WWII, Nazis Communists and other stuff

[Guest Lobo]

I don't know why I just went down that "Old Country Buffet" rabbit hole for 5 minutes, but holy shit...that's why we have novel coronaviruses.  Four hours into your shift, they suggest the carving station be wiped down with a dry paper towel.  Yeah, that should kill everything from a pork cutting board.  And then watch the 1:20 mark for lessons on how to start being a pedophile and asking what school/what time you can find the children of regular guests.  What the fuck?  

Anyway, back to Nazis who at least had food service standards.  

[hayden_horn 11360]

24 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

@Anastasis

Here you go.

What is "the dead end of Bolshevism"?

i'm not anastasis, but i was reading the other thread, and it got me thinking. before you begin, please know that none of this is a defense of communism.

i've made this argument before in this thread, and it never got any traction, but communism was never really effected in russia. sure, lenin clad himself in the cloak of public ownership of the means of production, but it was simply a tool for his power grab. he effectively replaced the romanov emperor with...a system of publicly owned property and where every person works and is paid according to need? oh, wait, no, he replaced the romanov dynasty with his own. granted, there was no primogeniture system in place for succession, which led to political infighting, leading to stalin, khrushchev, brezhnev, etc. yet, for the russian people, shit was essentially the same, as long as you backed the right local guy. but that was no different from the romanovs. people disappearing in russia for political punishment is a time-honored tradition.

basically the same thing happened in china with mao. sure, they displaced an emperor and a bureaucracy that was mired with outdated methods and traditions, and they replaced it with...a system of publicly owned property and where every person works and is paid according to need? oh, wait, no, he replaced the manchu dynasty with his own. mao wore his blue suit, sure, but it was his costume to fool the people so he could grab power and rule as basically an emperor with a completely different (but same) bureaucracy mired with outdated methods and traditions. the cultural revolution is looked upon in china as communism failing, but it really was mao reinserting himself and his power as leader following the famine. basically, mao was following stalin's despotic roadmap: consolidate power through violence and political purity tests.

neither nation has been really communist; they merely traded one despot for another in a different set of clothes. revolutionary transitions of power often rely on redistribution of wealth from the existing wealthy to political allies.  and despots doing despotic things should surprise no one, because as the saying goes: a king has only two types of people in his population: subjects and enemies. 

so my answer to anastasis would be, russia and china have been russia-ing and china-ing along for centuries. how they dress it up doesn't make it any different underneath. 

Edited August 16, 2020 by hayden_horn

[bad_teammate 13125]

3 minutes ago, Onboard 2.0 said:

Bolshevism itself. How do you not get that ? Show me a single Bolshevist state that is succeeding economically, socially, etc.  

I can't think of any kind of -ism that isn't "dead-end" using that kind of criteria. Empires and nations fall. And if they don't "fall" entirely they at least change beyond previous recognitions. All of them. If you're going to talk about our nation like it's God's Eternal then you're just engaging in more wishful, magical thinking.

Here are some realities about the Soviet Union.

- The Russian GDP per capita went up 6x under the Soviet regime adjusted for inflation.
- In 1914, 80+% of Russians were subsistence-farming peasants.
- Fewer than 30% of Russians were literate.

GDP growth, Soviet Union vs Modern Post-Soviet Russia

Per Capita GDP growth

Industrial productivity

The reality is that the Soviet Union was tremendously powerful and grew impressively and did so while under CONSTANT economic warfare from the entire West. The idea that Communist economies can't work isn't based in real understandings of anything measurable, it's just talking points that were vomited into your mouth as a kid that you vomit up again. Huge economic failures in the Soviet Union. Massive economic successes in the Soviet Union. The story is very complicated.

 

[Onboard 2.0 9083]

On 8/16/2020 at 2:08 PM, bad_teammate said:

I can't think of any kind of -ism that isn't "dead-end" using that kind of criteria. Empires and nations fall. And if they don't "fall" entirely they at least change beyond previous recognitions. All of them. If you're going to talk about our nation like it's God's Eternal then you're just engaging in more wishful, magical thinking.

