told you i would.

[not bossman no really it isnt]

and what does emperor bossman believe to be the greatest form of government? hitler wasnt the only german to enforce the anti slav... didnt world one start after the slavs said no to all those demands... actually. i think im thinking of the serbs. oops.
so far i think that a leftist democratic government is the best we have to offer though. question: if hitler hadnt been so bad and done such bad things do you think he shows that a few years under a dictator can be good? and then they can go about electing who they bloody well want. thats the problem. the dictators could do good thigns but most of them are so mad that they just do... bad things. and they never wnt to let go of their power. ie. china.

[TLCM]

Yeah, Bossman, it was Molotov (I still haven't found my book, I also lost my Indochina book but I found that one). I wouldn't enforce Communism, although it's an excellent theory it's not practical, people are too greedy. There is no definable term for my political strategy other than brilliant. lol.

Umm, is this not Bossman person Heinemann?

[captain heinemann]

yeah, i was a t school.

[bossman]

Ah, for all its flaws, a democratic system of government is the best form of government. Communism, while the idealogy may sound appealing, fails to take into account human nature, people will never be seen as equal, someone will always want to be seen as superior and the lust for power can be quite tempting.. The whole Emperor thing, well that's kind of a joke, you take all the characteristics of previous emperors and dictators and you can come up with a pretty good carricuture (I hope I spelled that right).
The question therefore remains, whats the best form of government? I find it stupid and a tad moronic to stick to a side in politics. You should always continually evaluate what is best for the country. In my view, right now its the liberal party. 5 odd years ago, when johnny wanted to bring in the GST, my view was labour. Maybe if the labor party got some workable policies and had a clear direction !'ll go back. I don't think I'll vote for costello. Well I think thats enough from me.
Coincidently, Hitler did do some good things, unfortunately for the ppl of europe, he also did some terrible things. Stalin, well there really isn't anything Comrade Joe can be proud of.

[captain heinemann]

do you not think that your switching sides of politics is a bit of a bad thing? as in... okay say your poor and so you believe in labor cos their more sympathetic to you but more because they help the people and aid the poor and whatever (yes they dont but just..yes). anyway, if you became rich under your way of thinking it seems that you go for libs cos they help make you richer... but thats means your throwing away your values of trying to aid the poor etc. in this situation what if you were going to have the same amount of wealth but perhaps not get extremely wealthier unless you earned it via working etc i... am no longer making sense. but i dont agree with changing values with change ins ituation. however if you change plictics becasue yous ee that there in keeping with your values then well..yeah. iu think i thought you were saying somthing but you werent so its all good. i think ill always support the party that helps out the poor rather than just trying to help the rich get richer. i dont think im a capitalist. heh, but i dont support the greens becasue well... they wouldnt work and a lot of them think in the same way the communists did in us 1950s which was a little bit silly..i dont mean their poiint of view - though im not a big fan of communism becasue its a lot like anarchy really and anarchy is a redundant paradoxical sort of thing. anwyay im really just blathering but i think im a labour backer (not that i can vote) because they do some things to help the woprse off and their the only major party who have that outlook.

costello is evil. lol. its fantastic. i love it when ppl are having a press conference and he just walks up and literally pusehs them out of th way. its just so MEAN!!!. and..i mean it doesn teven make me angry it jsut makes me laugh.

waht does make me angry is that alston decides to send to the abc a huge document about some minor left wing bias and even gets angry at wil anderson being silly when relaly it snot even worth mentioning. anyway MEANWHILE ruddock is on tape as blatantly bias in the atsic issue but NOOOOO he doesnt resign. but yet the abc are still under fire AND THEY GOT NO FUNDING. that is what amkes me angry.
and free trade with america.

caricature - one 'r'

[geg the nutter]

weeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeell if i can throw my one eye close minded and idiotic view, k?

"Following the triumph of the red army in the civil war Russia attempted to invade Poland and make them part of the USSR, but they failed."

well, actually, no.
poland wasnt the big innocent they seemed.

while the russian civil war was happening, they saw they could grab some land, as such, and went after it.

this is one of the main reasons why USSR invaded poland in 1939, along with trying to expand its communist state, it was tryign to get some of its land back.

been at war for centuries? well yes, most of europe has been at war for centuries.....milleniua? (milleniua, i need new brains).

do you see french mirages flying over london? no, nor british harriers over paris (well not hostile anyway).

WW1 was the 'war to end all wars' as you know.
france and britian sided with serbia who had war declared on it by the austro-hungary empire, who was backed by germany, and other central powers.
like ww2 it was actually eastern front, and the western front was jsut germanys trying to knock out the french so they could go full bront at russia.

except they had a revolution, and at this time, the germans helped lenin into russia to err do stuff, so to disrupt the russians as much as possible.

you think hitler wouldve been at war with russia, if at all, if it was still a monarchy and the Tsar firmly i place, circa ww2? no, probably not.

hell even stalin called them great socialist allies, even though most of his underlings were trying to buy time, etc etc, spesh after that whole winter war bungle, but he was blind to the truth, which is tstrange for an over paranoid fool.

hitler did some good things? yes, yes he did, he made the VW...anything else?

stalin did some good things too, like beat the nazi's (in the end).

trotsky was good, wouldve been a great leader (yes apart from the continuous revolution bit).
but mroe importantley he beleived in placing the idea of communism in its neighbours head, unlike the Stalinist states of yesteryear, and today, even.
BUT if trotsky had been ni power instead of stalin, the fool would've filled up the army with horsed cavalry, and no modern stuff (ie tanks, planes, unimportant stuff, ya know?).

