republic”.


And if you are interested: I will vote for the first time once I find a party that is not formed by sales & marketing professional, that tell you all you want to hear during their campaign, but that always end up forgetting about their promises in favour of pushing their own particular agendas and defending their (and their beneficiaries’) interests.

Furthermore, anyone who cannot see the difference between a communist and democratic nation is being intentionally blind, and burying their heads in the sand. If you were in a communist nation, you would not even be allowed to post your thoughts on this Internet forum. To pretend there is no difference is not honest.

That depends on what you call “communism” and “democracy”… (as explained in previous posts).

[kasalt]

I just saw on TV about their missiles tests and that he claims to be a communist, but got into power through a birth right (from his dad), which he will pass on his death (to his son). That's all I know about N. Korea, which is enough to judge their so called "communism".

If that's the only reason why you have a beef with N. Korea, then...let's just say you have a lot to learn about N. Korea. A whole lot.

[flyermay]

If that's the only reason why you have a beef with N. Korea, then...let's just say you have a lot to learn about N. Korea. A whole lot.

Well, if you include the missiles in my beef, I have to say that I'm fine with the fact that they are developing nuclear weapons. Unfortunately we all did it in the past (and still have them), therefore forcing others to take the same steps.

You know, nobody wants to end up like Iraq and Afganistan: free and democratic US style (it's understandable).

[flyermay]

But don't worry guys; a nuclear holocaust will not be necessary: our corrupt and decadent system is just about to implode from the inside out.

As every great civilization in history, we also reached our peak and now we face a steep downfall.

By the way, I placing my bets somewhere in Asia for the next big one.

[thelonious]

I heard that in America you don’t care much about what they think of you in other countries.

That wholly depends on the individual situation.

Besides, you also have a weird idea of what communism is

My "weird idea" of Communism comes from (a) the writings of prominent Communists, (b) the actions of prominent Communists. I've made absolutely no claim about Communism that cannot be easily supported by facts.

so I’m wondering if you think that fascism is what your government told you about Hitler

You think that the United States is Fascist, which is woefully incorrect.

Fascists and Communists share many traits, not the least of which is hatred for liberal democracies. The USA being a liberal democracy, it is a target of criticism for both Fascists *and* Communists, both of whom constantly rant against the evils of capitalism while praising totalitarian society.


So, let me repeat what you are saying: “you disapprove of closing Guantanamo”? You approve having a hidden (unaccountable under the US law) prison on foreign soil for the sole purpose of kidnapping innocent people? (Innocent, in any developed country as in: “innocent until proven otherwise” –I have to add that to the list above for future posts).

Guantanamo Bay is US soil.

Beyond that, you have purposely skewed my words, since I stated matter-of-factly that the prisoners there should be charged, tried, and dealt with humanely and in accordance with international law.


Do you really want to go through the embarrassment of me describing in public to you the reasons and the circumstances surrounding the deployment of US troops on the Middle East?

I'm not embarrassed in the least. I disapproved of the Iraq invasion, but have always approved covert operations to assist Iraqi dissidents in overthrowing the butcher Saddam Hussein.

I approve of the Afghan operation, and the complete annhilation of Islamic terrorists, who are not really "Islamic" at all, but are power grabs by wealthy middle easterners who brainwash kids into doing their dirty work for them.




I’m really sorry for bringing down the fairy tale

Then why promote so many?

[flyermay]

That wholly depends on the individual situation.

Well, believe me: there will be no French chicks waiting for your troops this time -naively thinking that you are the good guys; instead, abroad they will have to face the bombs and bullets of those who don’t want to surrender to your imperialist expansion, and at home the stones and insults of those who are ashamed of their own neighbours.

You think that the United States is Fascist, which is woefully incorrect.

Repeating it won’t make it true (thought our governments and the media thinks so). You fail to understand that there are many levels of fascism, and your government has definitely crossed the line into fascism; as proven by their actions.

I will only believe your government is not fascist once you prove (with facts) that all those characteristic of fascist regimes listed above can coexist in a liberal society.

Guantanamo Bay is US soil.

Then I guess you won’t have any problem naming the state to which it belongs… Miami, perhaps?

What about these other well know concentration camps and torture centres, are they also US soil?

1 in Afghanistan
2 in Pakistan
1 in island of Diego Garcia (Indian Ocean)
1 in Jordan

Plus all these suspected concentration camps and torture centres, as tracked by CIA secret flights (your death squads, by the way)

http://newsimg.bbc.co.uk/media/images/41022000/gif/_41022084_cia_world_map416.gif

Beyond that, you have purposely skewed my words, since I stated matter-of-factly that the prisoners there should be charged, tried, and dealt with humanely and in accordance with international law.

But that is absolutely no excuse to approve Guantanamo being operative. You might have not realised this, but the sole purpose of Guantanamo is to avoid US laws. Therefore, what’s the point on kidnapping all these innocent men in Guantanamo if they were going to be subject to international law? Exactly: none.

I approve of the Afghan operation, and the complete annhilation of Islamic terrorists, who are not really "Islamic" at all, but are power grabs by wealthy middle easterners who brainwash kids into doing their dirty work for them.

No trial, no jury, no conviction, not even death penalty: just simple annihilation… Thank god you despise butchers and are against death squads.

I'm not embarrassed in the least. I disapproved of the Iraq invasion, but have always approved covert operations to assist Iraqi dissidents in overthrowing the butcher Saddam Hussein.

Well, it seems that I completely misjudged you: for what you said in previous posts I thought you would be one of the millions embarrassed western citizens, as I am, to have such governments representing us.

So, I guess you would also approve operations against both Bush butchers??? It is no secret that their hands (individually) are stained with far more blood from women and children than Saddam’s.

This is just ridiculous, the US teaching the world how they should live and embrace their corrupt system and decadent double-morals. Have you all gone mad???

Then why promote so many?

The reason is obvious: the fight against fascism didn’t finish with Hitler, Mussolini and Franco; at the contrary, all the bastards left from the mid ranks are well known to have adopted a more popular approach towards the public, but to keep on pushing their true ideals (which many finally start to realise).

My "weird idea" of Communism comes from (a) the writings of prominent Communists, (b) the actions of prominent Communists. I've made absolutely no claim about Communism that cannot be easily supported by facts.

Fascists and Communists share many traits, not the least of which is hatred for liberal democracies. The USA being a liberal democracy, it is a target of criticism for both Fascists *and* Communists, both of whom constantly rant against the evils of capitalism while praising totalitarian society.

There is no “communism” or “democracy” without a truly popular government. Until you realise this simple fact you will never understand what those words really mean (no matter how many ‘prominent writers’ tell you the contraty, according to their own agendas).

In the other hand, fascism is always based on a system where the few govern the many at their will.

[thelonious]

Then I guess you won’t have any problem naming the state to which it belongs… Miami, perhaps?

The United States has territories outside of its 50 states (Puerto Rico, for example). Guantanamo Bay is one such territory.


But that is absolutely no excuse to approve Guantanamo being operative. You might have not realised this, but the sole purpose of Guantanamo is to avoid US laws. Therefore, what’s the point on kidnapping all these innocent men in Guantanamo if they were going to be subject to international law?

To begin with, most of the "innocent men" were "kidnapped" after having surrendered after battle. These, according to international law, should be classified as prisoners of war.

Those arrested in raids should be charged and tried as criminals. There is no reason to avoid US laws. That was a Bush decision, not an Obama one.


Well, it seems that I completely misjudged you: for what you said in previous posts I thought you would be one of the millions embarrassed western citizens, as I am, to have such governments representing us.

Then why not move to Yemen, or North Korea? If you think you have it so bad here, why stick around?

It's because you know as well as I do that what you're saying here is absurd. The very fact that you *can* leave freely, and that you *can* come on the Internet and criticize your government, proves conclusively that you don't live in a fascist state, regardless how much you want to claim otherwise.

So, I guess you would also approve operations against both Bush butchers??? It is no secret that their hands (individually) are stained with far more blood from women and children than Saddam’s.

Ridiculous. Saddam Hussein attempted ethnic cleansing on the Kurds, launching all-out chemical attacks on them. These, by the way, were his own citizens. Perhaps you missed all that while spending your time complaining about folks like Blair and Bush, I don't know.

[flyermay]

To begin with, most of the "innocent men" were "kidnapped" after having surrendered after battle. These, according to international law, should be classified as prisoners of war.

Those arrested in raids should be charged and tried as criminals. There is no reason to avoid US laws. That was a Bush decision, not an Obama one.

To start with, most of the kidnapped innocents in Guantanamo were sold by the local warlords to profit from the substantial CIA rewards (source: MSNBC (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/8049868/)).

Second, even those few who were kidnapped after having surrendered in battle, were undoubtedly defending their homes, families and land. So… prisoners of war: yes, but also heroes of the liberation front and of the fight against your corrupt and greedy imperialist expansion.

Please, don’t even try it with me; I know all your excuses and justifications from memory (I've been hearing them since I was born).

And by the way, Obama continues Bush’s foreign and domestic policies (as he is told to do).

Then why not move to Yemen, or North Korea? If you think you have it so bad here, why stick around?

I will start with the communists as soon as I finish with the fascists at home (oh sorry, "liberal democrats", so that you understand me). As you see, there's far more work than I can chew on; thank God a superstart like Icke is helping us.

It's because you know as well as I do that what you're saying here is absurd. The very fact that you *can* leave freely, and that you *can* come on the Internet and criticize your government, proves conclusively that you don't live in a fascist state, regardless how much you want to claim otherwise.

Our governments surely have a huge file with all our posts and details, just waiting until they can pass the next bunch of fascist laws in the agenda and end with all criticism once and for all.

For now, allow me to point out various common forms of repressing that particular freedom, that you always mention, from the American human rights campaigners’ list (which you obviously didn’t even look at):

Surveillance of ordinary citizens (and adding innocents to suspect's lists)
Infiltration of pacific citizen’s groups
Detention and release of innocent citizens (as a form of scare tactic)
Targeting key individuals (to silence them)
Restriction of the press
Recasting criticism as espionage, and dissent as treason

So please, be careful with what you say; the big brother is watching us (hey, where is the smillie with the middle finger up?).

Ridiculous. Saddam Hussein attempted ethnic cleansing on the Kurds, launching all-out chemical attacks on them. These, by the way, were his own citizens. Perhaps you missed all that while spending your time complaining about folks like Blair and Bush, I don't know.

Please... Saddam is just a beginner compared to his mentors: the Bushes (or should I say “Butchers”? What about the systematic genocide of all those Islamic men, women and children that do not bend over to the new Empire.

Oh, I forgot, the double-moral again:

Chemical attacks = BAD
Depleted uranium, cluster bombs and starving/poisoning the enemy to death = GOOD


I know, I know, you only did it for their own good, so that they can enjoy freedom, democracy and be good cooperative sheep. Really, it sounds so good that I’m also starting to believe it… where can I get some of that depleted uranium to go and liberate the Middle East*.

*disclaimer: big brother should log in my profile that this comment is pure sarcasm, and that I DO NOT wish to obtain depleted uranium, nor to liberate (US style) the Middle East.

[kasalt]

thank God a superstart like Icke is helping us...

For now, allow me to point out various common forms of repressing that particular freedom, that you always mention, from the American human rights campaigners’ list (which you obviously didn’t even look at):

Surveillance of ordinary citizens (and adding innocents to suspect's lists)
Infiltration of pacific citizen’s groups
Detention and release of innocent citizens (as a form of scare tactic)
Targeting key individuals (to silence them)
Restriction of the press
Recasting criticism as espionage, and dissent as treason



As I've told you before, that list is nothing in comparison to anything any communist government has perpetrated on its own citizens, not to mention anyone else it could get a hold of.

