Sfdebris.net

Admiral X wrote:

The Romulan Republic wrote: Sure looked like you were, in the context.

I never even brought up Putin. I was just laughing at the idea that communists were in any way better than fascists when it comes to civil rights.

It seems I misunderstood what part of the post you were referring to. My apologies.

My point was that communists aren't real big on civil rights and its laughable to claim they're better than fascists on that point.

I think you have to remember that communism is not a single ideology, the way Nazism was. Their are many flavours of communism, some more despotic than others (though I myself do not adhere to any communist ideology- the furthest Left I'll go is democratic socialism).

Yeah, because if it was, communism would definitely win the contest on political ideology that has killed and oppressed the most people.

See above.

Only to someone who sees fascists everywhere.

Well, they, and similar/successor ideologies, have had quite a resurgence of late.

Outside of little hippie communes, communism does not work and in order to even try, it must be enforced through authoritarian rule. Something the Berlin Wall and the Inner German Border was a great symbol of. After all, those walls weren't to keep people out so much as to keep people in. Historically, communism has oppressed and killed tens of millions, and there's no getting around that. This is part of what makes it laughable when I see people make excuses for it to the effect of "well, it just hasn't been done right yet." You would never, ever, ever, ever see anyone do that when it comes to fascism. Hell, not even the neo-nazis and the like would make that claim, because I'm sure they'd insist someone out of Hitler, Mussolini, Franco, etc. had got it right the first time around.

Admiral X wrote:Outside of little hippie communes, communism does not work and in order to even try, it must be enforced through authoritarian rule.

Honestly, can you name a system of government/economics which does not require a degree of enforcement, though?

Something the Berlin Wall and the Inner German Border was a great symbol of. After all, those walls weren't to keep people out so much as to keep people in. Historically, communism has oppressed and killed tens of millions, and there's no getting around that.

To put it bluntly, so has probably every major religion. If we count by death toll, I wonder how Christianity and Islam would stack up against Communism? Though they've had more time to rack up that body count.

This is part of what makes it laughable when I see people make excuses for it to the effect of "well, it just hasn't been done right yet." You would never, ever, ever, ever see anyone do that when it comes to fascism. Hell, not even the neo-nazis and the like would make that claim, because I'm sure they'd insist someone out of Hitler, Mussolini, Franco, etc. had got it right the first time around.

Well, like I said, I'm not a communist. I understand the appeal somewhat, but its not a system that I would ever care to see adopted.

But funnily enough, I have heard that Stalin is quite popular in Russia today, though I suspect that's more because of nationalism/WWII/"He made Russia strong" than out of loyalty to communism, given Russia today.

So my contacts who know more about the region than I do say the conservatives got shakabopped pretty badly tonight and their majority was obliterated despite a massive media backlash against Labour....

It has ended in a hung parliament, which is bad for the Tories as they didn't have to have this election yet and now they are no longer firmly in control. http://www.bbc.com/news/live/election-2017-40171454

IF (big if) they form a coalition government, then things are settled - but the only partner with enough seats that ISN'T labor is the SNP, otherwise they have to club together some just as unlikely also-rans like the Lib Dems and the DUP. So yeah, May may have to step down (which would be even worse for the Conservatives depending on the options), and we may be looking at another election round is a government can't be formed.

So May essentially shot herself in the foot, and may have cost the Conservatives control (they might run a minority government) but then there is NOTHING stopping the Labor party from doing the same. http://www.bbc.com/news/election-2017-40209087

You can blame this mostly on Theresa May's terrible performance over the campaign.

Prior to the snap election, the Tories had actually managed to get themselves seen as a party for the working class as well as the wealthy. After their manifesto which included such bizarre things as taxes for the elderly, a return to fox hunting and and re-opening the ivory trade, it looked like they believed they were so far ahead in the polls they were trying to get away with whatever they liked.

Corbyn's manifesto was a complete fantasy, promising everyone their own magical pony paid for by shaking the secret money tree but again picked up the voters from the working class that felt completely alienated by mainstream politics.

The Conservatives remain the largest party, and only need a handful more seats to have a parliamentary majority, but who would be willing to form a coalition with them after how 2010 ended up we'd have to see.

Fixer wrote:but who would be willing to form a coalition with them after how 2010 ended up we'd have to see.

Well, apparently DUP is enough, while Corbyn needs every other party on his side, with the exception of Sinn Fein and the Greens. I suppose May could start acting like former Canadian PM Harper, and govern on a bill by bill basis, given that she only needs 5 extra votes to get anything done (unless Sinn Fein decides to sit).

Just read that the joke candidate 'Lord Buckethead' who stood against May is a character from a cheesy 80s flick and the guy who played him in the film is the same one as the guy who stood for election. Apparently he's also previously stood against Thatcher and Major.

http://m.imdb.com/title/tt0141270/trivi ... tt_trv_trv

Not bad for a Vader knockoff.

TGLS wrote:

Fixer wrote:but who would be willing to form a coalition with them after how 2010 ended up we'd have to see.

Well, apparently DUP is enough, while Corbyn needs every other party on his side, with the exception of Sinn Fein and the Greens. I suppose May could start acting like former Canadian PM Harper, and govern on a bill by bill basis, given that she only needs 5 extra votes to get anything done (unless Sinn Fein decides to sit).

It looks like the first DUP Conservative Coalition is going ahead. Or DUPCON 1.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election-2017-40219030

May's gone from having a small majority to having to make concessions to the DUP to maintain a majority.

Glad to see May weakened.

I hope the coalition fails and Corbyn becomes PM.