why was the american gov so "evil" during the cold war

[loverOfSluts69]

Bullshit like everything else you have said.If a group of people are better off because they work for the state they are a class. If the leaders eat well and the workers stand in line for food they are not equal . You have drank so much kool aid you most piss red .

Class is not a simple social layer, class is relation in the process of production or how on which bases u have your money, if you get them on bases of ownership only you are capitalist, if you earn on ownership but you also work in your shop, you are middle class, if you earn by wage labour, you are working class.
I never said they were equal, that was my point on not being communist states by the way, because there was no full equality... but is not so simple, workers in America have way better living conditions than in Africa, does that makes them different class? There was no private ownership in Yugoslavia of the factories, they were like managers, they could be changed by the workers council, and mane were taken from directors in the factories, the were just executives, they didn't own capital or means of production, they were not class, part of the state aparatus. You don't consider some bureaucrat in The White House a capitalist.

 

[loverOfSluts69]

The government of the former Yugoslavia and Russia , E.Germany etc seem to actually have had a form of state sponsored capitalism. And you yourself say they where not actually communist countries. But you also claim that there were no classes in these countries. So which is it ? Were they classless communist countries or not actually communist? And if you benefit more because of your position in the state how is that not a form of class?Actually it appears Yugoslavia went to a market based economy.So I stand corrected. But a market based economy isn't very communist now is it ?

There was no government of former Russia since Russia didn't exist, it was the USSR.
There was no state sponsored capitalism, that is why I say you don't understand... how can you have capitalism if you don't have the bases for capitalist mode of production? There was no profits, goods were not produced as commodities, they had planed production. The economy functioned opposite to capitalist. You speak as if the state was investor who researched the market needs and invested there, it was the opposite, the state invested there where investment was needed to satisfy needs.
I never said that the were communist countries, you said that, and because you have no idea on the subject, or your knowldgge is based not in fact but just observations from USA liberal point, you mixed things... if the Bureaucracy was not a class but layer it doesn't means that it was classless, the working class existed and there were some middle layers. Socialism is when the working class disapears as class, worker state has one class and other social layers, capitalism has two classes and social layers.
You can benefit more because of your position, example professor on University, but you earn your money in wage labour relations, you are working class because of that. You can be poor, but earn your money from owning your small shop in which you are working than you are petit bourgeois. Class is more connected to your relations to private ownership and protecting it than to your wealth. Capitalist are wealthy because they are capitalist, not the other way, because they are wealthy they are capitalist...
Yugoslavia had several different stages is more complex than what you say, but even market reforms were quite limited compared to China today, it was not market as you imagine. Not only Yugoslavia, USSR had market during NEP, but the market was limited and not dominant. By the way Yugoslavia fall apart because the market reformations and the relations that the market developed between the countries.

 

[Dcdevon]

There was no government of former Russia since Russia didn't exist, it was the USSR.
There was no state sponsored capitalism, that is why I say you don't understand... how can you have capitalism if you don't have the bases for capitalist mode of production? There was no profits, goods were not produced as commodities, they had planed production. The economy functioned opposite to capitalist. You speak as if the state was investor who researched the market needs and invested there, it was the opposite, the state invested there where investment was needed to satisfy needs.
I never said that the were communist countries, you said that, and because you have no idea on the subject, or your knowldgge is based not in fact but just observations from USA liberal point, you mixed things... if the Bureaucracy was not a class but layer it doesn't means that it was classless, the working class existed and there were some middle layers. Socialism is when the working class disapears as class, worker state has one class and other social layers, capitalism has two classes and social layers.
You can benefit more because of your position, example professor on University, but you earn your money in wage labour relations, you are working class because of that. You can be poor, but earn your money from owning your small shop in which you are working than you are petit bourgeois. Class is more connected to your relations to private ownership and protecting it than to your wealth. Capitalist are wealthy because they are capitalist, not the other way, because they are wealthy they are capitalist...
Yugoslavia had several different stages is more complex than what you say, but even market reforms were quite limited compared to China today, it was not market as you imagine. Not only Yugoslavia, USSR had market during NEP, but the market was limited and not dominant. By the way Yugoslavia fall apart because the market reformations and the relations that the market developed between the countries.