The problem that I have with both you and Lux is that you both strike me as blatantly hypocritical and two-faced, disingenuous to the point of dishonesty. You feign ignorance of historical and present-day communist atrocities and then, when you cannot feign ignorance of them because they are too well-known, you then profess "I'm not a Maoist, I'm not a totalitarian Communist, I'm not a Marxist...I have my criticisms of those people, blah blah blah..."

And yet, right here on this very thread, Lux posted this:

I wil always love Mao...the aforementioned Communists are possibly my greatest mentors, my love and my inspiration to whom my eternal soul is bound...I worry that the spirit of Mao shall always love me, as I love him...

Methinks you doth not protest enough.

One can only wonder what you both must think of Mao's Cultural Revolution (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cultural_Revolution#Persecution), or since his death, his government's Tiananmen Square Massacre of peaceful pro-democracy students (http://images.google.com/images?hl=en&ie=UTF-8&q=tiananmen%20square%20massacre&sa=N&tab=wi&um=1), or the Chinese government's censorship of the internet...speaking of which, you both have praise for Icke but Icke's website is banned in China. Mao surely would have approved of all of those things.

Lux, you condemn what you call "the genocide of the capitalists" and then you call for a genocide of your own that by your own reckoning will leave few people left alive in the world. I can hardly call your plan a viable alternative.

I think John Lennon, a leftist of no ill repute, said it best when he wrote:

You say you want a revolution
Well, you know
We all want to change the world
You tell me that it's evolution
Well, you know
We all want to change the world
But when you talk about destruction
Don't you know that you can count me out
Don't you know it's gonna be all right
all right, all right

You say you got a real solution
Well, you know
We'd all love to see the plan
You ask me for a contribution
Well, you know
We're all doing what we can
But if you want money
for people with minds that hate
Well all I can tell is brother you'll have to wait
Don't you know it's gonna be all right
all right, all right

You say you'll change the constitution
Well, you know
We all want to change your head
You tell me it's the institution
Well, you know
You'd better free you mind instead
But if you go carrying pictures of Chairman Mao
You ain't going to make it with anyone anyhow
Don't you know it's gonna be all right
all right, all right

YouTube video link (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1jWDeOu4Rv4)


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1jWDeOu4Rv4

[flyermay]

As I've told you before, that list is nothing in comparison to anything any communist government has perpetrated on its own citizens, not to mention anyone else it could get a hold of.

Oh, so that makes it right, is that it?

Let’s support our fascist governments and fund their genocide abroad. But, hey, watch out, don’t you ever pass the death toll of the communists; that would really make us look bad.

For god sake, I really don’t know why I even bother answering posts like these (probably because they help prove my point).

The problem that I have with both you and Lux is that you both strike me as blatantly hypocritical and two-faced, disingenuous to the point of dishonesty. You feign ignorance of historical and present-day communist atrocities and then, when you cannot feign ignorance of them because they are too well-known, you then profess "I'm not a Maoist, I'm not a totalitarian Communist, I'm not a Marxist...I have my criticisms of those people, blah blah blah..."

I’m glad you are taking this against me personally, as it simply means that you have ran out of arguments against my posts.

In regards to Lucifer, he can say and think whatever he wants; it doesn’t bother me at all. And even though I disagree with him in many points; he is definitely on the right (left) side. So, I would hate interrupting -with my opinion- his accurate description of our corrupt, decadent, unjust, elitist and hypocritical system.

About the so called “communists” that you always mention: as I said, I will start with them once I finish with the fascists at home (nothing personal; just a matter of priorities).

[octopusrex]

Buddha a Communist?

Ohhhhkayyyyy....

Lemme see..

No. I think it misses the point.

Buddha was awake. That's all. :D

[kasalt]

Oh, so that makes it right, is that it?

Of course it doesn't make it right! Furthermore, that's not what I said, is it? What I said was that your list of complaints doesn't begin to compare in comparison with what every communist government that ever existed has done and is doing today! That's what I said. And you guys don't seem to want to admit that.

In regards to Lucifer, he can say and think whatever he wants; it doesn’t bother me at all.

No of course it doesn't bother you. It doesn't bother you at all because you have no problem with the idea of genocide. You're all for it. For you, it's just a question of who's doing it, that's all. If the genocide is being committed by communists, your attitude is "more power to them". But, if there's a genocide happening that isn't being committed by communists, then and only then do you decide to protest.

Do you realize that your communist revolutionary rhetoric is psychopathic (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychopathy)?

[flyermay]

Of course it doesn't make it right! Furthermore, that's not what I said, is it? What I said was that your list of complaints doesn't begin to compare in comparison with what every communist government that ever existed has done and is doing today! That's what I said. And you guys don't seem to want to admit that.

I don’t have any problem admitting any charges against almost every single, so called, “communist” dictatorship. Furthermore, please show me where I said the contrary. I’m tired of saying that I have no sympathy towards any form of dictatorship (whether they call thenselves communist or not), at the contrary.

But that doesn’t mean that my priority is to open people’s eyes about what they have at home, which is far more important for me (for all of us) than criticising a dictatorship in the other side of the world, while we are supporting and funding our governments towards total fascism.

No of course it doesn't bother you. It doesn't bother you at all because you have no problem with the idea of genocide. You're all for it. For you, it's just a question of who's doing it, that's all. If the genocide is being committed by communists, your attitude is "more power to them". But, if there's a genocide happening that isn't being committed by communists, then and only then do you decide to protest.

Well, your problems with Lucifer better take them on with him. I’m definitely not going to discuss his alleged genocidal tendencies for two reasons: first, I was the first one on this forum to oppose them and discuss the matter with him; and second, I don’t agree with those who take it on the messenger.

[luciferhorus]

Then why not move to Yemen, or North Korea? If you think you have it so bad here, why stick around?



http://www.buckfush.com/images/North_Korean_Army_Officers.jpg

Unfortunately there are no defenders of the North Korean regime here to respond to you, thus your argument is entirely a 'straw man.'

If the North Koreans nuked America, even though most of the people in the world might rejoice over that, I doubt even then if they would support the North Korean regime and wish to live there, and I doubt anyway if North Korea would leave a trail of evidence leading to their door; after all they have tiny one man submarines which can travel around the globe; they hardly need missiles; I think that is just for show.

My common response to this kind of comment is to suggest that if you believe in Capitalism so much that you should move to a shanty-town or slum outside Calcutta or Rio, or some Third World country and perhaps sell your mother into a life of slavery in a Third World brothel.

http://porcupinerim.files.wordpress.com/2008/12/starvation.jpg

Those who are the proponents of Capitalism are generally the same kind of people who were the proponents of slavery; they did not defend the slave trade because they wanted to be slaves or sell their mothers into slavey, but rather they wished to reap the rewards of slave labour. Similarly with the Capitalist elites in the First World; they wish to continue to demand the labour slavery of others.

Most of the famous Communists in history have been entirely from the educated classes and thus the 'middle' or upper 'classes,' such as Marx, Engels, Ho Chi, Che, Fidel, the Russian aristocrat Kropotkin......there is a very long list of them; they themselves were the beneficiaries and masters of Capital; they did not commit themselves to revolution for their own sakes, but because they empathised with the suffering of the victims of Capital and sought their liberation.

http://www.checulture.com/images/rev-04.jpg
I myself have nothing to complain about personally; I live in an elite nation, I am not a slave, I have access to food, shelter and sufficient technology; a world revolution would not 'enrich' me personally, but that is not the point, it is about the economic liberation of the billions of sex slaves, labour slaves and the many who are starving, propertyless and those forced by the dictorship of Capital into a life of misery

Frankly most of the anti-Capitalists I know are middle class; the British proletariate on the other hand are largely depoliticalised and infected by the disease of nationalism; their children no longer work down mines and they live a life at the top of the global Capitalist food chain as beneficiaries of the labour slaves of the Third World; their interests appear to be concerned with soap operas, football, cosmetics and the latest hairstyle or shoes worn by Kate Moss or Posh Spice; it is rather the educated classes who are the anti-Capitalists and are concerned for world liberation, and their domain is the universities, the Internet and the world of political activism, publishing and the dissemination of propaganda.


Saddam Hussein attempted ethnic cleansing on the Kurds, launching all-out chemical attacks on them. These, by the way, were his own citizens. Perhaps you missed all that while spending your time complaining about folks like Blair and Bush, I don't know.

http://vagreatblueheron.files.wordpress.com/2008/09/180305rumsfeld-saddam.jpg


Perhaps you either have a short memory or are unaware that Saddam's chemical and biological weapons came from America; Saddam after all was an American ally and a business partner with George Bush Sr. to the tune of hundreds of billions of dollars; the ending of this financial relationship may well have been the reason for Saddam being later considered an enemy.

You may also have conveniently forgotten that Saddam was an Anglo-European ally whose military hardware was sourced from the Europe and America; the 1980–88 war between Iraq and Iran was entirely initiated by Saddam, who invaded Iran and had no problem with using chemical weapons on the Iranians; it was also very profitable for Western arms companies, and it was generally considered by the Capitalist establishment that Saddam was the good guy fighting the evil Iranians; though it must be said that Israel was selling the allegedly evil Iranians half a billion dollars of arms per year; financing both sides of a war is usually a popular Capitalist strategy.

With regards to my comments on Mao, I am not uncritical of Mao, but he was a creature of his age and I entirely admire his attempt at mass collectivisation, though it was certainly frought with errors due to the speed of collectivisation, and although on a smaller scale, the Israeli and Cuba collectives are more of a model. A problem with those who are the defenders of Capitalism is that they will generally seek to quantify the loss of lives in Mao's collective efforts and ignore the current and past holocaust of hundreds of millions who have died from the effects of war and poverty in Capitalism. The 50 million dead in WW2 of course is always blamed on the Nazis and never on their American financiers; however this 50 million pales in comparision to the 200 million who are today allegedly on the verge of starvation.



We can throw statistics around all day regarding the hundreds of millions of victims whose deaths can be placed on either side of the Capitalist / Communist divide but this is not a quantitative matter, but a moral and political one; there are those who are willing to shed blood and bear responsibility for the misery and human slavery of many millions in order to keep their place at the top of the Capitalist food chain, and there are those who are also willing to justify war and genocide in order to eradicate Capitalism and to create an entirely 'New World Order' which shall be and must be entirely Communist.

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_6eonppuEMEo/SDygTp5BUqI/AAAAAAAAAWg/0u0xT4WD0WI/s400/nuclear+jihad.jpg

If you defend the existence of Capitalism or Christianity (which is the religious justification for Capitalism), unfortunately a certain karmic weight is attached which is the blood and the suffering of billions in the past and present; similarly with pacifism which is the sin of 'ommission;' on the other hand the Anarchist Communists have very little blood on their hands and on their conscience with regards to the past, but in the future, since the devotees of the god of Capital are militant and genocidal, this will require a similarly militant response. In the nuclear age those who seek to destroy all governments will not be able to be retaliated against; the weapons of apocalyptic guerilla war shall leave no fingerprints nor evidence of their origin; they shall come upon the kingdoms of Capital as if angels and there will be no identifiable enemy to negotiate with.

http://i24.photobucket.com/albums/c49/IgnoranceIsntbliss/Biohazard/Depleted-Uranium.jpg

The Anglo-American state terrorists are already using nuclear weapons in Iraq and Afghanistan; their use of depleted uranium is known throughout the world; thus I doubt if your will find many militant enemies of the Anglo-Americans and their allies who would consider the use of nuclear weapons against the Christian homelands to be immoral; in war it is entirely acceptible to use the same weapons as your enemy, and if the enemy attacks your homelands, it is entirely acceptable to retaliate in the same way; I am sure that the defenders of Capitalism might point out that there is sure to be collateral casualties, but such arguments are not accepted by the Capitalists when the argument is turned against them, since the collateral damage of Muslim women and children is considered acceptible.

http://cache.daylife.com/imageserve/03ZEf9Sgbs7yq/610x.jpg

There will be a terrible karmic reaction for all this blood shed by the Christian narco-terrorists in their quest for oil and opium; it is inevitable and it is simply too late for them to reverse the curse they have placed upon themselves and their kingdom of Capital; they have gone far past the point of no return, and any solution which might quell this curse would simply be too radical for them to accept.