Here are some realities about the Soviet Union.

- The Russian GDP per capita went up 6x under the Soviet regime adjusted for inflation.
- In 1914, 80+% of Russians were subsistence-farming peasants.
- Fewer than 30% of Russians were literate.

GDP growth, Soviet Union vs Modern Post-Soviet Russia

Per Capita GDP growth

Industrial productivity

The reality is that the Soviet Union was tremendously powerful and grew impressively and did so while under CONSTANT economic warfare from the entire West. The idea that Communist economies can't work isn't based in real understandings of anything measurable, it's just talking points that were vomited into your mouth as a kid that you vomit up again. Huge economic failures in the Soviet Union. Massive economic successes in the Soviet Union. The story is very complicated.

 

And a present the Soviet union is now defunct, real successful.

They couldn't keep store shelves stocked, their cars broke down, their nuclear reactors melt down, their missile systems may not have even worked, their subs were dangerous. 

These were the things they put all their focus into, and still couldn't get it right.

They had to build a wall to keep people in.

I could go on for pages about the failures of a soviet style system of Govt while you try and wax poetic about the assault from the West.  This was the west that was going to be crushed by the superior soviet world.  You can post all the graphs, charts, and opinions you'd like, but it'll just be pissing in the wind.

The communist system sucks because it's an untenable system of govt ( it's really just a mafioso system) with no reward to any, but those in the party.  PRO TIP: there's only one party/power structure so change is impossible. 

Edited February 10, 2021 by Onboard 2.0

[Anastasis 23375]

20 minutes ago, hayden_horn said:

so my answer to anastasis would be, russia and china have been russia-ing and china-ing along for centuries. how they dress it up doesn't make it any different underneath. 

I am not sure that I would lump Russia and China in the same boat at all. 

My query on the other thread was essentially an interest in the counterfactual, "What would the world look like today had the Bolshevik revolution not occurred". I think that it would look very very different.  Russia gonna Russia no doubt. But would Russia on an alternative path have created the lasting schism with the West that exists today? It's hard to imagine a course that would resulted in greater division than the cold war and its aftermath. 

[Anastasis 23375]

44 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

I can't think of any kind of -ism that isn't "dead-end" using that kind of criteria. Empires and nations fall. And if they don't "fall" entirely they at least change beyond previous recognitions. All of them. If you're going to talk about our nation like it's God's Eternal then you're just engaging in more wishful, magical thinking.

Here are some realities about the Soviet Union.

- The Russian GDP per capita went up 6x under the Soviet regime adjusted for inflation.
- In 1914, 80+% of Russians were subsistence-farming peasants.
- Fewer than 30% of Russians were literate.

GDP growth, Soviet Union vs Modern Post-Soviet Russia

Per Capita GDP growth

Industrial productivity

The reality is that the Soviet Union was tremendously powerful and grew impressively and did so while under CONSTANT economic warfare from the entire West. The idea that Communist economies can't work isn't based in real understandings of anything measurable, it's just talking points that were vomited into your mouth as a kid that you vomit up again. Huge economic failures in the Soviet Union. Massive economic successes in the Soviet Union. The story is very complicated.

 

Would be interested in similar statistics and graphs for the United States over same time frame. 

[Brisketexan 104465]

Would be interested in similar statistics and graphs for the United States over same time frame. 

Indeed. The shift from primarily poor agrarian population to industrial economies was significant. The US had already made real moves that way, of course, but the shift from the prewar economy to the postwar economy was profound.

At the beginning of the depression, I believe that around 50% of the us population was employed in or dependent upon agriculture. Now, it’s around 2%.

That’s not to say that the Soviet system wasn’t more effective at economic modernization than the Czarist one - it likely was. But the false conclusion is to compare the Soviet system results to only the czarist results. Those aren’t the only two alternatives. Hell, other European countries that didn’t go communist (or at least not for the entire century) also saw huge economic leaps over the next century. Moving farmers to factories built wealth and raised the standard of living, no matter who does it. Shit, look at China today.