You keep changing what you claim to be saying and contradicting yourself.You have no clue what you are talking about.

 

[Dcdevon]

Class is not a simple social layer, class is relation in the process of production or how on which bases u have your money, if you get them on bases of ownership only you are capitalist, if you earn on ownership but you also work in your shop, you are middle class, if you earn by wage labour, you are working class.
I never said they were equal, that was my point on not being communist states by the way, because there was no full equality... but is not so simple, workers in America have way better living conditions than in Africa, does that makes them different class? There was no private ownership in Yugoslavia of the factories, they were like managers, they could be changed by the workers council, and mane were taken from directors in the factories, the were just executives, they didn't own capital or means of production, they were not class, part of the state aparatus. You don't consider some bureaucrat in The White House a capitalist.

You claimed there were no classes. Now are trying to redefine what class is.You are just throwing shit against the wall and seeing what sticks .

 

[m_p12690]

You claimed there were no classes. Now are trying to redefine what class is.You are just throwing shit against the wall and seeing what sticks .

I think further conversation between you two may prove unfruitful. I for one am sure we Americans have a lot to learn about what real communist or socialist ideology and practice was/is, rather than relying on anti-communist propaganda.

 

[Dcdevon]

I think further conversation between you two may prove unfruitful. I for one am sure we Americans have a lot to learn about what real communist or socialist ideology and practice was/is, rather than relying on anti-communist propaganda.

If he knew what he was talking about maybe.But he keeps changing what he says to fit a different narrative and contradicting himself. Just because he is from a former communist country doesn't mean he knows what he is talking about .He is only 32 he has never lived under communism. He is just repeating what he has read .Which is nothing but propaganda as well.

 

[loverOfSluts69]

You claimed there were no classes. Now are trying to redefine what class is.You are just throwing shit against the wall and seeing what sticks .

No man, I didn't, I claimed they were not communist countries because they were not classless, and that refering to them as such, because of the same reason is just propaganda of the Western states. Read good what I wrote, that was the point of all what I wrote, that they were not communist and that communism is something way different than you tend to imagine when you speak of so called "real-socialist" states.

I do know what I speak, I grown up with people who lived in Yugoslavia, worked, voted in Yugoslavia, most of them still consider Tito as positive historical figure... I don't consider him as such since for me Tito was someone who betrayed the working class, but research done by the American Republican Institute in Macedonia has shown that 80% of the population considers him as positive person. This has nothing to do with the role he played but with their own experience of life in Yugoslavia and life today.

You seem like you don't read me what I say, just project your mindset of ideological propaganda to me as someone who just want to harm, as the "children eating communist" of the USA's propaganda in the 20s... which is a waste because you are working class, you are exploited and for the stupid reason of the US state telling you what is communism you miss your own class interest and to read what generations of workers fought for really to give you some benefits you take for granted as 8 hour shift or pension.

 

[SexyAsianBitch]

Beginning in 1928, the course of the economy of the Soviet Union was guided by a series of five-year plans. ... After Mikhail Gorbachev came to power in 1985, he began a process of economic liberalization by dismantling the command economy and moving towards a mixed economy

 

[SexyAsianBitch]

Many scholars agree that the economy of the Soviet Union and of the Eastern Bloc countries modeled after it, including Maoist China, were state capitalist systems, and that the current economy of China also constitutes a form of state capitalism

 

[Dcdevon]

No man, I didn't, I claimed they were not communist countries because they were not classless, and that refering to them as such, because of the same reason is just propaganda of the Western states. Read good what I wrote, that was the point of all what I wrote, that they were not communist and that communism is something way different than you tend to imagine when you speak of so called "real-socialist" states.