Lux


http://www.luciferia.tv/mars/images/bushcrimefamily.jpg


Russell S. Bowen, author of 'The Immaculate Deception: The Bush Crime Family Exposed (1991),' was a WW2 fighter pilot and is a retired US Brigadier General who has admitted that he was involved in major narcotics trafficking with the CIA and the OSS (Office of Security Services).

It is alleged in the evidence presented in case No 90 C 6863, 'The People of the State of Illinois ex rel Willis C. Harris vs the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve' that records for the Chicago branch of the BNL bank (Italy's largest bank) demonstrated that there were private transactions over a ten year period between 1980 to1990 involving $250 thousand million (billion) in oil money kickbacks which were 'personally' split between George Bush Sr and Saddam Hussein..

Consider this against the trifling sum of $180 million that George Jr., spent on his election campaign. George Jr spent the equivalent of one 2500th of that figure on his election. These documents were seen by the chairman of 'The House Banking Committee,' US congressman Henry Gonzalez (Democrat - Texas), for example, and consequently the Federal Reserve Board demanded that Gonzalez sign a secrecy oath and agree never to use the records in his reports. Gonzalez refused.

When Chicago journalist Sherman Skolnick put this matter before attorneys regarding the huge personal transactions between Bush and Saddam, the attorneys replied that he was 'absolutely correct' and explained that since Gonzalez had refused to sign a secrecy oath and had been talking about it, it was inevitable anyway that the truth of the matter would come out. Saddam and George were 'personally' receiving 25% of the money from oil sales as a 'kickback,' during a period where Bush was lobbying for billions of dollars of loans, aid and arms sales to Iraq, all of which represented a fraction of the sum that he was personally earning from his private business relationship with Saddam. Though the contents of these financial transactions have been admitted, today, Bush Sr. is still a free man and has yet to face trial for treason, fraud and narco-terrorism.

One law for the poor and one law for a man whose taxpayers are still writing off billions of dollars of loans to Saddam. George used his Oval office and CIA credentials to politically campaign for Saddam, while at the same time George shared a $250 billion war chest personally with Saddam.

It is a conflict of interest to have a person in the Oval office whose father is a known CIA narco-terrorist, traitor and thief involving one of the biggest frauds in human history, involving the largest ever sum of money known to be have been fraudulently gained by a head of state.

After all, even some of the richest African dictators are only worth a few billion. For example, the Third World debt of the poorest nations in the world is allegedly serviced by payments of an estimated $500 million per week, or approximately $25 billion per year. $250 billion is enough money to service this debt for 10 years, or perhaps to pay off the entire amount and still leave enough spare change to blow up the world.

.

[flyermay]

For those of you who naively think that the US has any interest in world peace, freedom and democracy -understandable to a certain extent, given the amount of propaganda that you were fed during your whole live- please watch this video:

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-8562860981340825213

And if you were able to reach then end of the video, and still think that the US is not the world's worst enemy and a real threat to global peace and each and every human being, then you are simply... (Well, please read Cooper's quote below and reach your own conclusions).

[flyermay]

Oh, and if you are interested in finding out how you have been brainwashed, you can watch this one too:

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-8383084962209910782

Otherwise, you always have Cooper's quote...

http://www.davidicke.com/forum/picture.php?albumid=309&pictureid=2727

[thelonious]

Unfortunately there are no defenders of the North Korean regime here to respond to you

That's because if a North Korean citizen were caught communicating with us, he'd more than likely be shot.

Progress, the communist way.

http://strangemaps.files.wordpress.com/2007/12/1207koreaelectricitygrikf0.jpg

Satellite image of the Korean peninsula at night. Communists apparently believe that electricity is a bourgeois wrecker of the revolution. Nevertheless, you can believe that Comrade Kim Jung Il is watching the Playboy Channel on his big screen TV.

[kasalt]

Satellite image of the Korean peninsula at night. Communists apparently believe that electricity is a bourgeois wrecker of the revolution.

At least, that means North Korea would be a nice place to set up a telescope.

Oh wait, I forgot it's illegal to set up a telescope in North Korea! How silly of me, what was I thinking? I feel so embarrassed....:o

Nevertheless, you can believe that Comrade Kim Jung Il is watching the Playboy Channel on his big screen TV.

I understand that Comandante Kim is a huge fan of Hollywood:"He is said to have a library of 20,000 Hollywood movies..." (Source: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/1907197.stm )
Not to mention that he has expensive tastes:"Konstantin Pulikovsky, a Russian emissary who travelled with Mr Kim by train across Russia, reported that the North Korean leader had live lobsters air-lifted to the train every day which he ate with silver chopsticks." (Source: ibid (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/1907197.stm))
Take that, dictatorship of the proletariat!

[luciferhorus]

That's because if a North Korean citizen were caught communicating with us, he'd more than likely be shot.

Progress, the communist way.



http://entertainment.timesonline.co.uk/multimedia/archive/00330/pg39385_330972a.jpg

North Korea is a pretty easy target for criticism. If you try criticising North Korea on discussion boards where the majority of debaters are either Marxist or Anarchist, you will find that most people will probably agree with you.

http://knowledgerush.com/wiki_image/e/e7/Korea_(179).jpg

The general Anarchist criticism of Marxism is based upon Marx's view that the dictatorship of Capitalism must be replaced with the dictatorship of the proletariat; frankly this system is open to abuse, since any dictator can just 'claim' to be Communist and yet North Korea is, like the UK, a monarchy.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio3/worldmusic/onlocation/media/northkorea23.jpg

An intention of Communist revolution is to ensure that everyone has access to food and to economic equality; this has not occurred in North Korea; if we compare North Korea to the Capitalist system, in North Korea the higher echelons of government live a rather priveleged life, while the masses are impoverished.

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_sQkIMobbJDI/Sdg83Teat9I/AAAAAAAAAcQ/Dfx_oMwOC8A/s320/North-Korea_Propaganda-Poster_Final.png

Similarly most of us here live in the First World and are the spoiled children of humanity, and the masses in the Third World who supply our clothes, technology and much of our food are generally impoverished; I frankly cannot understand why those who defend Capitalism should be so critical of Kim Jong Il, after all he lives in a palace surrounded by luxury while his people are suffering; this is very much the Capitalist model.

http://www.puppiesandflowers.com/blogimages/may2008/koreanPosters.jpg

Providence.

At this stage in the 'Great Work,' despite being critical of the suffering of the North Korean people, Kim Jong Il's apocalyptic militarism is necessary and is a warning of what is to come in the future. By all means necessary, the Capitalist elites must be counterattacked.


http://blog.cafepress.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/03/picture-37.png

Since the Anglo-American Christian state terrorists are already using nuclear weapons in Iraq, there is a necessity for Iran, North Korean and other independent enemies of Christianity / Capitalism to have nuclear weapons and to use them; this does not mean that criticism of North Korea or Iran should be suspended; however these nations clearly have a providential role and a responsibility to nuke the Christians and to give them a taste of their own medicine in their homelands.

What goes around, comes around.

LL

Lux

fire, plague and poisoned waters.

http://www.nikopopp.com/NorthKoreanPropaganda/NorthKoreanPropaganda10.jpg


http://tuberose.com/Graphics/depleted-uranium.2005.jpeg

Depleted Uranium: the gift that stays and stays; with a half-life of 4.5 billion years, it is not just for Christmas.

http://i144.photobucket.com/albums/r189/roguelmnt/realpolotik/depleted_uranium.jpg

http://homepage.mac.com/juanwilson/islandbreath/%20Year%202007/17-peace&war/0717-07DUcartoon.jpg

Out of the 580,400 soldiers in the first Gulf War, 518,739 are now medically disabled.
www.u-r-next.com/DUdeaths.html

[kasalt]

An intention of Communist revolution is to ensure that everyone has access to food and to economic equality; this has not occurred in North Korea; if we compare North Korea to the Capitalist system, in North Korea the higher echelons of government live a rather priveleged life, while the masses are impoverished.

Similarly most of us here live in the First World and are the spoiled children of humanity, and the masses in the Third World who supply our clothes, technology and much of our food are generally impoverished; I frankly cannot understand why those who defend Capitalism should be so critical of Kim Jong Il, after all he lives in a palace surrounded by luxury while his people are suffering; this is very much the Capitalist model.

At this stage in the 'Great Work,' despite being critical of the suffering of the North Korean people, Kim Jong Il's apocalyptic militarism is necessary and is a warning of what is to come in the future. By all means necessary, the Capitalist elites must be counterattacked.

If you are to declare war against capitalism because you accuse it of impoverishing and starving the Third World etc., then you must also declare war against the so-called communist nations for doing the same thing against their own people and everyone else they can get a hold of, otherwise you are merely a hypocrite.

I must admit I am taking your blowhard rhetoric less and less seriously as this moves along.

[luciferhorus]

If you are to declare war against capitalism because you accuse it of impoverishing and starving the Third World etc., then you must also declare war against the so-called communist nations for doing the same thing against their own people and everyone else they can get a hold of, otherwise you are merely a hypocrite.
.

http://img440.imageshack.us/img440/4353/300antiwarsf0087ab1.jpg

The Armies of Heaven: The Alliance against Capital

I am not uncritical of the failures of the various Communist experiments of which the most successful is perhaps the Cuban model; however in the current world the resistance to Capitalist revolution takes many forms including Islamic resistance; it was Machiavell's position that in war one should always take sides and never remain neutral, and I think this to be wise, however any 'alliances' in war are generally 'ad hoc' and do not indicate ideological alliances, such the CIA's support for Pol Pol in order to destabalise Cambodia; obviously this was not an ideological alliance, merely an ad hoc military alliance; similarly with the alliance of the Americans and the Islamic militia in the campaign against the Soviets; once the Soviets withdrew from Afghanistan, the alliance ended and the Taliban which eventually seized power became the enemies of the American narco-terrorists due to the Taliban's attempts to stop opium production, which the Christian state terrorists depend upon for their black budgets and to keep their banks in business. Similarly Anarchists bear no ideological alliance with the Muslims, Cubans and North Koreans, but it is important to support North Korea and militant Islam for the same reasons that the CIA supported Pol Pot.

http://www.defenselink.mil/dodcmsshare/newsstoryPhoto/1999-08/scr_9908131a.jpg


I must admit I am taking your blowhard rhetoric less and less seriously as this moves along.

http://bp1.blogger.com/_NE-72ZXux-g/SIgnK2PM5PI/AAAAAAAADr0/Yf9kdLNMNh4/s320/Afghan+child+-+result+of+depleted+uranium.jpg

Propaganda is the First Stage of War however I can assure you that very real nuclear war must and shall be forthcoming and that it shall be an inevitable karmic effect of genocidal, militant Capitalism and a copnsequence of the lack of resistance to priesthood and Archons of Capital from the citizens of the First World.

http://www.apfn.org/apfn/pic12.jpg

LL

Lux


http://www.atomicarchive.com/Photos/Nagasaki/images/NG30.jpg
http://djiin.files.wordpress.com/2007/11/leb901.jpg

For those of you who naively think that the US has any interest in world peace, freedom and democracy -understandable to a certain extent, given the amount of propaganda that you were fed during your whole live- please watch this video:

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-8562860981340825213

And if you were able to reach then end of the video, and still think that the US is not the world's worst enemy and a real threat to global peace and each and every human being, then you are simply... (Well, please read Cooper's quote below and reach your own conclusions).

http://www.spibooks.com/graphics/00000001/CoInAmer.jpg

Essentially it is important for the Capitalists to instill a martyr spirit in it's populace; citizens must be convinced that world Capitalist revolution is important enough to kill for and indeed even to die for; however generally it seems from the testimony of many ex-intelligence agents, the higher up one gets in the narco-intelligence food chain, the more the person realises the real situation and that it is just a war game about drugs and money; it is thus important to disseminate propaganda which reverses the image of the US government as being 'good,' in order to rid the masses of the illusion that their government is a force of good in the world.

http://p.images.blip.tv/Bcivil-MikeRupertCIADrugRunning550.jpg
http://www.bbc5.tv/eyeplayer/category/categories/cia

The CIA, NSA and departments of US covert operations are not merely engaged in 'actual' war but also propaganda war and have an army of professional internet bloggers who are dedicated to propaganda warfare on discussion groups such as this one, however such individuals never have to go out to the front line and inhale depleted uranium themselves, they are simply paid to sit in front of a computer screen and defend their capitalist masters in the propaganda war; a war which on the Internet, they are losing; they much prefer network TV where they have a passive non-interactive audience.

