Question about President Obama

SmellsLikeCurlyFries

Social Capitalist
Jan 22, 2012
4,727
76
32
Chattanooga, Tennessee
✟5,424.00
Faith
Pagan
Marital Status
Engaged
Politics
US-Democrat
Wasn't there some kind of pretty democratic structure like for 2 weeks right after the Bolshevik Revolution and they (Russia) almost became a republic or something?

...I can't remember -_-' You may be right.

Leere? Any idea?
 
Upvote 0

acropolis

so rad
Jan 29, 2008
3,676
277
✟12,793.00
Faith
Humanist
Marital Status
Single
...I can't remember -_-' You may be right.

Leere? Any idea?

I'm not sure if this is what he's referring to but there was a brief time between the February and October Revolutions where a series of provisional governments where formed that involved open elections and were staffed by a mix of different socialists, anarchists, and other revolutionaries. The Bolsheviks consolidated their power shortly after that, however. The whole period between 1917 and 1922 is pretty chaotic.
 
Upvote 0

SmellsLikeCurlyFries

Social Capitalist
Jan 22, 2012
4,727
76
32
Chattanooga, Tennessee
✟5,424.00
Faith
Pagan
Marital Status
Engaged
Politics
US-Democrat
I'm not sure if this is what he's referring to but there was a brief time between the February and October Revolutions where a series of provisional governments where formed that involved open elections and were staffed by a mix of different socialists, anarchists, and other revolutionaries. The Bolsheviks consolidated their power shortly after that, however. The whole period between 1917 and 1922 is pretty chaotic.

Oh, the Russian Civil War. Yeah, it was a mess.
 
Upvote 0

RETS

Telling it like it is
Nov 30, 2010
2,370
182
Visit site
✟10,929.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Constitution
Wasn't there some kind of pretty democratic structure like for 2 weeks right after the Bolshevik Revolution and they (Russia) almost became a republic or something?

There was a period between September 14 through October 10 of 1917 where they attempted to create a democratic government which made use of a parliament. However, on October 10, the decision was made by the Bolsheviks to overthrow that provisional government, effectively ending the hope for democracy at that time.
 
Upvote 0

Trogool

Well-Known Member
Apr 3, 2012
2,838
90
✟3,694.00
Faith
Christian
Politics
US-Green
There was a period between September 14 through October 10 of 1917 where they attempted to create a democratic government which made use of a parliament. However, on October 10, the decision was made by the Bolsheviks to overthrow that provisional government, effectively ending the hope for democracy at that time.

That was it. I'm so proud of myself. :unbelievable:
 
Upvote 0

Leere

Newbie
Mar 22, 2011
740
13
✟8,488.00
Faith
Presbyterian
Marital Status
Engaged
Politics
US-Others
I'm not sure if this is what he's referring to but there was a brief time between the February and October Revolutions where a series of provisional governments where formed that involved open elections and were staffed by a mix of different socialists, anarchists, and other revolutionaries. The Bolsheviks consolidated their power shortly after that, however. The whole period between 1917 and 1922 is pretty chaotic.

Yep, that's what it was. Dictatorship of the proletariat, where each soviet would democratically elect people to represent them. There were different parties, but the civil war put an end to that pretty quickly. So the idea to not be despotic was there, but it didn't ban out because of the circumstances.

Edit: Dang it. People beat me to it. Twice!
 
Upvote 0

Leere

Newbie
Mar 22, 2011
740
13
✟8,488.00
Faith
Presbyterian
Marital Status
Engaged
Politics
US-Others
What book? The premise is true

It was something like "Russian and Chinese Communism..." It had a subtitle, but I can't remember what it was, I just remember exactly the place I found it. So hopefully it will be there is a few weeks. I'll go back today and find out for you if I can.

I can't think of a time in Russian or Chinese history where they didn't have a sort of totalitarian government.
Ha, at least as far as Chinese history goes, it's never not been totalitarian. Minus maybe one dynasty during the warring period, and I only say that because there were so many of them.
 
Upvote 0

NightHawkeye

Work-in-progress
Supporter
Jul 5, 2010
45,814
10,318
✟781,037.00
Faith
Methodist
Marital Status
Married
Exactly (but don't ignore my post Hawk). "Marxism" has been defined in so many ways its almost impossible to keep track of what they all are. Socialism has survived in the Europe, in a very democratic way. I'm looking to read a book I found in the library about how Chinese and Russian Communism was only a continuation of each nations history of totalitarian rule, which only lived on in their Communist states.
Hi, Leere. :wave:

I'm not sure what you want me to comment on exactly, Leere ... but I'm definitely not "ignoring" your post, LOL.