I do know what I speak, I grown up with people who lived in Yugoslavia, worked, voted in Yugoslavia, most of them still consider Tito as positive historical figure... I don't consider him as such since for me Tito was someone who betrayed the working class, but research done by the American Republican Institute in Macedonia has shown that 80% of the population considers him as positive person. This has nothing to do with the role he played but with their own experience of life in Yugoslavia and life today.

You seem like you don't read me what I say, just project your mindset of ideological propaganda to me as someone who just want to harm, as the "children eating communist" of the USA's propaganda in the 20s... which is a waste because you are working class, you are exploited and for the stupid reason of the US state telling you what is communism you miss your own class interest and to read what generations of workers fought for really to give you some benefits you take for granted as 8 hour shift or pension.

Our gains made in America were not because of communism The CPUSA was funded by The Soviet Union and reflected their agenda .As such they never had much influence We have been influenced by Socialists though .The things you mention mostly came about because of the American Socialist Party although communists did play a part in workers rights in America it isn't the role you imagined. In addition most people who protested were injured and died didn't hold either ideology .They just wanted to be treated decently .

 

[loverOfSluts69]

Many scholars agree that the economy of the Soviet Union and of the Eastern Bloc countries modeled after it, including Maoist China, were state capitalist systems, and that the current economy of China also constitutes a form of state capitalism

Yes, but it depends on which analysis are based on the subject. Ema Goldman is one of the first that offered this reading, Trotsky on the other side has different analyse and if you read him and the arguments he gives, it shows that his analysis are correct including his position that the USSR will fall apart... Chine's current economy is just regulated capitalism, it is capitalist and has nothing to do with Maoist China long time ago...

 

[loverOfSluts69]

Our gains made in America were not because of communism The CPUSA was funded by The Soviet Union and reflected their agenda .As such they never had much influence We have been influenced by Socialists though .The things you mention mostly came about because of the American Socialist Party although communists did play a part in workers rights in America it isn't the role you imagined. In addition most people who protested were injured and died didn't hold either ideology .They just wanted to be treated decently .

Where I said that the workers rights in US were because of the CPUSA? Quote me please... I speak of the Second International which by the way was formed by Marx and based in Marxism long time before CPUSA... but if we are on the subject, CPUSA was not formed by "evil chileater from Russia" it was a split in the Second International that was happening everywhere during WWI, it was split based on the support of the war in the Social Democratic parties everywhere also in Russia just in Russi the split happened some time ago... you still use the same mentality of "evil childeaters from Siberia"... I'm not even saying what you think, communism my friend has quite a history and quite different versions it is not the KGB...read this:

"The Communist Party USA, officially the Communist Party of the United States of America (CPUSA),[8] is a far-left communist party in the United States established in 1919 after a split in the Socialist Party of America following the Russian Revolution.[9][10] The history of the CPUSA is closely related to the American labor movement and communist parties worldwide. Initially operating underground due to the Palmer Raids starting in the First Red Scare, the party was influential in American politics in the first half of the 20th century and played a prominent role in the labor movement from the 1920s through the 1940s, becoming known for opposing racism and racial segregation after sponsoring the defense for the Scottsboro Boys in 1931. Its membership increased during the Great Depression, and they played a key role in the Congress of Industrial Organizations.[10] The CPUSA subsequently declined due to events such as World War II, the beginning of the Cold War, the second Red Scare, and the influence of McCarthyism. Its opposition to the Marshall Plan and the Truman Doctrine were unpopular, with its endorsed candidate Henry A. Wallace under-performing in the 1948 presidential election. Its support for the Soviet Union increasingly alienated it from the rest of the left in the United States in the 1960s."