Allegedly in addition to the financial rewards for narco-terrorist collaboration, they are also rewarded in Heaven, where their anti-Capitalist god (Jesus) will allegedly forgive the Capitalists and offer them entry to Capitalist heaven with numerous Popes and famous Christians such as Pinochet, Franco, George Bush and a variety of other mass murderers and torturers etc., assuming the Capitalists go to heaven and their victims and slaves (the poor) are abandoned to hell as they are in this world.

Thus the propaganda campaign against both Christianity and Capitalist state terrorism in general is a vital aspect in creating the conditions for revolution; unless the masses 'hate' their government, they will more likely to fight 'for' their government than against it.

Lux

http://plugincinema.com/plugin/images/stories/Articles/aesthetic/marshall/article_s_marshall_a.jpg
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H8xLd5YTYtE

Crack the CIA
Guerrilla News Network Tells the true story about the so called "War on Drugs"... a truth known throughout the world, except in the US

http://ciadrugs.homestead.com/files/tom961125.gif

[lightgiver]

Look around us at this world that we call "civilized" and that for more than 2,000 years has searched to obtain happiness and avoid suffering by false means: trickery, corruption, hate, abuse of power, and exploitation of others. We have searched only for individual and material happiness, opposing people against each other, one race against another, social systems against others. This has led to a time of fear, of suffering, murder, and famine. If in India, Africa, and other countries, misery and famine rule, it is not because natural resources are lacking, nor that the means of bringing about lasting well-being are flawed. It is because each person has looked only for his own profit without fear of oppressing others for selfish goals, and this sad and pitiful world is the result. The root of this civilization is rotten, the world suffers, and if it continues in this way, it will suffer more and more.

We can't blame one individual for what happens in our world. I think we should blame our entire society. Society produces our leaders and politicians, and if we try to develop a more compassionate and affectionate society, we will have human beings with a more peaceful nature. Leaders, politicians, and businesspeople coming from such a society would offer hope for a better world. Our long-term responsibility--everyone's responsibility, whether they are believers or nonbelievers--is to find ways to promote a peaceful and compassionate society.
I think one way is quite simple. Each individual must try to ensure peace and compassion in his [or her] family. Put together ten peaceful, compassionate homes, or one hundred, and that's a community. The children in such a society would receive affection in their family and in their schools from the educators concerned. We might have one or two setbacks, but generally I think we could develop a sensible society. Sensible here means a sense of community, a sense of responsibility, and a sense of commitment.
Many Ways to Nirvana: Reflections and Advice on Right Living

External disarmament is very, very important. Already, there is some movement. My dream is that one day the whole world will be demilitarized, but we cannot achieve this overnight. Also, we cannot achieve it without a proper, systematic plan; however, it is important to make the target clear. Even though it may take one hundred years, or fifty years, that doesn't matter. Establish a clear idea or clear target; then try to achieve it step by step. As a first step, we have already started with the elimination of antipersonnel mines and biological weapons. Also, we are already reducing nuclear weapons; eventually, there should be a total ban on nuclear weapons. This is now foreseeable; the idea of its possibility is approaching. These are great, hopeful signs.
The Art of Peace: Nobel Peace Laureates Discuss Human Rights, Conflict and Reconciliation.

[flyermay]

That's because if a North Korean citizen were caught communicating with us, he'd more than likely be shot.

Here are a couple of examples of the American freedom of speech:


A man in South Dakota was sentenced to 37 months in a federal prison for “threatening the life of the president” just for telling a joke about Bush in a bar.
Mr. Winston (US citizen) detained by a whole squad of the Denver police just for mentioning the "Twin towers" in a train; later left free with a simple advice from one of the officers: “Remember, no philosophical discussions that would attract attention to you.”
Michael Moore (US Navy Veteran) received a visit from the secret service that interrogated him like a criminal and threatened him for sending an email to a friend with political content.
Another American citizen received a visit in the middle of the night from the FBI for talking about 911 on the gym.
Jeff Seemann and all his classmates were threatened with being expelled from University for turning their back during a speech by Bush after the invasion of Iraq.
High schools students from Ohio detained and interrogated by the secret service for wearing a t-shirt that said: “Bush is not my president”.
A man in Georgia was interrogated by the secret service for having a bumper sticker on his truck about Bush.
12 Students in Dallas detained, interrogated and threatened with arrest by the secret service for “threatening the life of the president” just for changing an anti-war slogan during a Bush’s speech.
An US attorney in Albany was arrested “for trespassing at a local mall” just for wearing an anti-war t-shirt.


If any of you still think that I was joking or exaggerating about the US being under fascism –and you ego allows you to- please watch this video:

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-5089601709558101431

“Fascism should rightly be called Corporatism as it is a merge of state and corporate power.”
(Benito Mussolini)

[flyermay]

http://www.spibooks.com/graphics/00000001/CoInAmer.jpg

Essentially it is important for the Capitalists to instill a martyr spirit in it's populace; citizens must be convinced that world Capitalist revolution is important enough to kill for and indeed even to die for; however generally it seems from the testimony of many ex-intelligence agents, the higher up one gets in the narco-intelligence food chain, the more the person realises the real situation and that it is just a war game about drugs and money; it is thus important to disseminate propaganda which reverses the image of the US government as being 'good,' in order to rid the masses of the illusion that their government is a force of good in the world.

http://p.images.blip.tv/Bcivil-MikeRupertCIADrugRunning550.jpg
http://www.bbc5.tv/eyeplayer/category/categories/cia

The CIA, NSA and departments of US covert operations are not merely engaged in 'actual' war but also propaganda war and have an army of professional internet bloggers who are dedicated to propaganda warfare on discussion groups such as this one, however such individuals never have to go out to the front line and inhale depleted uranium themselves, they are simply paid to sit in front of a computer screen and defend their capitalist masters in the propaganda war; a war which on the Internet, they are losing; they much prefer network TV where they have a passive non-interactive audience.

Allegedly in addition to the financial rewards for narco-terrorist collaboration, they are also rewarded in Heaven, where their anti-Capitalist god (Jesus) will allegedly forgive the Capitalists and offer them entry to Capitalist heaven with numerous Popes and famous Christians such as Pinochet, Franco, George Bush and a variety of other mass murderers and torturers etc., assuming the Capitalists go to heaven and their victims and slaves (the poor) are abandoned to hell as they are in this world.

Thus the propaganda campaign against both Christianity and Capitalist state terrorism in general is a vital aspect in creating the conditions for revolution; unless the masses 'hate' their government, they will more likely to fight 'for' their government than against it.

Lux

http://plugincinema.com/plugin/images/stories/Articles/aesthetic/marshall/article_s_marshall_a.jpg
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H8xLd5YTYtE

Crack the CIA
Guerrilla News Network Tells the true story about the so called "War on Drugs"... a truth known throughout the world, except in the US

http://ciadrugs.homestead.com/files/tom961125.gif

I wish the US was only involved in drugs and arms traffic. Unfortunately, as you can clearly see in the video "Secrets of the CIA", based on hard evidences and backed up by historians and witnesses, they were also behind -to a greater or less measure- in almost every massacre and genocide carried out during the last 60 years (communists included).

In the video you can see: from helping dictators and tyrants into power, like Pinochet and Saddam; to invasions, assassinations, kidnapping, illegal tests on US citizens and even porno production to destabilize democratically elected governments.

This video has no waste. And if you any of you didn’t saw it yet, I assure you will not be let down by it:

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-8562860981340825213

[flyermay]

Look around us at this world that we call "civilized" and that for more than 2,000 years has searched to obtain happiness and avoid suffering by false means: trickery, corruption, hate, abuse of power, and exploitation of others. We have searched only for individual and material happiness, opposing people against each other, one race against another, social systems against others. This has led to a time of fear, of suffering, murder, and famine. If in India, Africa, and other countries, misery and famine rule, it is not because natural resources are lacking, nor that the means of bringing about lasting well-being are flawed. It is because each person has looked only for his own profit without fear of oppressing others for selfish goals, and this sad and pitiful world is the result. The root of this civilization is rotten, the world suffers, and if it continues in this way, it will suffer more and more.

We can't blame one individual for what happens in our world. I think we should blame our entire society. Society produces our leaders and politicians, and if we try to develop a more compassionate and affectionate society, we will have human beings with a more peaceful nature. Leaders, politicians, and businesspeople coming from such a society would offer hope for a better world. Our long-term responsibility--everyone's responsibility, whether they are believers or nonbelievers--is to find ways to promote a peaceful and compassionate society.
I think one way is quite simple. Each individual must try to ensure peace and compassion in his [or her] family. Put together ten peaceful, compassionate homes, or one hundred, and that's a community. The children in such a society would receive affection in their family and in their schools from the educators concerned. We might have one or two setbacks, but generally I think we could develop a sensible society. Sensible here means a sense of community, a sense of responsibility, and a sense of commitment.
Many Ways to Nirvana: Reflections and Advice on Right Living

External disarmament is very, very important. Already, there is some movement. My dream is that one day the whole world will be demilitarized, but we cannot achieve this overnight. Also, we cannot achieve it without a proper, systematic plan; however, it is important to make the target clear. Even though it may take one hundred years, or fifty years, that doesn't matter. Establish a clear idea or clear target; then try to achieve it step by step. As a first step, we have already started with the elimination of antipersonnel mines and biological weapons. Also, we are already reducing nuclear weapons; eventually, there should be a total ban on nuclear weapons. This is now foreseeable; the idea of its possibility is approaching. These are great, hopeful signs.
The Art of Peace: Nobel Peace Laureates Discuss Human Rights, Conflict and Reconciliation.

You're dam right: education at a personal level is the main problem in this corrupt and hypocritical world. For me there is no difference between a communist and a capitalist tyrant, both need to be overthrown and replaced; not by a lesser tyrannical leader, but by the full education of the population into sharing responsibilities and privileges.

The whole problem falls down on every hierarchal system throughout the world, and in every government's tendency to manipulate and control their own people towards personal ideologies and agendas.

"Power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely"

[luciferhorus]

Here are a couple of examples of the American freedom of speech:


A man in South Dakota was sentenced to 37 months in a federal prison for “threatening the life of the president” just for telling a joke about Bush in a bar.
Mr. Winston (US citizen) detained by a whole squad of the Denver police just for mentioning the "Twin towers" in a train; later left free with a simple advice from one of the officers: “Remember, no philosophical discussions that would attract attention to you.”
Michael Moore (US Navy Veteran) received a visit from the secret service that interrogated him like a criminal and threatened him for sending an email to a friend with political content.
Another American citizen received a visit in the middle of the night from the FBI for talking about 911 on the gym.
Jeff Seemann and all his classmates were threatened with being expelled from University for turning their back during a speech by Bush after the invasion of Iraq.
High schools students from Ohio detained and interrogated by the secret service for wearing a t-shirt that said: “Bush is not my president”.
A man in Georgia was interrogated by the secret service for having a bumper sticker on his truck about Bush.
12 Students in Dallas detained, interrogated and threatened with arrest by the secret service for “threatening the life of the president” just for changing an anti-war slogan during a Bush’s speech.
An US attorney in Albany was arrested “for trespassing at a local mall” just for wearing an anti-war t-shirt.


