Welcome to Gaia! ::

Communism is just a reaction to people being butthurt over economic inequality. We should share everything, that way I don't have to feel bad!
Suicidesoldier#1's avatar

Fanatical Zealot

N3bu
Since it seems we need this.

Quote:
France began its conquest of Indochina in the late 1850s, and completed pacification by 1893.[39][40][41] The Treaty of Huế, concluded in 1884, formed the basis for French colonial rule in Vietnam for the next seven decades.

but none were ultimately as successful as the Viet Minh common front, which was founded in 1941, controlled by the Indochinese Communist Party, and funded by the U.S. and the Chinese Nationalist Party in its fight against Japanese occupation.[43][A 4]

The Viet Minh was founded as a league for independence from France, but also opposed Japanese occupation in 1945 for the same reason. The U.S. and Chinese Nationalist Party supported them in the fight against the Japanese.[45] However, they did not have enough power to fight actual battles at first. Viet Minh leader Ho Chi Minh was suspected of being a communist and jailed for a year by the Chinese Nationalist Party.[46]

During 1944–1945, a deep famine struck northern Vietnam due to a combination of bad weather and French/Japanese exploitation. 1 million people died of starvation (out of a population of 10 million in the affected area).[48] Exploiting the administrative gap[49] that the internment of the French had created, the Viet Minh in March 1945 urged the population to ransack rice warehouses and refuse to pay their taxes.[50] Between 75 and 100 warehouses were consequently raided.[51] This rebellion against the effects of the famine and the authorities that were partially responsible for it bolstered the Viet Minh's popularity and they recruited many members during this period.[49]

In August 1945, the Japanese had been defeated and surrendered unconditionally. In French Indochina this created a power vacuum, as the French were still interned and the Japanese forces stood down.[51] The Viet Minh stepped into this vacuum and grasped power across Vietnam in the August Revolution,[51] largely supported by the Vietnamese population.[52]

Ho Chi Minh declared the independent Democratic Republic of Vietnam before a crowd of 500,000 in Hanoi on 2 September 1945.[51]

However, the major allied victors of World War II, the United Kingdom, the United States, and the Soviet Union, all agreed the area belonged to the French.[51] As the French did not have the ships, weapons, or soldiers to immediately retake Vietnam, the major powers came to an agreement that British troops would occupy the south while Nationalist Chinese forces would move in from the north.[51] Nationalist Chinese troops entered the country to disarm Japanese troops north of the 16th parallel on September 14, 1945.[55] When the British landed in the south, they rearmed the interned French forces as well as parts of the surrendered Japanese forces to aid them in retaking southern Vietnam, as they did not have enough troops to do this themselves.[51]

Following the party line from Moscow, Ho Chi Minh initially attempted to negotiate with the French, who were slowly re-establishing their control across the country.[56] In January 1946, the Viet Minh won elections across central and northern Vietnam.[57] On March 6, 1946, Ho signed an agreement allowing French forces to replace Nationalist Chinese forces, in exchange for French recognition of the Democratic Republic of Vietnam as a "free" republic within the French Union, with the specifics of such recognition to be determined by future negotiation.[58][59][60] The French landed in Hanoi by March 1946 and in November of that year they ousted the Viet Minh from the city.[61] British forces departed on 26 March 1946, leaving Vietnam in the hands of the French.[62] Soon thereafter, the Viet Minh began a guerrilla war against the French Union forces, beginning the First Indochina War.


So basically...
1. The Viet Minh, the entire basis of the "communists" in Vietnam was rooted solely in the independence of Vietnam.

2. The French we're backstabbing morons.

3. The Rest of the West was full of Assholes.

4. The Viet Minh was forced to fight a guerrilla war against Western powers who wished to violently put down the Vietnamese INDEPENDENCE movement.

Enter the First Indochina war, a war of independence that colonial powers lost at dien bein phu.

When that failed the west tried to prop up one of the most oppressive unpopular authoritarian regimes ever in order to provide their own government with which to oppose the Democratic Republic of Vietnam.

The Idea that we went in their to protect people, is just ******** ludicrous.


American President Franklin D. Roosevelt and General Joseph Stilwell privately made it adamantly clear that the French were not to reacquire French Indochina (modern day Vietnam, Cambodia and Laos) after the war was over.

The new leader ended up being just as oppressive as the last (I.E. the French), and so we tried to oust him, but the Russians and Chinese came in to help, thereby making it very difficult.



Also "The Viet Minh stepped into this vacuum and grasped power across Vietnam in the August Revolution,[51] largely supported by the Vietnamese population.[52]"

So did HITLER, with the Germans.