[workswithseed 2033]

2 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

Indeed. The shift from primarily poor agrarian population to industrial economies was significant. The US had already made real moves that way, of course, but the shift from the prewar economy to the postwar economy was profound.

At the beginning of the depression, I believe that around 50% of the us population was employed in or dependent upon agriculture. Now, it’s around 2%.

That’s not to say that the Soviet system wasn’t more effective at economic modernization than the Czarist one - it likely was. But the false conclusion is to compare the Soviet system results to only the czarist results. Those aren’t the only two alternatives. Hell, other European countries that didn’t go communist (or at least not for the entire century) also saw huge economic leaps over the next century. Moving farmers to factories built wealth and raised the standard of living, no matter who does it. Shit, look at China today.

China opening up to capitalism really helped with that. 

[bad_teammate 13125]

2 hours ago, Onboard 2.0 said:

And a present the Soviet union is now defunct real successful.

All nations and empires fall. Even ours will fall. Don't be delusional.

Rome fell. Was it never "successful"? Don't be a moron (if that's possible for you). The Soviet Union had a period of astonishing economic and social success. That's not a value judgment, it's just me looking somewhat objectively at history and not being completely fucking stupid.

Quote

they couldn't keep store shelves stocked, their cars broke down, their nuclear reactors melt down, their missile systems may not have even worked, their subs were dangerous. 

And I could insert a list of all the embarrassing and stupid bullshit I want for every possible nation, what's your point?

Are you trying to prove that America is better than the Soviet Union? Cool, great, you're in a place where literally everyone will agree. Good job. Have a sticker.

Quote

I could go on for pages about the failures of a soviet style system of Govt while you try and wax poetic about the assault form the West.

@AnastasisYou used this phrase in the other thread regarding the Romanov picture. Your schtick is tired and your vocabulary is poor.

The reality is that the West was constantly hitting the Soviet Union and its satellites/allies with economic embargoes and sanctions. It's a fact and it doesn't care about your abundant and easily-wounded feelings.

And I could also go on for pages about the failures of the USA, what's your point?

58 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

Indeed. The shift from primarily poor agrarian population to industrial economies was significant. The US had already made real moves that way, of course, but the shift from the prewar economy to the postwar economy was profound.

At the beginning of the depression, I believe that around 50% of the us population was employed in or dependent upon agriculture. Now, it’s around 2%.

That’s not to say that the Soviet system wasn’t more effective at economic modernization than the Czarist one - it likely was. But the false conclusion is to compare the Soviet system results to only the czarist results. Those aren’t the only two alternatives. Hell, other European countries that didn’t go communist (or at least not for the entire century) also saw huge economic leaps over the next century. Moving farmers to factories built wealth and raised the standard of living, no matter who does it. Shit, look at China today.

Centrally-planned industrial economies do a wonderful job of building mass industry, slashing poverty, and boosting literacy. Soviet Union, United States, and PRC prove it.

Edited August 16, 2020 by bad_teammate

[Anastasis 23375]

17 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

Quote

I could go on for pages about the failures of a soviet style system of Govt while you try and wax poetic about the assault form the West.

@AnastasisYou used this phrase in the other thread regarding the Romanov picture. Your schtick is tired and your vocabulary is poor.

The reality is that the West was constantly hitting the Soviet Union and its satellites/allies with economic embargoes and sanctions. It's a fact and it doesn't care about your abundant and easily-wounded feelings.

And I could also go on for pages about the failures of the USA, what's your point?

I didn't use any such phrase in that thread, and the section you quote in this post does not contain any of my words either.  You seem confused at the moment. I can sympathize with how disorienting it must be for a bolshevik living among the upper class bourgeoisie. 

[bad_teammate 13125]

Damn, I always mix up poetry and pornography.

[Anastasis 23375]

17 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

Damn, I always mix up poetry and pornography.