If any of you still think that I was joking or exaggerating about the US being under fascism –and you ego allows you to- please watch this video:

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-5089601709558101431

http://www.allamericanpatriots.com/files/images/anti-bush-bumper-stickers.jpg

Amazing. Over here in the UK, during the Queen's Golden Jubilee, Anarchists protested in the streets with a giant guillotine calling for Elizabeth's decapitation; they were arrested by the police and later successfully brought charges for false arrest.

http://www.omdurman.org/butcher_kafirs.jpg

In more recent years, since the Terrorism Act 2000 came into force, Muslims have been successfully prosecuted merely for 'incitement' to violence, however these charges seem to only be raised against Muslims; there are numerous political organisations and individuals who are inciting armed violent Capitalist revolution, and numerous Christians who call for executions for various biblical offences.

http://i262.photobucket.com/albums/ii81/acedillinger1975/Jihad.jpg
Above: Inciting murder and violence is OK as long as it 'against Islam.'


http://bbs.chinadaily.com.cn/attachments/month_0603/The%20Spiritual%20Journey%20of%20George%20Bush_VJ6 0VYlI9fBa.jpg

Personally I have been calling for the execution Bush, Blair, Windsor and all who collaborate with them for many years and I offer a reward of 144 virgins in the afterlife to all anti-Christian martyrs.

http://img.wonkette.com/images/thumbs/d26fe6a619c9a87f294dafc66a679ed4.jpg
144 of the above offered to all anti-Christians.

Meanwhile, four Muslims were recently charged with soliciting murder and incitement to racial hatred for shouting 'Bomb, bomb Denmark' and for calling for UK soldiers to be brought back from Iraq in body bags.....they were imprisoned for between four and six years. In the meantime it is quite resepectible to call for militant muslims to be sent home in body bags; a certain double standard thus exists.

http://geopolitics.world-citizenship.org/wp-content/uploads/2008/12/image0011.jpg

I think it only a question of time before the British Crown turns against it's own people and starts arresting dissenters; however I think it will take a few more 911 type false-flags.

http://www.unitedstates.fm/pics/wtc7an.gif

LL

Lux


_____________
Echelon keywords: nuclear terrorism biological terrorism jihad jihad jihad nuclear terrorism biological terrorism jihad jihad jihad nuclear terrorism biological terrorism jihad jihad jihad nuclear terrorism biological terrorism jihad jihad jihad nuclear terrorism biological terrorism jihad jihad jihad nuclear terrorism biological terrorism jihad jihad jihad nuclear terrorism biological terrorism jihad jihad jihad nuclear terrorism biological terrorism jihad jihad jihad nuclear terrorism biological terrorism jihad jihad jihad

[zero1]

http://img.wonkette.com/images/thumbs/d26fe6a619c9a87f294dafc66a679ed4.jpg

144 of the above offered to all anti-Christians.

LL

Lux


_____________
Echelon keywords: nuclear terrorism biological terrorism jihad jihad jihad nuclear terrorism biological terrorism jihad jihad jihad nuclear terrorism biological terrorism jihad jihad jihad nuclear terrorism biological terrorism jihad jihad jihad nuclear terrorism biological terrorism jihad jihad jihad nuclear terrorism biological terrorism jihad jihad jihad nuclear terrorism biological terrorism jihad jihad jihad nuclear terrorism biological terrorism jihad jihad jihad nuclear terrorism biological terrorism jihad jihad jihad

A very generous offer, Commandante Lucifer. I personally would settle for 3 gorgeous blonde anarchists in the afterlife, not necessarily virgins either, but that's me. :)

Love the ECHELON II keywords, you truly are a shit-stirring propagandist extraordinaire - and as such, sir, I salute you.

On with the Revolution, anything good (but strong!).

LL,

Z1

[luciferhorus]

A very generous offer, Commandante Lucifer. I personally would settle for 3 gorgeous blonde anarchists in the afterlife, not necessarily virgins either, but that's me. :)

Z1

http://johns-jokes.com/afiles/images/virgins_in_heaven.jpg

Well Comandante Zero,

I have sent a message to the angels to especially set aside 144 Virgins in the afterlife especially for you; however I only use the term 'Virgin' metaphorically, and since the Muslims offer their followers 72 Virgins and I have to make a better offer to the Anarchists.

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_AhGe9uhQ1N0/RcpeblsPTwI/AAAAAAAAAWg/Xv23xeDWisc/s400/72virgins.jpg

If spending all eternity as the sex slave of 144 virgins gets too exhausting for you, you can always reduce the number or simply share them. I would suggest that you get lots of practice in prior to your arrival in heaven.

Love and Light

Lux

[boots]

http://img.wonkette.com/images/thumbs/d26fe6a619c9a87f294dafc66a679ed4.jpg


I'm an anti Christian.


Count me in.

[flyermay]

Amazing. Over here in the UK, during the Queen's Golden Jubilee, Anarchists protested in the streets with a giant guillotine calling for Elizabeth's decapitation; they were arrested by the police and later successfully brought charges for false arrest.

In more recent years, since the Terrorism Act 2000 came into force, Muslims have been successfully prosecuted merely for 'incitement' to violence, however these charges seem to only be raised against Muslims; there are numerous political organisations and individuals who are inciting armed violent Capitalist revolution, and numerous Christians who call for executions for various biblical offences.

...

Meanwhile, four Muslims were recently charged with soliciting murder and incitement to racial hatred for shouting 'Bomb, bomb Denmark' and for calling for UK soldiers to be brought back from Iraq in body bags.....they were imprisoned for between four and six years. In the meantime it is quite resepectible to call for militant muslims to be sent home in body bags; a certain double standard thus exists.

I think it only a question of time before the British Crown turns against it's own people and starts arresting dissenters; however I think it will take a few more 911 type false-flags.

There is no doubt that Europe will end up exactly as the US. At the moment, and as usual, the US just leads the way into total fascism.

[danceswithbunnies]

Sorry to interrupt..

I wanted to add that the US had a higher standard of living and more freedom because of our technological development...it had little or nothing to do with the structure of its government in the 20th century..(it did back in revolutionary times but not today).The US has never had an actual free market in the last 200 years.

Here is a Partial timeline of American Brutality
http://american-genocide.netfirms.com/html/americanstateterrorism/ChronologyofTerror.html

Most American citizens have been brainwashed with the sanitized version of the US in world events, and are so mind*ucked, they can barely think at all, let alone discern truth.

The truth is not pretty.

It is time for the Human Race to grow the fuck up.
NO GODS ,NO GOVERNMENT.

[luciferhorus]

Sorry to interrupt..


It is time for the Human Race to grow the fuck up.
NO GODS ,NO GOVERNMENT.

Ah another Anarchist who has come over to the conclusions of the one true Anarchist political faith.

Welcome comrade Bunnydancer. Your 144 Anarchist virgins await you in paradise.

http://www.smh.com.au/ffxImage/urlpicture_id_1048354635272_2003/03/26/poster24.jpg

http://img.wonkette.com/images/thumbs/d26fe6a619c9a87f294dafc66a679ed4.jpg


I'm an anti Christian.


Count me in.

I'll consider you a probationary Anarchist and reserve you 14.4 virgins (10% down) with the remaining 139.6 virgins upon receipt of further anti-Christian and anti-statist proapaganda.

Love from

Comandante Lucifer.

I will not be beaten on afterlife virgins; 100% more vigins guaranteed. Do not be fooled by lower offers and lower quality afterlife virgins.

http://www.hyscience.com/archives/72virgins_1.JPG

http://www.monica.li/pagsIfYouOnlyKnew/UpiNHeavenAwaitOsama.jpg

http://windsofchange.net/images/TOON_Danish_Muhammad_Out_Of_Virgins.jpg

http://www.freespeechseattle.org/replacementsneeded/english.jpg

http://members.lycos.nl/rubenvandermeer/hpbimg/Make%20love%20not%20war.jpg

[danceswithbunnies]

Ah another Anarchist.

Welcome comrade Bunnydancer. Your 144 Anarchist virgins await you in paradise.

http://www.smh.com.au/ffxImage/urlpicture_id_1048354635272_2003/03/26/poster24.jpg

Definitely an anarchist, ..hold the virgins..
not that interested...being female and all.

A sanctuary in the country to take in unwanted bunnies, goats, dogs etc and take care of them...would be
a nicer reward.


Here is a history of (western "spirituality") mostly christianity:
http://www.scribd.com/doc/13397740/Mans-Search-for-Spirituality

and of course the classic:People' sHistory of the US
(fr those in the UK, you may not find it that interesting)
http://www.scribd.com/doc/11560712/Howard-Zinn-a-Peoples-History-of-United-States-1492Present

AND IF YOU ENJOY HAVING YOUR BLOOD BOIL...
here is a little pamphlet by FELLOW ANARCHIST Noam Chomsky

http://www.scribd.com/doc/3096306/Noam-Chomsky-1999-Profit-over-People-Neoliberalism-and-Global-Order

Do you have any information linking masonry more directly with this?
While the pictures of men in dresses flouting themselves before the camera, posturing with the signing of papers may be entertaining, do you have something that explicitly states rhe connections?

Wasn't it true that "communism" was sponsored from wall street ?
(probably to make it look bad)

BTW If you are interested there are pages at Antipas ministries linking the top names in american evangelicalism with military and corporate malfeasance around the globe..
I think it may be a short step to link that with freemasonry.

[luciferhorus]

Definitely an anarchist, ..hold the virgins..
not that interested...being female and all.

My apologies sister, it is mostly males here and it is nice to have a female presence.


A sanctuary in the country to take in unwanted bunnies, goats, dogs etc and take care of them...would be a nicer reward.


Well you are welcome to 144 bunny rabbits, goats, dogs and two by two of all the animals in Eden in the afterlife, if you like; unfortunately on earth you would have trouble feeding them in the Capitalist world and stopping the carnivores from killing and eating them.

Afterlife Beliefs

http://johns-jokes.com/afiles/images/virgins_in_heaven.jpg

Females are generally more romantic than males and are generally not as attracted to the idea of 144 male sex slaves in the afterlife; generally they seek their angelic prince / soul mate / other half, etc; in other words their own private love slave, worshipper and devotee.

http://photos1.meetupstatic.com/photos/event/8/a/7/c/highres_4955452.jpeg

The idea of the 72 vrigins in the gardens of paradise is very much directed at Islamic males who are generally rather repressed sexually since they cannot have a real girlfriend and have to purchase wives (slaves) whom they consider private property.

The suffering of women in Islamic and Hindu countries is rather disturbing; they are little more than unpaid domestic servants and sex slaves.; the Muslim afterlife beliefs are very much an extension of their culture.

http://www.digitaljournal.com/img/2/1/0/8/2/9/i/4/0/2/o/sexy-hijab.jpg

Based on my understanding of modern women, if one male was stuck on an island with 72 women, it is the male who would be the sex slave, not the women.

http://www.smh.com.au/ffxImage/urlpicture_id_1048354635272_2003/03/26/poster24.jpg

Feminist Heaven

http://www.goddesstemple.co.za/Goddess%20Conference%201%20212%20(Large).jpg

What we bind on earth, we bind in eternity. Our earthly enemies and allies become our eternal enemies and allies. On Heaven and Hell.

Having said all this, satire aside, I genuinely believe that the afterlife is a feminist 'love paradise' and that sex is not confined to our earthly experience; however for those on earth who were the slave masters and priesthood of Capitalism, and their collaborators and mercenaries who are responsible for the enslavement of humanity, I genuinely believe that they are confined to their own realm in eternity.

Just as with the prisions of the earth, Hell is a predonimately male realm with a Grand Master and a kingdom of paternalism, and that heaven is a predominately female realm with a High Priestess / goddess and a kingdom of maternalism.