Popular movements are not always good ones, in the power Vacuum came a man speaking of greatness, like Fidel, or Hitler, and despite Fidel initially being supported by the U.S. it turned out he was bad and oppressive.
Tuesday Mournings's avatar

Swashbuckling Lunatic

12,400 Points
  • Jolly Roger 50
  • Peoplewatcher 100
  • Invisibility 100
Personal i find your view very self-centered. Communism isn't so much about having nothing, but having everything with everyone. Now if you truely loved every person around you, you would sincerely work 10 hours everyday to provide happiness to the person next to you. Communism is a system that is based on how well we love one another. The reason why it hasn't work throughout history is because after the first few weeks people get greedy and it falls apart from there. I'm completely for communism
Suicidesoldier#1's avatar

Fanatical Zealot

Tuesday_Smiles
Personal i find your view very self-centered. Communism isn't so much about having nothing, but having everything with everyone. Now if you truely loved every person around you, you would sincerely work 10 hours everyday to provide happiness to the person next to you. Communism is a system that is based on how well we love one another. The reason why it hasn't work throughout history is because after the first few weeks people get greedy and it falls apart from there. I'm completely for communism


Except that it's not necessary to support them.
Tuesday Mournings's avatar

Swashbuckling Lunatic

12,400 Points
  • Jolly Roger 50
  • Peoplewatcher 100
  • Invisibility 100
Suicidesoldier#1
Tuesday_Smiles
Personal i find your view very self-centered. Communism isn't so much about having nothing, but having everything with everyone. Now if you truely loved every person around you, you would sincerely work 10 hours everyday to provide happiness to the person next to you. Communism is a system that is based on how well we love one another. The reason why it hasn't work throughout history is because after the first few weeks people get greedy and it falls apart from there. I'm completely for communism


Except that it's not necessary to support them.


Well its not necessary, but because of love you would WANT to. This is the part that usually fails for communism. Its like how seniors go into retirement homes, you want the best for them in their old age whatever you can supply. Now take it for a whole community you want the best you can supply for everyone and if everyone had this same mindset then yes you would have a working communist community.
Suicidesoldier#1's avatar

Fanatical Zealot

Tuesday_Smiles
Suicidesoldier#1
Tuesday_Smiles
Personal i find your view very self-centered. Communism isn't so much about having nothing, but having everything with everyone. Now if you truely loved every person around you, you would sincerely work 10 hours everyday to provide happiness to the person next to you. Communism is a system that is based on how well we love one another. The reason why it hasn't work throughout history is because after the first few weeks people get greedy and it falls apart from there. I'm completely for communism


Except that it's not necessary to support them.


Well its not necessary, but because of love you would WANT to. This is the part that usually fails for communism. Its like how seniors go into retirement homes, you want the best for them in their old age whatever you can supply. Now take it for a whole community you want the best you can supply for everyone and if everyone had this same mindset then yes you would have a working communist community.


Except that 10 hours is not necessary and can eventually hurt yourself due to exhaustion, which would help no-one.
Tuesday Mournings's avatar

Swashbuckling Lunatic

12,400 Points
  • Jolly Roger 50
  • Peoplewatcher 100
  • Invisibility 100
Suicidesoldier#1
Except that 10 hours is not necessary and can eventually hurt yourself due to exhaustion, which would help no-one.


Then ten hours was an exerp from your own words. Not meant literally, but my point is people would enjoy working, knowing that it is to help their neighbour; whoever it might be.
Suicidesoldier#1's avatar

Fanatical Zealot

Tuesday_Smiles
Suicidesoldier#1
Except that 10 hours is not necessary and can eventually hurt yourself due to exhaustion, which would help no-one.


Then ten hours was an exerp from your own words. Not meant literally, but my point is people would enjoy working, knowing that it is to help their neighbour; whoever it might be.


Well, it would be nice, so long as it would actually benefit myself and others.
ShalomTheStargazer's avatar

Festive Cutesmasher

9,650 Points
  • Tycoon 200
  • Millionaire 200
  • Marathon 300
I stopped reading about the second page. Clearly you have no concept of what pure communism is--because it has yet to happen within the confines of our world's history. The USSR and China were called "communist" during the Cold War, as North Korea and Vietnam are called now, but what you fail to realize is that, while their economies have a loose basis in communism, THEY AREN'T COMMUNIST. They run much closer to totalitarianism. Why? Because these countries do not (or did not) allow for any other political party to exist, and banished or killed political enemies to maintain control and power in their countries. There are very few actual elements of communism in these instances, as in a purely communist society, resources would be distributed according to NEED, and there is common ownership rather than government overregulation, as you suggest. What you are speaking of sounds borderline Fascist, which is about as far from communism as you can get.