I use to know this stripper that could do amazing things with a wax candle and a high pain tolerance. 

[Onboard 2.0 9083]

1 hour ago, bad_teammate said:

All nations and empires fall. Even ours will fall. Don't be delusional.

Rome fell. Was it never "successful"? Don't be a moron (if that's possible for you). The Soviet Union had a period of astonishing economic and social success. That's not a value judgment, it's just me looking somewhat objectively at history and not being completely fucking stupid.

And I could insert a list of all the embarrassing and stupid bullshit I want for every possible nation, what's your point?

Are you trying to prove that America is better than the Soviet Union? Cool, great, you're in a place where literally everyone will agree. Good job. Have a sticker.

@AnastasisYou used this phrase in the other thread regarding the Romanov picture. Your schtick is tired and your vocabulary is poor.

The reality is that the West was constantly hitting the Soviet Union and its satellites/allies with economic embargoes and sanctions. It's a fact and it doesn't care about your abundant and easily-wounded feelings.

And I could also go on for pages about the failures of the USA, what's your point?

Centrally-planned industrial economies do a wonderful job of building mass industry, slashing poverty, and boosting literacy. Soviet Union, United States, and PRC prove it.

Central planning doesn't work when it's forced on a people against their will (SEE: Soviet Union).

 The Soviet Union lasted less than 100 years, just beating out the Nazis as second worst country of the 20th c.  So while it's true every empire eventually falls, the ones that have adopted generally democratic/ parliamentary based forms of gov't have seemed to last hundreds of years at least.

You can't point to anything they did successfully other than kill over 20 million in the name of central planing, and outright terror of their own citizens.  

It must really suck for you to live in a free, and democratic society that allows its citizens to manage their own lives   I'd really like to know how you make it thru the day without burying a bullet in your own brain pan.

China is the sole authoritarian gov't that's lasted more than a century, going from a monarch to mafioso style communist without missing such of a beat.

[bad_teammate 13125]

2 minutes ago, Onboard 2.0 said:

Central planning doesn't work when it's forced on a people against their will (SEE: Soviet Union).

Central planning is how we won WWII, got out of the depression, and built the American middle class. (Which has, since, died.)

You really need to depersonalize this topic. You're not thinking, you're reacting.

Quote

You can't point to anything they did successfully other than kill over 20 million in the name of central planing, and outright terror of their own citizens.

I already have pointed out tremendous successes in the Soviet Union, but you're hell-bent on proving to no one how patriotic you are. You get the American Good Boy prize, OK? Daddy is proud of you at last. We all know you are a true lover of America and it inspires us.

Nations rise, nations fall. Powerful nations commit powerful evils. 

Quote

It must really suck for you to live in a free, and democratic society that allows its citizens to manage their own lives   I'd really like to know how you make it thru the day without burying a bullet in your own brain pan.

lol what?

Quote

China is the sole authoritarian gov't that's lasted more than a century, going from a monarch to mafioso style communist without missing such of a beat.

The conception of an "authoritarian" state is pretty fuzzy, dude, and I struggle to see the constraint that makes the bolded statement true without pretending history started in the 1900s.

[Onboard 2.0 9083]

1 minute ago, bad_teammate said:

Central planning is how we won WWII, got out of the depression, and built the American middle class. (Which has, since, died.)

You really need to depersonalize this topic. You're not thinking, you're reacting.

I already have pointed out tremendous successes in the Soviet Union, but you're hell-bent on proving to no one how patriotic you are. You get the American Good Boy prize, OK? Daddy is proud of you at last. We all know you are a true lover of America and it inspires us.

Nations rise, nations fall. Powerful nations commit powerful evils. 

lol what?

The conception of an "authoritarian" state is pretty fuzzy, dude, and I struggle to see the constraint that makes the bolded statement true without pretending history started in the 1900s.

You can try to twist the topics all like. Yeah we were in a war planning phase of production for 4 years then it went away and people were able to go back to normalcy. You make up more bizarre little ways of trying to make them some great world power when they were really a paper tiger. Take the bomb away, and they're second  world power still functioning as the USSR probably.