This of course is a feminist, pagan perspective and has nothing to do with Christianity which is a religion which has affected only a tiny percentage of human souls in the history of the cosmos, and is generally a malevolent religion which represents the anti-thesis of the teachings of the anti-Capitalist, proto-Anarchist Jesus, and which offers eternal heaven to Capitalists and hypocrites of religion who are generally the enemies of Love itself.

I have been in involved with the British Neo-Pagan movement for many years, and I live near Europe's Pagan Capital (Glstonbury); it is very much a 'feminist' movent; I have attended many Neo-Pagan events in over a number of years; currently once or twice a month; generally there are always more beautiful goddesses than there are males; this is quite understandable since it is very much an anti-Paternalistic reaction to Paternalistic religion and culture, and it is certainly a very sexual culture in contrast with the sexually repressed paternalistic religions; there are few things more dangerous to Paternalism and the 'sin of restriction' and to organised religion in general than a sexually liberated feminist practitioner of Wicca.

http://www.jewishjournal.com/images/thegodblog_images/Pope-739682.jpg

Capitalist Paternalist Heaven

I think that Capitalist heaven is an attempt to offer 'cultural familiars' to Christians; if they are submissive Capitalists in their life and do not rebel against their tyrants and religious hypocrites (priests), they get to end up with the Christian tyrants and priests with whom they have revered in this life; it is very much an extention of the Egyptian afterlife where the rich (the kings) and the faithful priesthood and aristocracy continue to rule over their slaves in the afterlife.

Here is a history of (western "spirituality") mostly christianity:
http://www.scribd.com/doc/13397740/Mans-Search-for-Spirituality

Yes, it is rather good, but at over 600 pages, it does not lend itself perfectly to my speed reading skills, it is more of a reference book, but before he gets into his listing of the 'historical facts' of Christianity, he generally concurs with the popular academic view of the history of Christianity; that it has nothing to do with the teachings of Jesus and is just a religion invented by the aristocracy and the priesthood; he does cite Jesus' '(I paraphrase) do not carry money, have only one robe, no sandals, do not carry a purse, etc.' but he stops short of coming to the same conclusions as Liberation Theologians, Christian Marxists and Christian Anarchists.


and of course the classic:People' sHistory of the US
(fr those in the UK, you may not find it that interesting)
http://www.scribd.com/doc/11560712/Howard-Zinn-a-Peoples-History-of-United-States-1492Present

Again at over 600 pages it is a classic 'reference text.' Zinn is really writing against the North-American-centrist perspective; such an anti-American revisionist perspective is common among European, African, Latin American and indeed non-North American academics; he deals with the holocaust of the Latino Indians, the American Indians, the slave trade, all the way through to the imperialistic wars of the 20th century state terrorists; it is certainly not a perspective which would be familiar to the average 'red neck' American patriot brought up on a diet of patriotic American propaganda and the denial of the american financing of Nazi Germany.

AND IF YOU ENJOY HAVING YOUR BLOOD BOIL...
here is a little pamphlet by FELLOW ANARCHIST Noam Chomsky

http://www.scribd.com/doc/3096306/Noam-Chomsky-1999-Profit-over-People-Neoliberalism-and-Global-Order

I have a print edition of Chomsky's 'Word Orders, Old and New' and not to demean saint Chomsky at all, but in common with David Icke, once you have read one of his great works, the rest become entirely familiar, but Chomsky's text is certainly a classic in understanding the consequences of Neoliberalism.

Essentially he is defining Neo-Liberalism in this work; which is very much a term used by Leftists throughout Europe and Latin America and which has yet to sink into the popular North American language.

Of course liberalism is from the French 'Liberation,' but Neo-Liberalism is not about the liberation of humanity; it is rather about free market Capitalism and the 'liberation' of economic trade barriers which allow the First World Capitalists to buy up the resources, corporations and ulitility companises of humanity and to use the world as a global slave market where 'profit' is the king;


Do you have any information linking masonry more directly with this?
While the pictures of men in dresses flouting themselves before the camera, posturing with the signing of papers may be entertaining, do you have something that explicitly states rhe connections?

It appears that the Internet is full of Christian sites which attack the Masons as anti-Christians and such sites are based on their system of rites / rituals etc., such as www.freemasonwatch.org (http://www.freemasonrywatch.org/) whereas what is of more concern is the relationship between Masonry and the Capitalist command and control centres such as Wall St, the City of London, the lite banks etc. David Icke certainly makes this connection, as does Martin Short and Stephen Knight's 'Brotherhood' books; I have read their printed works, though I have been unable to source either Short or Knight on BitTorrent.

From a British perspective, the relationship between Masonry and the current Capitalist revolution is entirely clear; in the financial district (the Square Mile) of the city of London there are more Masonic Lodges in that square mile of loan-sharking than anywhere else on earth (over 200 allegedly); they are certainly deeply rooted in the financial system, the police state and the military; indeed their Grand Marshall is a Field Marshal which is the highest rank in his cousin's (the Queen) army; thus their link to the current Capitalist Imperialist revolution and the genocide of the Iraqis and Afghans is entirely overt.


Wasn't it true that "communism" was sponsored from wall street ?
(probably to make it look bad)

http://www.inteldaily.com/tpllib/img.php?im=cat_171/1422.jpg&w=300&h=468

The entire text is avalable free on: http://reformed-theology.org/html/books/bolshevik_revolution/

Yes of course, the Bolsheviks were financed by Wall St.

As were the Nazis.

http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/41FKH9KHPHL.jpg

The entire text is avalable free onhttp://reformed-theology.org/html/books/wall_street/

Financing ideological enemies on both sides is very good for the Masters of War; war is always profitable for bankers, arm's manufacturers and Capitalist corporations.


BTW If you are interested there are pages at Antipas ministries linking the top names in american evangelicalism with military and corporate malfeasance around the globe..
I think it may be a short step to link that with freemasonry.

Yes I've had a look at http://www.antipasministries.com/; despite the evangelical Christian impression, the site does appear to have a 'socialist gospel' emphasis with regards to the liberation of the 'poor,' but they do seem to be waiting for Jesus to come back and save them.


Love and Light

Lux

[kasalt]

Kim Jong Il's apocalyptic militarism is necessary and is a warning of what is to come in the future. By all means necessary, the Capitalist elites must be counterattacked.

Flip side of the same coin, you are...

[danceswithbunnies]

My apologies sister, it is mostly males here and it is nice to have a female presence.



Well you are welcome to 144 bunny rabbits, goats, dogs and two by two of all the animals in Eden in the afterlife, if you like; unfortunately on earth you would have trouble feeding them in the Capitalist world and stopping the carnivores from killing and eating them.



Females are generally more romantic than males and are generally not as attracted to the idea of 144 male sex slaves in the afterlife; generally they seek their angelic prince / soul mate / other half, etc; in other words their own private love slave, worshipper and devotee.





The idea of the 72 vrigins in the gardens of paradise is very much directed at Islamic males who are generally rather repressed sexually since they cannot have a real girlfriend and have to purchase wives (slaves) whom they consider private property.

The suffering of women in Islamic and Hindu countries is rather disturbing; they are little more than unpaid domestic servants and sex slaves.; the Muslim afterlife beliefs are very much an extension of their culture.

Yep..i love animals and see them as deserving of kindness as people.
Had problems with the Muslim men when i was in undergraduate, they were always hitting on me..i started out in engineering.
By the time i got to graduate school they stayed far away..being terrified of the fact that i was in the math department..

Based on my understanding of modern women, if one male was stuck on an island with 72 women, it is the male who would be the sex slave, not the women.

Or so the man would hope...chances are better that they might go in for each other.



What we bind on earth, we bind in eternity. Our earthly enemies and allies become our eternal enemies and allies. On Heaven and Hell.

Having said all this, satire aside, I genuinely believe that the afterlife is a feminist 'love paradise' and that sex is not confined to our earthly experience; however for those on earth who were the slave masters and priesthood of Capitalism, and their collaborators and mercenaries who are responsible for the enslavement of humanity, I genuinely believe that they are confined to their own realm in eternity.

I try not to extrapolate too far into realms i have no personal experience in. I try to be brave enough to hold firmly to doubt and see where it leads me.
Sex is not confined to earthly experience, i have been attacked while spontaneously OBE.


Just as with the prisions of the earth, Hell is a predonimately male realm with a Grand Master and a kingdom of paternalism, and that heaven is a predominately female realm with a High Priestess / goddess and a kingdom of maternalism.

This of course is a feminist, pagan perspective and has nothing to do with Christianity which is a religion which has affected only a tiny percentage of human souls in the history of the cosmos, and is generally a malevolent religion which represents the anti-thesis of the teachings of the anti-Capitalist, proto-Anarchist Jesus, and which offers eternal heaven to Capitalists and hypocrites of religion who are generally the enemies of Love itself.

One third of the globe's population is "christian", Isn't it?
Things don't seem to be getting better, the adage of knowing them by their fruits appears to apply here.

Matriarchy would be just as bad as patriarchy.You cannot split minds and expect the best outcome.
We need balance.Right hemisphere, left hemisphere..
no one sex better than the ther.

I have been in involved with the British Neo-Pagan movement for many years, and I live near Europe's Pagan Capital (Glstonbury); it is very much a 'feminist' movent; I have attended many Neo-Pagan events in over a number of years; currently once or twice a month; generally there are always more beautiful goddesses than there are males; this is quite understandable since it is very much an anti-Paternalistic reaction to Paternalistic religion and culture, and it is certainly a very sexual culture in contrast with the sexually repressed paternalistic religions; there are few things more dangerous to Paternalism and the 'sin of restriction' and to organised religion in general than a sexually liberated feminist practitioner of Wicca.


I like Wicca, but have a problem with the idea of "worshiping" anything.
That and the fact that Wicca was started by Masons, and even Feri Witchcraft (the one i am most attracted to)has masonic symbols on the cover of many of its books written by the founder.(viktor anderson)




I think that Capitalist heaven is an attempt to offer 'cultural familiars' to Christians; if they are submissive Capitalists in their life and do not rebel against their tyrants and religious hypocrites (priests), they get to end up with the Christian tyrants and priests with whom they have revered in this life; it is very much an extention of the Egyptian afterlife where the rich (the kings) and the faithful priesthood and aristocracy continue to rule over their slaves in the afterlife.



Yes, it is rather good, but at over 600 pages, it does not lend itself perfectly to my speed reading skills, it is more of a reference book, but before he gets into his listing of the 'historical facts' of Christianity, he generally concurs with the popular academic view of the history of Christianity; that it has nothing to do with the teachings of Jesus and is just a religion invented by the aristocracy and the priesthood; he does cite Jesus' '(I paraphrase) do not carry money, have only one robe, no sandals, do not carry a purse, etc.' but he stops short of coming to the same conclusions as Liberation Theologians, Christian Marxists and Christian Anarchists.


Quite right it is a long read..better for dipping into at certain points here and there.

I would posit that the fact
That things turn into their opposite here in this realm of maya is because of the way the brain works.

Most revelation starts out as messages from the right hemisphere, flashes of intuition that cannot be communicated with words...just a flash of knowing.
then as the knowing is comunicated to others it sounds self contradictory, because it is paradoxical, and all sorts of interpretations start arising from the original knowing...the left brain swings into gear and tries to Catch the revelation, analyze it, dissect in...and thus basically kills it.

It then resurrects as a zombie meme, acting as a Qlippoth, a shell acting as the opposite of what it represented.


Again at over 600 pages it is a classic 'reference text.' Zinn is really writing against the North-American-centrist perspective; such an anti-American revisionist perspective is common among European, African, Latin American and indeed non-North American academics; he deals with the holocaust of the Latino Indians, the American Indians, the slave trade, all the way through to the imperialistic wars of the 20th century state terrorists; it is certainly not a perspective which would be familiar to the average 'red neck' American patriot brought up on a diet of patriotic American propaganda and the denial of the american financing of Nazi Germany.