 

[loverOfSluts69]

"The Socialist Party of America (SPA) was a socialist political party in the United States formed in 1901 by a merger between the three-year-old Social Democratic Party of America and disaffected elements of the Socialist Labor Party of America which had split from the main organization in 1899.[1] In the first decades of the 20th century, it drew significant support from many different groups, including trade unionists, progressive social reformers, populist farmers and immigrants. However, it refused to form coalitions with other parties, or even to allow its members to vote for other parties. Eugene V. Debs twice won over 900,000 votes in presidential elections (1912 and 1920) while the party also elected two Representatives (Victor L. Berger and Meyer London), dozens of state legislators, more than a hundred mayors, and countless lesser officials.[2] The party's staunch opposition to American involvement in World War I, although welcomed by many, also led to prominent defections, official repression, and vigilante persecution. The organization was further shattered by a factional war over how to respond to the October Revolution in the Russian Republic in 1917 and the establishment of the Communist International in 1919—many members left the party in favor of the Communist Party USA. After endorsing Robert M. La Follette's presidential campaign in 1924, the party returned to independent action at the presidential level. It had modest growth in the early 1930s behind presidential candidate Norman Thomas. The party's appeal was weakened by the popularity of El Comandante Franklin D. Roosevelt's New Deal, the organization and flexibility of the Communist Party under Earl Browder and the resurgent labor movement's desire to support sympathetic Democratic Party politicians. A divisive and ultimately unsuccessful attempt to broaden the party by admitting followers of Leon Trotsky and Jay Lovestone caused the traditional Old Guard to leave and form the Social Democratic Federation. While the party was always strongly anti-fascist as well as anti-Stalinist, its opposition to American entry in World War II cost it both internal and external support. The party stopped running presidential candidates after 1956, when its nominee Darlington Hoopes won fewer than 6,000 votes. In the party's last decades, its members, many of them prominent in the labor, peace, civil rights, and civil liberties movements, fundamentally disagreed about the socialist movement's relationship to the labor movement and the Democratic Party and about how best to advance democracy abroad. In 1970–1973, these strategic differences had become so acute that the Socialist Party of America changed its name to Social Democrats, USA. Leaders of two of its caucuses formed separate socialist organizations, namely the Socialist Party USA and the Democratic Socialist Organizing Committee, the latter of which became a precursor to the Democratic Socialists of America."

If you want to read, https:/ /en.wikipedia.org/ wiki/ Socialist_Workers_Party_ (United_States) something more, because your idea of communism is quite narrow...

 

[Dcdevon]

Where I said that the workers rights in US were because of the CPUSA? Quote me please... I speak of the Second International which by the way was formed by Marx and based in Marxism long time before CPUSA... but if we are on the subject, CPUSA was not formed by "evil chileater from Russia" it was a split in the Second International that was happening everywhere during WWI, it was split based on the support of the war in the Social Democratic parties everywhere also in Russia just in Russi the split happened some time ago... you still use the same mentality of "evil childeaters from Siberia"... I'm not even saying what you think, communism my friend has quite a history and quite different versions it is not the KGB...read this:

"The Communist Party USA, officially the Communist Party of the United States of America (CPUSA),[8] is a far-left communist party in the United States established in 1919 after a split in the Socialist Party of America following the Russian Revolution.[9][10] The history of the CPUSA is closely related to the American labor movement and communist parties worldwide. Initially operating underground due to the Palmer Raids starting in the First Red Scare, the party was influential in American politics in the first half of the 20th century and played a prominent role in the labor movement from the 1920s through the 1940s, becoming known for opposing racism and racial segregation after sponsoring the defense for the Scottsboro Boys in 1931. Its membership increased during the Great Depression, and they played a key role in the Congress of Industrial Organizations.[10] The CPUSA subsequently declined due to events such as World War II, the beginning of the Cold War, the second Red Scare, and the influence of McCarthyism. Its opposition to the Marshall Plan and the Truman Doctrine were unpopular, with its endorsed candidate Henry A. Wallace under-performing in the 1948 presidential election. Its support for the Soviet Union increasingly alienated it from the rest of the left in the United States in the 1960s."

I didn't say CPUSA was formed by Russia.I said they were funded by Russia and worked for the interests of Russia which they did .They also helped Russia with spying on the U.S .Yes they spit from the American Socialist Party.That was before WW2 .After WW2 they were funded by Russia during the cold war .