I pretty much fully agree with the entirety of your post here. Marxism is pretty nebulous.

Proponents would have you believe that's because it's never been fully implemented ... and that Marxism is a nice warm, cuddly fuzzball.

Of course, the truth is that the warm outer covering of that fuzzball of Marxism conceals a core of deceit and lies. Therein lies the rub, and why Marxism never works.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

SmellsLikeCurlyFries

Social Capitalist
Jan 22, 2012
4,727
76
32
Chattanooga, Tennessee
✟5,424.00
Faith
Pagan
Marital Status
Engaged
Politics
US-Democrat
It was something like "Russian and Chinese Communism..." It had a subtitle, but I can't remember what it was, I just remember exactly the place I found it. So hopefully it will be there is a few weeks. I'll go back today and find out for you if I can.

Appreciate it :thumbsup:
 
Upvote 0

Leere

Newbie
Mar 22, 2011
740
13
✟8,488.00
Faith
Presbyterian
Marital Status
Engaged
Politics
US-Others
Of course, the truth is that the warm outer covering of that fuzzball of Marxism conceals a core of deceit and lies. Therein lies the rub, and why Marxism never works.

The lies which would be..? "Marxism" is applied to such a wide variety and assortment of left wing governments that it's almost impossible to believe they're anything at all what Marx himself believed would actually occur in the future.
Leninism, Trotskyism, Moaism, Stalinism, and a whole host of other -isms each vary in so many technical aspects, it's hard to really call any of them "marxist" if you want to stay true to what Marx wrote (keep in mind he actually wrote history, and contributed quite a bit to sociology, anthropology, and historical theory). "Marxism" is a bad political umbrella term to be honest, because people have used the term to mean pretty much anything they want.

Also, who are you to say that the general idea behind "Marxism" isn't going to work in the future? Neither you nor I can know that. Has it failed? It's still going strong in many places in the world. Sure the USSR collapsed, but for multiple reasons, not simply because of its left leaning government. The fact that it's been legitimized by being a major player on the world scene (in the form of China today, and formerly the USSR), proves it's here to stay for at least many years to come. The failures of past communist governments does not prove it's illegitimacy (Vietnam has been communist for some time).

Indeed, you can't even say that socialism "never works": look at Europe (specifically Sweden...). The socialist governments in Europe, such as France, were all democratically elected. Lenin in fact wanted there to be an elected body from the multiple soviets to form a single governing body. Unfortunately for Lenin, the civil war caused other choices to be made, such as eliminating opposition parties, and Lenin wanted multiple parties for the working class.
 
Upvote 0

RETS

Telling it like it is
Nov 30, 2010
2,370
182
Visit site
✟10,929.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Constitution
All of which can be evidenced by just having a simple understanding of history...

Actually, at its most simplistic, Marxism, Communism, Socialism... They look remarkably similar. (Again, only at their most simplistic.)

Perhaps the issue is not so much the need for a "simple understanding of history," but rather the lack of motivation to cultivate a deeper understanding of history.

Just sayin'.

Super saiyan...
 
Upvote 0
C

conamer

Guest
The lies which would be..? "Marxism" is applied to such a wide variety and assortment of left wing governments that it's almost impossible to believe they're anything at all what Marx himself believed would actually occur in the future.
Leninism, Trotskyism, Moaism, Stalinism, and a whole host of other -isms each vary in so many technical aspects, it's hard to really call any of them "marxist" if you want to stay true to what Marx wrote (keep in mind he actually wrote history, and contributed quite a bit to sociology, anthropology, and historical theory). "Marxism" is a bad political umbrella term to be honest, because people have used the term to mean pretty much anything they want.

Also, who are you to say that the general idea behind "Marxism" isn't going to work in the future? Neither you nor I can know that. Has it failed? It's still going strong in many places in the world. Sure the USSR collapsed, but for multiple reasons, not simply because of its left leaning government. The fact that it's been legitimized by being a major player on the world scene (in the form of China today, and formerly the USSR), proves it's here to stay for at least many years to come. The failures of past communist governments does not prove it's illegitimacy (Vietnam has been communist for some time).