Wikipedia
Communism is a revolutionary socialist movement to create a classless, moneyless, and stateless social order structured upon common ownership of the means of production, as well as a social, political and economic ideology that aims at the establishment of this social order.


In case you didn't hear that, it ISN'T hierarchical, you are NOT "controlled" by the government. It is based on EQUALITY, and you are SUPPORTED by the government, but not controlled by it.

And me? I'm a proud British citizen, a socialist, and part-Cherokee, part-Middle Eastern, part-white. Argue with me or attack me all you want. It doesn't change the fact that socialized programs in England and other such nations are MUCH more successful than their American (capitalist) equivalents.
ShalomTheStargazer's avatar

Festive Cutesmasher

9,650 Points
  • Tycoon 200
  • Millionaire 200
  • Marathon 300
Suicidesoldier#1
Tuesday_Smiles
Suicidesoldier#1
Except that 10 hours is not necessary and can eventually hurt yourself due to exhaustion, which would help no-one.


Then ten hours was an exerp from your own words. Not meant literally, but my point is people would enjoy working, knowing that it is to help their neighbour; whoever it might be.


Well, it would be nice, so long as it would actually benefit myself and others.
There is COMMON OWNERSHIP and SOCIAL EQUALITY in truly communist societies, so yes, it would benefit you and others.
Joan Darr's avatar

Newbie Noob

Excerpt from Suicidesoldier#1's bestseller
Uh...

Bhudist monks have ligthen themselves on fire in many places of the world before, before and after the war. O_o
Revolutionary Justice
cogito ergo sum treader
Suicidesoldier#1
Blind Guardian the 2nd
Have you been reading This Godless Communism or something? Or did the total amount of idiot concealed within you just burst through, and you were hiding your rancid, dully simplistic thoughts in your head far too well?


I merely understand the evils of communism.

Everyone's like "In theory, it's amazing!" and of course, so is everything.


You know, during WWii most of the Propaganda painted Stalin as "Uncle Joe" then the war ended and the Cold War occurred. Fascist individuals were so concerned about Communism in America that they began denying the rights of the American Citizens. Palmer raids, McCarthyism, etc. Fear of Communism even lead us into the Vietnam war. You really want to talk about the home front there? Granted the national Guard had to defend themselves from the mobs in a few instances (like Kent State) you see many truly peaceful protests, protected by the first amendment broken apart violently. If anything Capitalism is just as evil as Communism.

For the record, a commonly confused fact, the original belief that started the Russian Revolution, was Socialism, not Communism.

In any sense, you do seem to be attempting to troll. At least get some facts down so you can actually piss people off.
Seriously?


It's a dramatic picture and frankly, it's my third favorite when it comes to Vietnam related pictures but what is commonly ignored about this picture is that the fallen student was shot in an act of defense by an authority figure. Kent state was originally planned to be a peaceful protest but the students broke out into a riot, destroyed buildings and beat the authority who was there. I know there were a few students who weren't originally involved who were gunned down but there is records (I'm not seeing them at the moment, I'll let you know if I find them) that this particular guy had been beating an officer.

So yes, seriously.

User Image - Blocked by "Display Image" Settings. Click to show.
Love Muffin88's avatar

Shameless Giver

10,650 Points
  • Clambake 200
  • Nudist Colony 200
  • Prayer Circle 200
The OP reminds me of my brother, who when drunk, sometimes calls people and threatens to commit suicide. Because everyone is out to get him.

But really man, you type like you're angry and drunk.
Suicidesoldier#1's avatar

Fanatical Zealot

PandorasJackinthebox
I stopped reading about the second page. Clearly you have no concept of what pure communism is--because it has yet to happen within the confines of our world's history. The USSR and China were called "communist" during the Cold War, as North Korea and Vietnam are called now, but what you fail to realize is that, while their economies have a loose basis in communism, THEY AREN'T COMMUNIST. They run much closer to totalitarianism. Why? Because these countries do not (or did not) allow for any other political party to exist, and banished or killed political enemies to maintain control and power in their countries. There are very few actual elements of communism in these instances, as in a purely communist society, resources would be distributed according to NEED, and there is common ownership rather than government overregulation, as you suggest. What you are speaking of sounds borderline Fascist, which is about as far from communism as you can get.