 

[Dcdevon]

No man, I didn't, I claimed they were not communist countries because they were not classless, and that refering to them as such, because of the same reason is just propaganda of the Western states. Read good what I wrote, that was the point of all what I wrote, that they were not communist and that communism is something way different than you tend to imagine when you speak of so called "real-socialist" states.

I do know what I speak, I grown up with people who lived in Yugoslavia, worked, voted in Yugoslavia, most of them still consider Tito as positive historical figure... I don't consider him as such since for me Tito was someone who betrayed the working class, but research done by the American Republican Institute in Macedonia has shown that 80% of the population considers him as positive person. This has nothing to do with the role he played but with their own experience of life in Yugoslavia and life today.

You seem like you don't read me what I say, just project your mindset of ideological propaganda to me as someone who just want to harm, as the "children eating communist" of the USA's propaganda in the 20s... which is a waste because you are working class, you are exploited and for the stupid reason of the US state telling you what is communism you miss your own class interest and to read what generations of workers fought for really to give you some benefits you take for granted as 8 hour shift or pension.

What ' generations of workers' are you referring to here? And what do these generations of workers have to do with Communism? Since Communism is the subject we are talking about .What do these generations of workers have to do with workers rights in America?

 

[loverOfSluts69]

What ' generations of workers' are you referring to here? And what do these generations of workers have to do with Communism? Since Communism is the subject we are talking about .What do these generations of workers have to do with workers rights in America?

I speak of communism, you speak of Cold War... I speak of generations of working class fighters since the The Communist League even before the movement split in Anarchist and Marxist... You speak of Cold War nonsense about "evil childeaters and their agents in USA"... man, let's face it, you know nothing of the socialist movement since it's begginings, have no idea, repeat just Cold War American ideology of the evil communists. Here is the thing, you can't narrow the communist movement which has more than 150 years of history to Stalin's USSR and Cold War politics... The communist movement is not KGB, it has quite huge history... The split in the Second International was based on for or against WWI, not on "the dictatorship of the proletariat", both sides considered them self Marxist, read...


"(German: Bund der Kommunisten) was an international political party established on 1 June 1847 in London, England. The organisation was formed through the merger of the League of the Just, headed by Karl Schapper and the Communist Correspondence Committee of Brussels, Belgium, in which Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels were the dominant personalities. The Communist League is regarded as the first Marxist political party and it was on behalf of this group that Marx and Engels wrote the Communist Manifesto late in 1847. The Communist League was formally disbanded in November 1852, following the Cologne Communist Trial."

By the way the 8 hour shift was set as request by Marx on the Congress, and the Second International realized that...

"The International Workingmen's Association took up the demand for an eight-hour day at its Congress in Geneva in 1866, declaring "The legal limitation of the working day is a preliminary condition without which all further attempts at improvements and emancipation of the working class must prove abortive", and "The Congress proposes eight hours as the legal limit of the working day." Karl Marx saw it as of vital importance to the workers' health, writing in Das Kapital (1867): "By extending the working day, therefore, capitalist production...not only produces a deterioration of human labour power by robbing it of its normal moral and physical conditions of development and activity, but also produces the premature exhaustion and death of this labour power itself." "

I won't continue this discussion since it has no point, I'm trynig to comunicate with you on human level, I can use the same methods as you, I know how to do it, I'm not stupid, but that has no point... I now you like Biden and speak of "freedom", I guess by "freedom" you consider the bombs on Syria during a fucken pandemic... No it was not generations of communist which won the 8 hour day, it was Biden, maybe Clinton in the 90s...

 

[Dcdevon]

I speak of communism, you speak of Cold War... I speak of generations of working class fighters since the The Communist League even before the movement split in Anarchist and Marxist... You speak of Cold War nonsense about "evil childeaters and their agents in USA"... man, let's face it, you know nothing of the socialist movement since it's begginings, have no idea, repeat just Cold War American ideology of the evil communists. Here is the thing, you can't narrow the communist movement which has more than 150 years of history to Stalin's USSR and Cold War politics... The communist movement is not KGB, it has quite huge history... The split in the Second International was based on for or against WWI, not on "the dictatorship of the proletariat", both sides considered them self Marxist, read...