Yes a stat that shows we have high incarnation rates makes your case...  Yeah... no it doesn't.  The Soviets put people away for political expediency, we do it because of a failed war on drugs.  Actually they skipped incarceration, and went straight to firing squads in many cases.

[bad_teammate 13125]

26 minutes ago, Onboard 2.0 said:

You can try to twist the topics all like. Yeah we were in a war planning phase of production for 4 years then it went away and people were able to go back to normalcy.

That was obviously the spike, but the overall trend of public spending into the economy began before WWII and has never stopped. After the mid/late-40s end of the spike, it has just grown and grown and grown. We haven't had spending under 10% of GDP in over a century. Our spending is so traditionally high that we started massive wars abroad in the early 2000s and you wouldn't even be able to tell just looking at our trajectories.

The government takes money out of our hands and spends it for us. If that's not centralized control of economic life then words don't have meanings anymore.

"it went away" lol

Quote

You make up more bizarre little ways of trying to make them some great world power when they were really a paper tiger. Take the bomb away, and they're second  world power still functioning as the USSR probably.

There's nothing bizarre or even controversial in stating the Soviet Union was the 2nd most powerful state in the world for multiple decades. You're just dishonest.

Quote

Yes a stat that shows we have high incarnation rates makes your case...  Yeah... no it doesn't.  The Soviets put people away for political expediency, we do it because of a failed war on drugs.  Actually they skipped incarceration, and went straight to firing squads in many cases.

You really think those are different things?

lol fucking hell

[Onboard 2.0 9083]

18 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

That was obviously the spike, but the overall trend of public spending into the economy began before WWII and has never stopped. After the mid/late-40s end of the spike, it has just grown and grown and grown. We haven't had spending under 10% of GDP in over a century. Our spending is so traditionally high that we started massive wars abroad in the early 2000s and you wouldn't even be able to tell just looking at our trajectories.

The government takes money out of our hands and spends it for us. If that's not centralized control of economic life then words don't have meanings anymore.

"it went away" lol

There's nothing bizarre or even controversial in stating the Soviet Union was the 2nd most powerful state in the world for multiple decades. You're just dishonest.

You really think those are different things?

lol fucking hell

I'm done here. You can wallow in your fantasy world all you like. Have at it.

[BehoId, The Underminer! 11667]

Nazis.  I hate these guys. 

 

https://www.cnn.com/2021/02/05/europe/nazi-camp-secretary-charged-stutthof-grm-intl/index.html

 

Quote

Berlin (CNN) — A former secretary from the Stutthof Nazi concentration camp has been charged with complicity in the murders of 10,000 people, German prosecutors said Friday, in what is a rare case involving an alleged female concentration camp staff member. 

Prosecutors in Itzehoe did not name the woman but said in a statement that they charged her with "aiding and abetting murder in more than 10,000 cases," as well as complicity in attempted murder. 

The woman, who was a minor at the time of the alleged crimes, "is accused of having assisted those responsible at the camp in the systematic killing of Jewish prisoners, Polish partisans and Soviet Russian prisoners of war in her function as a stenographer and secretary to the camp commander," between June 1943 and April 1945, the prosecutors said in a statement. 

She will face a juvenile court because she was under 18 when she served in Stutthof.

It is estimated that about 65,000 people were murdered during the Holocaust in the Stutthof concentration camp, near the Polish city now called Gdansk.

German prosecutors are investigating 13 other cases connected to the concentration camps of Buchenwald, Sachsenhausen, Mauthausen and Stutthof, according to the Central Office for the Investigation of Nazi Crimes.

Last summer, a 93-year-old former guard at Stutthof, identified as Bruno D., was convicted of thousands of counts of being an accessory to murder and given a two-year suspended prison sentence

He, too, was tried in a juvenile court because because he was 17 years old at the time he served in Stutthof.