Indeed, you can't even say that socialism "never works": look at Europe (specifically Sweden...). The socialist governments in Europe, such as France, were all democratically elected. Lenin in fact wanted there to be an elected body from the multiple soviets to form a single governing body. Unfortunately for Lenin, the civil war caused other choices to be made, such as eliminating opposition parties, and Lenin wanted multiple parties for the working class.
He, he, Europe is just fine. Hitler was elected too. France had Vichey that collaberated with the Nazis. Today we still have the same socialist anti-semite narrative in Europe. The more things change....
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Leere

Newbie
Mar 22, 2011
740
13
✟8,488.00
Faith
Presbyterian
Marital Status
Engaged
Politics
US-Others
He, he, Eurpoe is just fine. Hitler was elected too. France had Vichy that collaberated. Today we still have the same socialist anti-semite narative in Europe. The more things change....
And you happened to quote me for what reason? Is there something you agree or disagree with?
 
Upvote 0

disciple2011

Newbie
Jun 5, 2011
1,141
30
✟16,489.00
Faith
Other Religion
Marital Status
Private
Marxists don't want to be American citizens. They hate America; marxists want to be something other than Americans, and not citizens, but comrades.

Marxists don't want a voice in government. They want to be the voice of government.

Marxists want the proletariat to have the voice in government.

They want to have the central government dissolved and it go to regional (or individual states) control. So that locals control their own region free from some unified federal government.

Hmmm now who does that sounds like? Obama with his bigger stronger federal government? Or the people that strive for state's rights over the federal system?

Sounds a lot like...

090415-teaparty-hmed-10a.h2.jpg


And....

220px-Ron_Paul,_official_Congressional_photo_portrait,_2007.jpg
 
Upvote 0

disciple2011

Newbie
Jun 5, 2011
1,141
30
✟16,489.00
Faith
Other Religion
Marital Status
Private
Sorry, but I have to stop you on Vietnam.

More than half of that country was rooting for the U.S. to win, because the other side was even more cruel: For example, they put infants on pikes for no other reason than to remind the people of that village NOT to associate with the U.S. forces; used toddlers as living bombs, (and I don't mean suicide bombers); used women and other children to run live grenades at U.S. forces; and the list continues.

That war did not have to end the way it did, nor did we have to be there as long as we were. The defeat was manufactured, as was the length of time we were there, and when we left... When we left, scores of Vietnamese were left at the bases, trying desperately to get on the transport planes, not wanting to be in their own country; and why? Because we were leaving.

If Vietnam as a whole country hates us, it's not because of how long the war lasted- That war had been raging for years prior to our involvement. It's because we turned tail and ran home, leaving them to the cruelty of the "victors."

Vietnam, like so many issues like this, could have been avoided.

When Ho Chi Minh asked for assistance to become independent from France the US told him to go blow.

So who could he go to?

Why those people that we tried to overthrow in the early 1900s. The USSR.

But you see they don't teach of the White Cossacks, Pershing and the retreat to Archangel in history in the US much.

Why? Because we would look like the bad guys.

Same as we did when you look at Admiral Perry and Japan.

But we had this Imperialist phase we were going through to keep up with the European Jonses.
 
Upvote 0

disciple2011

Newbie
Jun 5, 2011
1,141
30
✟16,489.00
Faith
Other Religion
Marital Status
Private
So he said ... but then, Hitler said many things which were not so.

Yet, his National Socialism - NAZI - party is largely indistinguishable from many Marxist regimes in action and deeds.

And with that you tip your hand and prove beyond doubt you have NO idea what Marxism is.

Good day.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

SmellsLikeCurlyFries

Social Capitalist
Jan 22, 2012
4,727
76
32
Chattanooga, Tennessee
✟5,424.00
Faith
Pagan
Marital Status
Engaged
Politics
US-Democrat
Hmmm now who does that sounds like? Obama with his bigger stronger federal government? Or the people that strive for state's rights over the federal system?

Sounds a lot like...

And....

And once again you, what was it you said to Hawk..."tip your hand" and show that you know nothing of the beliefs of proponents of states rights. How long, disciple, will you insist on misrepresenting the beliefs of those you disagree with? It doesn't help your case at all, as all it makes you look is shot of all credibility and intellectually dishonest.
 
Upvote 0