"(German: Bund der Kommunisten) was an international political party established on 1 June 1847 in London, England. The organisation was formed through the merger of the League of the Just, headed by Karl Schapper and the Communist Correspondence Committee of Brussels, Belgium, in which Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels were the dominant personalities. The Communist League is regarded as the first Marxist political party and it was on behalf of this group that Marx and Engels wrote the Communist Manifesto late in 1847. The Communist League was formally disbanded in November 1852, following the Cologne Communist Trial."

By the way the 8 hour shift was set as request by Marx on the Congress, and the Second International realized that...

"The International Workingmen's Association took up the demand for an eight-hour day at its Congress in Geneva in 1866, declaring "The legal limitation of the working day is a preliminary condition without which all further attempts at improvements and emancipation of the working class must prove abortive", and "The Congress proposes eight hours as the legal limit of the working day." Karl Marx saw it as of vital importance to the workers' health, writing in Das Kapital (1867): "By extending the working day, therefore, capitalist production...not only produces a deterioration of human labour power by robbing it of its normal moral and physical conditions of development and activity, but also produces the premature exhaustion and death of this labour power itself." "

I won't continue this discussion since it has no point, I'm trynig to comunicate with you on human level, I can use the same methods as you, I know how to do it, I'm not stupid, but that has no point... I now you like Biden and speak of "freedom", I guess by "freedom" you consider the bombs on Syria during a fucken pandemic... No it was not generations of communist which won the 8 hour day, it was Biden, maybe Clinton in the 90s...

So you were talking about communists. You just said you didn't mention communists in reference to the American labor movement. So which is it? So either you who claim to know so much about communism , didn't know American communists did play a role in the American labor movement early on .Which doesn't make you a very good comrade .Or you were lying when you said you didn't mention them. Which is it?

 

[loverOfSluts69]

So you were talking about communists. You just said you didn't mention communists in reference to the American labor movement. So which is it? So either you who claim to know so much about communism , didn't know American communists did play a role in the American labor movement early on .Which doesn't make you a very good comrade .Or you were lying when you said you didn't mention them. Which is it?

You are high, or you don't read, or you read but pretend to be stupid, maybe just troll... don't care... I do said American communist played role, it is in the quotation... I also said that communism is quite wide movement not only the CPUSA in America, you had Black Panther Party, SWP and many more organisations, currently you have at least 10 Trotskyst organisations in the USA... not to speak of others... buy buy mister troll

 

[Dcdevon]

You are high, or you don't read, or you read but pretend to be stupid, maybe just troll... don't care... I do said American communist played role, it is in the quotation... I also said that communism is quite wide movement not only the CPUSA in America, you had Black Panther Party, SWP and many more organisations, currently you have at least 10 Trotskyst organisations in the USA... not to speak of others... buy buy mister troll

You are the stupid one. You have changed what you claim to be saying three times today. Don't be mad because I keep catching you in your contradictions. Stop making up shit and lying about it afterwards.This was real fucking simple .Did you or did you not say communist played a part in the American labor movement.You claimed you didn't say that. I showed that you did .And now you claim you did say that .Wtf is wrong with you ? Are you hitting the potato vodka hard ?

 

[loverOfSluts69]

You are the stupid one. You have changed what you claim to be saying three times today. Don't be mad because I keep catching you in your contradictions. Stop making up shit and lying about it afterwards.This was real fucking simple .Did you or did you not say communist played a part in the American labor movement.You claimed you didn't say that. I showed that you did .And now you claim you did say that .Wtf is wrong with you ? Are you hitting the potato vodka hard ?

You have no idea, yes communist played role, communist in America is not only the CPUSA, is that clear, or is too complicated for your Cold War mentality to understand that communism is not KGB angent?