Yes, Zinn can be tiresome for people from other countries, it can be very useful for those discussions with lantern jawed buzzcuts who tend to respond with all caps colored fonted jingoisms as in "freedom isn't free",
"Cowards never serve"...etc



I have a print edition of Chomsky's 'Word Orders, Old and New' and not to demean saint Chomsky at all, but in common with David Icke, once you have read one of his great works, the rest become entirely familiar, but Chomsky's text is certainly a classic in understanding the consequences of Neoliberalism.

Essentially he is defining Neo-Liberalism in this work; which is very much a term used by Leftists throughout Europe and Latin America and which has yet to sink into the popular North American language.

Of course liberalism is from the French 'Liberation,' but Neo-Liberalism is not about the liberation of humanity; it is rather about free market Capitalism and the 'liberation' of economic trade barriers which allow the First World Capitalists to buy up the resources, corporations and ulitility companises of humanity and to use the world as a global slave market where 'profit' is the king;

I have Profit Over People on my book shelf..we haven't had "free market" in this country for over 200 years.
To be truthful..i wonder if there has ever been a free market in the history of the world.

My PROBLEM, is that i can see many sides to the same actual issue.
i can understand the anarcho-liberal position, and i can understand the masonic idea of limited government,which is not what we have at present, but a centralized behemoth that literally is destroying the earth.

I think the problem with words, is that the powers that be manipulate them so easily.. Freedom is slavery, war is peace, etc.

The way this small group of individuals appears to be working is by keeping up a constant state of war to keep the hierarchical structure of western society intact...they appear to be working through jewish bankers.

It is true that "profit" is king in the US...my own father ( a mason) would probably sell his mother for a dollar.

What is PROFIT though?
The money itself that profit is denominated in, is only given its power to buy and sell BY THE LABOR OF THE PEOPLE.
IF THERE WERE NO MONEY MONOPOLY the laborers would be free to choose a currency that preserved their labor's value
One of the best ways to give power back to the people is to have fiat system of money run for their benefit..not the benefit of government, not the benefit of the bankers but the benefit of the people.


It appears that the Internet is full of Christian sites which attack the Masons as anti-Christians and such sites are based on their system of rites / rituals etc., such as www.freemasonwatch.org (http://www.freemasonrywatch.org/) whereas what is of more concern is the relationship between Masonry and the Capitalist command and control centres such as Wall St, the City of London, the lite banks etc. David Icke certainly makes this connection, as does Martin Short and Stephen Knight's 'Brotherhood' books; I have read their printed works, though I have been unable to source either Short or Knight on BitTorrent.

From a British perspective, the relationship between Masonry and the current Capitalist revolution is entirely clear; in the financial district (the Square Mile) of the city of London there are more Masonic Lodges in that square mile of loan-sharking than anywhere else on earth (over 200 allegedly); they are certainly deeply rooted in the financial system, the police state and the military; indeed their Grand Marshall is a Field Marshal which is the highest rank in his cousin's (the Queen) army; thus their link to the current Capitalist Imperialist revolution and the genocide of the Iraqis and Afghans is entirely overt.

Okay. i will try looking at those...Many writers make the connection but only in a cursory or surface sense. From the simplistic way many writer's explain the connection, it is very possible that masonry is just a coincidental social club to which the miscreants belong while some more sinister organization goes unchecked.

I really need to see something actually linking masonry directly to the actual fact of actions taken.





Yes of course, the Bolsheviks were financed by Wall St.

As were the Nazis.

http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/41FKH9KHPHL.jpg

The entire text is avalable free onhttp://reformed-theology.org/html/books/wall_street/

Financing ideological enemies on both sides is very good for the Masters of War; war is always profitable for bankers, arm's manufacturers and Capitalist corporations.

Exactly..
The question though is WHO is the ring master?
I am asking because on the srface level that i am seeing it is the jewish establishment...but who are they working for?

[flyermay]

Matriarchy would be just as bad as patriarchy.You cannot split minds and expect the best outcome.
We need balance.Right hemisphere, left hemisphere..
no one sex better than the ther.

That's true feminism; and not turning around the war of sexes. I guess that even the most just ideals are corrupted these days.

On the other side, think about a society dominated by women: freemasons would have no chance of manipulating any government. ;)

i wonder if there has ever been a free market in the history of the world.

Not since the appearance of the "money changers", first mentioned during biblical times.

One of the best ways to give power back to the people is to have fiat system of money run for their benefit..not the benefit of government, not the benefit of the bankers but the benefit of the people.

Quite right, as the only purpose of money is to facilitate the exchange of goods and services (which is not the case; as the current crisis has proved). However, we would still suffer the injustices of capitalism whether we have a fiat currency or a gold standard; so I think it is just a partial solution.

[octopusrex]

Nobody seems to remember or care that FASCISM fed the Germans when their other European brothers tried to starve them to death.

[luciferhorus]

http://www.sarna.net/files/incoming/forum/132792-nuke.jpg

[luciferhorus]

I am simply bumping this thread as I am being accused by Lightbearer on the "Satanic nonsense" thread of misinterpreting Buddha and Jesus.

LL

Lux

[lightgiver]

No such thing as a communist Buddha,they are all mere labels imputed by mind.:)

Buddha Never Bowed Before a Statue, and Jesus Never Knelt Before a Cross.

[luciferhorus]

Buddha Never Bowed Before a Statue, and Jesus Never Knelt Before a Cross.

But that that is the position I am stating on my essays on these two ancestors.

[zero1]

No such thing as a communist Buddha,they are all mere labels imputed by mind. :)

The Triple Gem of Buddha (think 'Chairman'), the Dhamma (the teaching, or if you like, Propaganda, the Revolution) and the Sangha (the Community, or if you like the Proletariat) is the core of Buddhism, and is religiously communistic; the same 'Trinity' was reflected in the organization of Jesus' tribe, the Essenes.

Buddha Never Bowed Before a Statue, and Jesus Never Knelt Before a Cross.

Indeed, but neither Commandante Lucifer nor I would hold that they did. The question is, perhaps deserving a thread of its own, what were the real politics (real-politick) of the two great ancestors Jesus Christ and Gautama Buddha?

The politics of these men are always obscured in latter days by those who claim to preach in their name, and organize communities according to their principles; but we know the hypocrisy and blatant reversals that men can indulge when 'interpreting' the real teachings of these great men.

[lightgiver]

The politics of these men are always obscured in latter days by those who claim to preach in their name, and organize communities according to their principles; but we know the hypocrisy and blatant reversals that men can indulge when 'interpreting' the real teachings of these great men.

I agree with your eloquently put post.;)

But that that is the position I am stating on my essays on these two ancestors.

Yes,but maybe you should investigate more thoroughly before you come to a conclusion.

[luciferhorus]

Yes,but maybe you should investigate more thoroughly before you come to a conclusion.

Contradiction is a poor substitute for argument and often the last cry of the desparate; and argument on the other hand would spell out the flaws or weaknesses of my analysis. For example you might offer some argument and evidence that Buddha or Jesus were indeed Capitalists, propertyists, idolaters, anti-Communists etc.

Lux

[lightgiver]

Contradiction is a poor substitute for argument and often the last cry of the desparate; and argument on the other hand would spell out the flaws or weaknesses of my analysis. For example you might offer some argument and evidence that Buddha or Jesus were indeed Capitalists, propertyists, idolaters, anti-Communists etc.

Lux

You have your beliefs and other people have theirs.

No contradiction.

:)

[luciferhorus]

You have your beliefs and other people have theirs.

No contradiction.

:)

It is not a matter of "beliefs;" we "believe" only what we do not know for certain. Your statement that " you should investigate more thoroughly before you come to a conclusion." is simply a fool's argument; it is simply contradiction, not an argument; an argument would state the flaws in my position.

With regards to what we know about Jesus and Buddha from texts, the description of these persons depicts historical anti-Capitalists; to refute this you need to offer argument and evidence that they were both evangelical Capitalists, etc.


Lux

[lightgiver]

It is not a matter of "beliefs;" we "believe" only what we do not know for certain. Your statement that " you should investigate more thoroughly before you come to a conclusion." is simply a fool's argument; it is simply contradiction, not an argument; an argument would state the flaws in my position.

With regards to what we know about Jesus and Buddha from texts, the description of these persons depicts historical anti-Capitalists; to refute this you need to offer argument and evidence that they were both evangelical Capitalists, etc.


Lux

yes they were most likely anti capitalists and anti communist and anti conforming with the worlds ways.:)

The greatest action is not conforming with the worlds ways.

The greatest achievement is selflessness.
The greatest worth is self-mastery.
The greatest quality is seeking to serve others.
The greatest precept is continual awareness.
The greatest medicine is the emptiness of everything.
The greatest action is not conforming with the worlds ways.
The greatest magic is transmuting the passions.
The greatest generosity is non-attachment.
The greatest goodness is a peaceful mind.
The greatest patience is humility.
The greatest effort is not concerned with results.
The greatest meditation is a mind that lets go.
The greatest wisdom is seeing through appearances.
Atisha


How can investigating something be a fools argument.( I try to avoid arguments they lead nowhere)Like I say I am sure if people want to believe something then they will.

I do not see any contradictions.

[luciferhorus]

How can investigating something be a fools argument.( I try to avoid arguments they lead nowhere)Like I say I am sure if people want to believe something then they will.

I do not see any contradictions.

Your entire debating strategy here appears to be based upon offering contradictions; you state that I should investigate further prior to coming to conclusions; that is merely a form of contradiction; an argument would state what you consider the flaws in my positions to be.

Lucifer

The Socratic Dialectic (Gr. Argument) 101

or:


‘Abuse, sophisty and contradiction (ASC) : the last cries of the desparate.’


What is ‘argument?
By Lucifer
For Anarchist Communism.

______________________________________

There are numerous groups on the Internet where debate is confused with 'exchanges' of abuse.

I was did not always think as I do, and in the future I expect my positions to modify as a consequence of study, debate, life experience etc.

Debate and discussion is always a good thing.

Our political and metaphysical beliefs must go through a dialectical testing process.

When tested, if they fail or are destroyed by superior arguments; the person who is intellectually honest should concede and modify his position.

That is how adults 'develop' intellectually, morally (the discernment of good and evil), spiritually, whatever.

Children just slag each other off.

______________

http://sorinplaton.files.wordpress.com/2008/05/skinheads.jpg

Thesis (idea), anti-thesis (opposing idea) and synthesis (a combination of two ideas).

An argument in the English language can mean a fight between two football hooligans but this has nothing to do with the Greek meaning of ‘dialectic, ’ with regards to the teaching and debating method Socrates. In Internet debates over the years I have often made many ‘arguments’ against the ‘ideas’ of other people who misunderstand the meaning of the term ‘dialectic, ’ and to simplify I have written the following explanation which I often post in response to my essays.


_____________________________________________

Abuse and contradiction are common and can be had from imbecile, football hooligan or a drunk at a bus stop and do not constitute argument.

Responses should follow certain standards or I will probably ignore you.
_________________________________

Argument (Gr. dialectic) according to Socrates, Hegel and John Cleese.


3 universally accepted ground rules of debating

1: Abuse.
Abuse does not constitute an argument.

2: Contradiction.
Contradiction is not an argument. ’I don’t agree with you’ is not an
argument. An Argument would state ‘why’ you disagree.

3: Sophistry (sophist: ’sophisticated / educated).

A Sophist generally avoids the question and rambles on about something else, often avoiding the argument made by the opponent and often utilising straw man arguments (attacking arguments and positions which the opponent does not hold) and creates confusion with language.

The use of the combination of 1, 2 and 3 is generally defined as ’arrogance’ and ‘avoidance of debate, ’ and by default ‘conceding the point to the opponent’

For those who do not understand the meaning of the term ‘argument, ’ for further information watch the 6 minute video on the ground rules of debate on:

http://www.scottberkun.com/wp-content/themes/scottberkun/images/40-1.jpg

http://www.youtube.com/v/kQFKtI6gn9Y&hl=en&fs=1

(Monty Python Argument Sketch)

Note that this only covers abuse and contradiction.