First established by the Nazis in 1939, Stutthof went on to house a total of 115,000 prisoners, more than half of whom died there. Around 22,000 went on to be transferred from Stutthof to other Nazi camps.

An estimated 6 million Jewish peoplewere killed in Nazi concentration camps during World War II. Also killed were hundreds of thousands of Roma people and people with mental or physical disabilities.

 

[Gatorubet 30064]

Nazis.  I hate these guys. 
 
https://www.cnn.com/2021/02/05/europe/nazi-camp-secretary-charged-stutthof-grm-intl/index.html
 

Berlin (CNN) — A former secretary from the Stutthof Nazi concentration camp has been charged with complicity in the murders of 10,000 people, German prosecutors said Friday, in what is a rare case involving an alleged female concentration camp staff member. 

Prosecutors in Itzehoe did not name the woman but said in a statement that they charged her with "aiding and abetting murder in more than 10,000 cases," as well as complicity in attempted murder. 

The woman, who was a minor at the time of the alleged crimes, "is accused of having assisted those responsible at the camp in the systematic killing of Jewish prisoners, Polish partisans and Soviet Russian prisoners of war in her function as a stenographer and secretary to the camp commander," between June 1943 and April 1945, the prosecutors said in a statement. 

She will face a juvenile court because she was under 18 when she served in Stutthof.

It is estimated that about 65,000 people were murdered during the Holocaust in the Stutthof concentration camp, near the Polish city now called Gdansk.
German prosecutors are investigating 13 other cases connected to the concentration camps of Buchenwald, Sachsenhausen, Mauthausen and Stutthof, according to the Central Office for the Investigation of Nazi Crimes.
Last summer, a 93-year-old former guard at Stutthof, identified as Bruno D., was convicted of thousands of counts of being an accessory to murder and given a two-year suspended prison sentence He, too, was tried in a juvenile court because because he was 17 years old at the time he served in Stutthof.
First established by the Nazis in 1939, Stutthof went on to house a total of 115,000 prisoners, more than half of whom died there. Around 22,000 went on to be transferred from Stutthof to other Nazi camps.
An estimated 6 million Jewish peoplewere killed in Nazi concentration camps during World War II. Also killed were hundreds of thousands of Roma people and people with mental or physical disabilities.

 

You can’t impeach them, they’re out of office.

[NotActuallyALonghorn 4965]

I kinda like that they try them as juveniles because they were minors at the time. Even if they were "old enough to know better," I'm a strong believer of the concept that if you aren't old enough to vote on the system, the system shouldn't be able to strip you of your rights.

Still, without details, these kids could have been victims of the Nazis as well.

[OneOfTheOutOfFocusGuys 2056]

96 year old lady (and fugitive from the law) about to go on trial for 11,000 counts of accessory to murder.

 

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/96-year-old-german-woman-released-after-going-run-skip-n1280876

 

I mean, this lady was a real jerk.

[atomheartbevo 89362]

21 minutes ago, OneOfTheOutOfFocusGuys said:

96 year old lady (and fugitive from the law) about to go on trial for 11,000 counts of accessory to murder.

Quote

The German woman was picked up by police Thursday, a few hours after leaving her home in Hamburg in a taxi on the morning her trial was due to start on more than 11,000 counts of accessory to murder. The state court in Itzehoe ordered her detained.

The woman appealed and appeared in court again Tuesday. A statement from the court said that judges suspended the arrest warrant and released her, ordering unspecified “safeguards.”

"Safeguards".  Did they confiscate her insulin?

And at 96, if she had actually fled the cops and went on the run...that would be impressive.

[Armybrat 40678]

Is this the nazi bitch?

 

[Guest Lobo]

1 hour ago, OneOfTheOutOfFocusGuys said:

96 year old lady (and fugitive from the law) about to go on trial for 11,000 counts of accessory to murder.

 

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/96-year-old-german-woman-released-after-going-run-skip-n1280876

 

I mean, this lady was a real jerk.

and the more I'm learning about her boss, the less I care for him.