Wikipedia
Communism is a revolutionary socialist movement to create a classless, moneyless, and stateless social order structured upon common ownership of the means of production, as well as a social, political and economic ideology that aims at the establishment of this social order.


In case you didn't hear that, it ISN'T hierarchical, you are NOT "controlled" by the government. It is based on EQUALITY, and you are SUPPORTED by the government, but not controlled by it.

And me? I'm a proud British citizen, a socialist, and part-Cherokee, part-Middle Eastern, part-white. Argue with me or attack me all you want. It doesn't change the fact that socialized programs in England and other such nations are MUCH more successful than their American (capitalist) equivalents.


Common ownership is a giant pile of bullshit.

What's the difference going to be, anyone can just take my land any time they want or do whatever on it, or will it end up being just like private land and the only difference being a name?


Social equality?

No, some people will work harder and do harder jobs and still get paid less, that is in no way equal. Even so, some people will be mistreated, or beaten, or called names, or disliked, becuase they possess "X" quality, equal money does not result in social equality.


And what happens to art, who decides what is and is not art- the government, you have to be a registered artist, becuase you can't get paid to sale something, you can't go out on your own and write a book or have a flower garden and get paid, it's all controlled by the state, oh wait, I mean "the people"? Right, so you go out and create a shitty book and you get the same supplies and support as a 12 hour coal miner, that's SO ******** equal.

You can't go out and do whatever you want, you can't have a yard sale becuase that's definitely not communism, one person deciding what's sold and their price, can't have that.


All tinkerers, all self employed, all small business, you kill it, you are essentially looking to further big business under impossible romantic self contradictory "idealistic" notions.

Where you "have no state", yet all the land is owned, yet you "have no state" but a super powerful government, which less government control but oh, government in control of all of business, etc. it's just a giant pile of crap, and the second people believe it's a good idea is the second they start burning the world for no reason.


Right, becuase if we all own the land I can decide all the Gays and Jews are evil and do whatever the hell I want.

And anyone can stop me from leaving my house, or live in my house and there isn't a damn thing I can do about it cause "Oh, we're all brothers and we should all share, and there is no 'private' land" and then they steal all your s**t and there's nothing you can do about it, or god knows what while you're sleeping.


You can tell me oh, communism is a super ideal form of government, and I can tell you that what I want is for everyone to have super powers and live forever and never want to hurt anyone and have energy sources that create energy from nothing like magic, but it's not going to happen and it's physically impossible.

Get real; if you push for a society with such a thing, you will fail, as no such things exists.


What you want to do is fundamentally impossible, to have a "stateless" society. And why? Because "state" carries a negative connotation; you want to get rid of a word. You want a "government" without a "state", something fundamentally impossible to do, that will end up being the exactly the same as any other government except with no secondly available option than what the government gives you.

The idea of words is that they have value, instead you want to change the word and then remove it's use, which won't change anything. Change your perception of why you work and then carry on without changing anything. It'll be totalitarian regardless if the "people" are behind it or not; even if they were, pure democracy is not a good thing, it's why we have a constitution.


I like the military, rigid discipline is fine and everything, and I like the rules and generally the government, although not every politician.

But that kind of rigid discipline and lack of an interpersonal option isn't for everyone. We should be able to peruse a private option- and so what, is the government going to provide cosmetic surgery too? How about mountain dew, or Dr Pepper, or the really Authentic Taiwan food (And I mean Taiwan) food down the street? How about those who want "organic", and those who don't really care? Will the government provide all that, should they even, can they provide what I want to do, it's impossible. People should be allowed choices, and in general they can run things by themselves. It's that 2% that messes it up for the rest of us, the 1% in jail and the 1% still walking around. That's why we have government, to stop those people, to ensure our rights, to ensure our freedom's. The forefront of American democracy has never been democracy but our freedoms. We can't just murder people and things, even if that would be a more "free" society (such as in Anarchy) so we find the right balance, to just throw things out of whack is silly. When we need government control and intervention, we'll have it, and when we don't we'll leave whatever else up to the people. Constitution and things. This should be the forefront of our society, Communism is just too strict I think for the majority of people, and there's no reason to restrict ourselves like that.


In theory, communism isn't evil, becuase you say it isn't evil, becuase you say the backing isn't bad.

In reality it will end up being something entirely different, and evil; just becuase you say you want to help others, perhaps you sincerely want to help others, does not mean that the end result will necessarily be that.

Quick Reply

Submit
Manage Your Items
Other Stuff
Get Items
Get Gaia Cash
Where Everyone Hangs Out
Other Community Areas
Virtual Spaces
Fun Stuff
Gaia's Games