If you cannot understand this, I suggest the removal of your brain.

See

http://www.physd.amu.edu.pl/~magik/pics/gumby1.jpg

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IIlKiRPSNGA

(Monty Python: ’My Brian Hurts)

’An argument is not contradiction (or abuse); it is a series of connected statements which establish a proposition; a debate is a dialectical intellectual process’

__________


The Socratic and Sophist method of education

Socrates: intellectual and spiritual development through a dialectical process.

Socrates would encourage his students to ‘argue’ with him, but to restate, since the term ‘argue’ has a number of meanings in the English, we are speaking of a Socratic ‘dialectical’ process, not a punch up, nor the showering of abuse; we are speaking of challenging an idea (thesis) with another idea (anti-thesis) and in this way the ideas and debating skills of both parties evolve and develop.

This process is intended to produce an intellectually evolved and intellectually honest person who can admit points to the opponent when the opponent’s position seems to be better and who can also stand up for their own ideas when challenged by an authority whom they disagree with. This is how we evolve intellectually and spiritually; whereas an ‘arrogant; person engages in an argument (debate) in the same way that a boxer fights (to win). The purpose of dialectical argument is not to win even if one is shown to be errant, but to test and evolve (develop) ones’ ideas. This sometimes can involve using the ‘Devil’s advocate’ form of argument where one attacks the arguments of those one essentially agrees with in order to test them.

The Sophists: Intellectual fascism (Gr. Sophist: a sophisticated, educated, arrogant pseudo-intellectual).

The Sophist method of educating students, which has been taken up by the Catholic Church throughout it’s history, was to lecture them for hours, and if challenged by a student, the student might be told that they are arrogant, told off or burned at the state, tortured by the Inquisition’ or simply ‘murdered ’ and branded a heretic who dared to challenge authority. The Sophist method defines the term ‘arrogance. An arrogant person thinks that they are always correct, and even when shown to be incorrect, they will still hold fast to their position, since their purpose is to ‘win’ an argument by all means necessary. The Sophists of course despised Socrates as much as he despised them (he considered them to be educated fools) and like so many others who challenge existing authority, Socrates was martyred.

Lucifer
http://www.luciferia.tv/animation/A.gif
Light of the World.
Aeon of Lucifer 2008

[lightgiver]

No contradictions.

your debate is just based on the same thing.

I do not conform to your or anyone else's ideologies and never will.:)

[luciferhorus]

your debate is just based on the same thing.

What "thing?"

Lux

[lightgiver]

What "thing?"

Lux

some old crazy commie anarchism label thing.:rolleyes:

[zero1]

some old crazy commie anarchism label thing. :rolleyes:

:(

I'm disappointed in you, LG.

You're usually the sort of person I would assume put little value in labels...

[lightgiver]

:(

I'm disappointed in you, LG.

You're usually the sort of person I would assume put little value in labels...

Yeah that is correct, I am disappointed in you that you think otherwise.:(

maybe you should feel more instead.:)

you see this the trouble wrong interpretations of labels and objects.

[luciferhorus]

some old crazy commie anarchism label thing.:rolleyes:


Well we have gone over this before. A "label" is a describing word such as a noun or an adjective. I would challenge you to attempt to speak without using nouns and adjectives, but you would find that you would not find language very useful. Thus I find your own language full of labels.

Critique and counterproposal.

It is very easy to criticise those who defend the prevailing Capitalist ideology, but all too often it is the case that those who do criticise them merely seek a "palace" revolution where one form of Capitalist tyranny is replaced with another. The other type of person is one who appears to have no ideology (no idea) and is merely a critic without a counterproposal; it seems to me that you are very much in that category.

Lucifer

[lightgiver]

Well we have gone over this before. A "label" is a describing word such as a noun or an adjective. I would challenge you to attempt to speak without using nouns and adjectives, but you would find that you would not find language very useful. Thus I find your own language full of labels.

Critique and counterproposal.

It is very easy to criticise those who defend the prevailing Capitalist ideology, but all too often it is the case that those who do criticise them merely seek a "palace" revolution where one form of Capitalist tyranny is replaced with another. The other type of person is one who appears to have no ideology (no idea) and is merely a critic without a counterproposal; it seems to me that you are very much in that category.

Lucifer

Labels are labels quite simple really,it just that humans over complicate matters with their nouns and adjectives,trying to come over all intelligent.

I will tell you once again I do not subscribe to any ideology s or systems.

What I subscribe to is wisdom and compassion,labels are not really needed for that.

[zero1]

Yeah that is correct, I am disappointed in you that you think otherwise. :( Maybe you should feel more instead.:) You see this the trouble wrong interpretations of labels and objects.

Well, that strikes me as something of a swerve, but nevermind. I feel quite a bit, you know, and if as you say you're all about wisdom and compassion, does that not extend to anarcho-communists? Commandante Lucifer is self-admittedly polyamorous, and I'm not that fussy either; we all could use some love, compassion and wisdom. ;)

[lightgiver]

Well, that strikes me as something of a swerve, but nevermind. I feel quite a bit, you know, and if as you say you're all about wisdom and compassion, does that not extend to anarcho-communists? Commandante Lucifer is self-admittedly polyamorous, and I'm not that fussy either; we all could use some love, compassion and wisdom. ;)

Like I say its up to people to beleive what they want including you and your anarchy commie ideology,just do not try and push it on to me ,that's all

Wisdom and compassion extends to all regardless of what label 1 follows.

that does not mean I have to agree with you.:)

[zero1]

Like I say its up to people to beleive what they want including you and your anarchy commie ideology, just do not try and push it on to me, that's all.

No-one was pushing anything on you; you chose to post on this thread, now it's all bluster. 'anarchy commie', I mean, really, children...

Wisdom and compassion extends to all regardless of what label 1 follows. That does not mean I have to agree with you.:)

True enough. Good luck.

[lightgiver]

No-one was pushing anything on you; you chose to post on this thread, now it's all bluster. 'anarchy commie', I mean, really, children...



True enough. Good luck.

No one is pushing an agenda,Its just that sometimes LHs post come across like that.

I am sure that LH states he is into some anarchy type communism agenda promoting masons like Marx,Castro ETC ETC it s all been exposed before.

I come on when people have the wrong interpretation of something,just trying to help.:)

I do agree with some of his thread about how some use religion and other practices to increase their own wealth and power.

Anyone with an ounce of common sense knows this.

[flyermay]

That's true, but in the end, it actually saved lives.

If the US had had to invade the island of Japan, they estimated Japanese civilian casualties to be 3 times what they were in Nagasaki and Hiroshima, not to even mention the US troop casualties that would have been sustained.

The fact that the bomb was necessary is lamentable, but what other answer could there have been? The Japanese were given ample warning of a "doomsday bomb" and opportunity to surrender. They ignored it.

Yes, that's definitely what the world was told. And sorry for bringing this up again after so long, but I just found an interesting video about this subject.

Sadly, the truth is that the atomic bomb was dropped anyway, even though WWII was practically over. Hiroshima and Nagasaki were chosen just because the US wanted to measure the effects of the atomic bomb on a city that was untouched by previous bombings.

This video is not from a "conspiracy theorist". John Pilger is a very well known journalist with an extensive career and various British and American awards on his back:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ak-uNo8hFL0

[lightgiver]

Yes, that's definitely what the world was told. And sorry for bringing this up again after so long, but I just found an interesting video about this subject.

Sadly, the truth is that the atomic bomb was dropped anyway, even though WWII was practically over. Hiroshima and Nagasaki were chosen just because the US wanted to measure the effects of the atomic bomb on a city that was untouched by previous bombings.

This video is not from a "conspiracy theorist". John Pilger is a very well known journalist with an extensive career and various British and American awards on his back:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ak-uNo8hFL0

The Holocaust (from the Greek ὁλόκαυστος [holókaustos]: hólos, "whole" and kaustós, "burnt"

http://img693.imageshack.us/img693/1658/nuclearexplosion.jpg (http://img693.imageshack.us/i/nuclearexplosion.jpg/)

http://img693.imageshack.us/img693/9283/hiroshima1.gif (http://img693.imageshack.us/i/hiroshima1.gif/)

http://img693.imageshack.us/img693/5051/hiroshima2.jpg (http://img693.imageshack.us/i/hiroshima2.jpg/)

[anarchocommunist666]

No, it's what math tells me. Mao was responsible for an estimated 20 million deaths, not in war, but his own citizens, in peace time. This is by itself far more any nation has killed in war, and doesn't even include the victims of Stalin, Ceaucescaue, Castro, Pol Pot, Honecher, and the other Communist leaders.



You're wrong there. I haven't defended anybody, I've been criticizing the Communists. But *you* are defending them, and *they* are the most corrupt and criminal form of government the world has ever seen.

You are wrong. Mao is one of the most lied about people in history.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jw8VEwHUlJs
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ms99-3Nj81I

[luciferhorus]

You are wrong. Mao is one of the most lied about people in history.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jw8VEwHUlJs
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ms99-3Nj81I


Yes of course. As Lotta argues, agricultural collectivism in China "solved" China's food problems, despite a limited famine which was caused essentially by the worst weather conditions of the century; if there had been a Capitalist system in China, the 1958-1961 famine would still have occurred and ; Mao tried to feed the Chinese population, not starve them. The fact that 200 million people in our world are always close to the point of starvation means little to the anti-Communists; nor the constant state of war which the US state terrorists have subjected the world to.

Agricultural collectivism is the only practical and sensible solution which could bring about the non miraculous feeding of the 6 billion. It is the ideal solution for Third World impoverishment.

Lux

[anarchocommunist666]

Even though Lightgiver and I disagree on pretty much everything (except Communism), and we fight all the time, we nevertheless have the freedom to do so, and no governmental entity is trying to stop us from expressing our opinions on this website.

In Cuba, use of the Internet is highly restricted, and is practically banned for the average citizen. It is illegal to criticize the Castro brothers, and doing so makes one guilty of "dangerousness", which is a real word written into a real law on that island.

Flyermay, I've spoken to you in depth before on other subjects, and I know that you're an intelligent person, and not an idiot. I just for the life of me cannot figure out why you're defending those criminals.

We all want a better world. Most of us want to see more egalitarianism and more grass roots political power. We want to end hunger and oppression too. But can't you see that the Communists use our humanitarian concerns against us, like a carrot on a stick?


this guy's clearly NOT from Cuba and Commendante has nothing to do with his life so what could he know. Fidel is a hero, the one of few leaders along with Chaves and earlier Che, who oppose US and Western in general Imperialism in "banana" part of Americas. And people from Cuba are grateful to him, not only because of his actions Cuba is much much safer place to live than say Mexico or Brazil not to mention the States.


1 - As said in my earlier post, Cuba is one of the safest postcolonial countries in Americas (comparabl...e to Canada) AND it does even have comparable high level of public health care (which you cannot say about...US for example)

2 - Cubans don't share fate of people from countries that were/are occupied economically or with armies by the West. Don't share fate of Malaysia and Philippines (Cheap labor source for the Global dominated by the West economies). Instead most Cubans who grow up on Cuba you will see as highly qualified staff, like Doctors, other medical personel, Mechanicans, Architects....(yarr) Unroll Parchment

3 - the US with "approval" of the rest of the West put an embargo on Cuba to cripple it's economy while it was in the transition. And has now even with the open objection of the United Nations "The United Nations General Assembly has condemned the embargo as a violation of international law every year since 1992. In 2002, for example, it condemned the embargo by 173 votes to 3"

4 - and last fact is that also with the "approval" of the rest of the western world US has for years a "torture center" called Guantánamo's Detention Camp on part of the Cuban island where it has its military base.