communism, as a form of government, "Communism, while the idealogy may sound appealing, fails to take into account human nature, people will never be seen as equal, someone will always want to be seen as superior and the lust for power can be quite tempting..", yes, thats very true.

but we can come close cant we?

democracy isnt all that great, how many countries has it accelled in? france has had 5, america's is only like it is because they were isolationists for a long time...

anyway, ill bring to an end my loophole filled, nonsensical, and jsut plain wrong statement.....

communism isnt for the world at this time, it's be like going back in tiem to the 50's and startign a heavy metal band.

not everyone will like it, but there will be a few, but thered be bickering among band and fans (thats the dumbest euphemism ive ever used, and also, better buy dictionary, and theasaurus while im at it).

me......im a neo communist, which doesnt sound right, considering neo nazi's, etc.

neo being modern, and all.

i beleive in open government, religion, etc, like gorbachev's soviet government before it collapsed (due to the fact, the states could finally get rid of communism in which theyve had for sooooo long with greedy and corrupt leadership, that they didnt see what it could be).

unfortunately communism, for now, will always be associated with the USSR for all the the bad things.
id like communism ONLY to be associated witht he soviet union from say, 1985-1989...eh?

communsit parties these day exercise marxist leninism, which means they cant think for themselves, and want to restore the former ussr, the fools.

i might edit this later and finish it properly but must dash, bye all.

[slushpup]

bossman said:

Ah, for all its flaws, a democratic system of government is the best form of government. Communism, while the idealogy may sound appealing, fails to take into account human nature, people will never be seen as equal, someone will always want to be seen as superior and the lust for power can be quite tempting..

you're exactly right. thats why i have a problem with communism as a staple ideology. yes, marxist and sometimes socialist idea do sound extremely appealing, but can they really be put into action wihout corruption? _{wouldnt it be nice, if the world was caburys...}
above all, i guess i believe in a liberal democracy (which is different from the kind of democracy that exists in most places).

[geg the nutter II]

im tired, and cant be bothered posting anymore politcal debates etc, after this.

it seems the sindsor style of government we have here in australia, and most of the other commonwealth nations, seems the best, dont you think?

the people who think we should have a republic have a point, but why?

lifes not gonig to get better, hell things might even get worse.

if it aint broke dont fix it eh?

heinemann pour me a vodka

[heiny]

*pours.

i wouldnt mind gin myself, dear.

Guest-geg said:

hitler did some good things? yes, yes he did, he made the VW...anything else?

stabilised their economy.

remember hyperinflation?

also, commuinism wouldnt work. mccartyism was stupid but in some ways the communists in america were relaly quite silly. communism means ins oemw ays that youd otn have individual thought. you believ in what the party believes. at least under capitalism/democratic systems, you have the whole... no freedom of speech really. anfd i couldnt handle that. this foum wouldnt exist. we'd be censored. i dunno...

did you know that as australians we dont relly have free speech as it isnt written into the constitution.

[TLCM]

Guest-geg said:

you think hitler wouldve been at war with russia, if at all, if it was still a monarchy and the Tsar firmly i place, circa ww2? no, probably not.

stalin did some good things too, like beat the nazi's (in the end).

trotsky was good, wouldve been a great leader (yes apart from the continuous revolution bit).
but mroe importantley he beleived in placing the idea of communism in its neighbours head, unlike the Stalinist states of yesteryear, and today, even.

I believe Hitler would have gone to war with Russia as it had a large population of slavs, Hitler saw them as inferior people, regardless of their political agenda.

People tend to forget what the communists did for women and childcare, at one period they had the most refined childcare system in the world. The Soviet women were also alot more free that Western women. Iknow this sounds hypocriticals but countries like America took their sweet fucking time to allow women to vote or work. Although their elections weren't democratic the Soviet women were allowed to vote and were also allowed to work, they could do almost anything a man could, includeing get into politics (so long as they supported Stalin.)

Trotsky was seen as Lenins successor, however he made people hate him through his arrogance. He was more stable and had better policies than Stalin, he was also excellent at organising events and stuff. However, he would most likely not have lasted, the people who were supposed to be his commrads in his political spectrum ie Zinoviev and Rykov, hated him and even allied with Stalin to knock him out.



Heinemann - Most people (not all) vote for what would suit them best not what would be better for the nation. For many change in parties is not about values, it's about looking after yourself. Say, if you own a buisness or have more money than many other people, then of course you are going to vote liberal. This doesn't mean you support all their policies but you agree with enough. Say you earn $100 000 a year and your child wants to go to uni and study say nursing with an 84 UAI. However upon completing the HSC they end up with a UAI of 81. Under a Liberal government if your child is an upfront full fee paying student they are more likly to get into the course than the kid in the next suburb who got 83 but can't afford to pay up front. Under a Labour Government policy then the kid who got 83 would get the spot.

[slushpup]

i might be wrong in this but...i think woman in russia only had improved equal rights during the first 6 months of rule under lenin and the bolsheviks...

[TLCM]

You might be right, I don't know. I haven't heard that, but that just means I have not been properly informed.

[bossman]

Heinemann, what I meant is that when it comes to election time, I look to see which party offers to best direction for the country, not just for me. Last election, labour was a mess and didn't have a clue so liberal was good choice for the next four years. Next election that may change. The whole uni debate is one that is not so clear cut. Labour's promise to create 20000 new places might sound good but in which places? Are uni's going to get the funding to physically handle 20000 new students? Full fees are a problem but why isn't labour talking about reducing international students? There the ones the uni's are after because they have the money to spend. Going to uni should not be an automatic right but it should be based purely on merit and not on how much money your parents have in the bank. The liberals plan is equally bad, you can't just keep increasing fees. I reckon for certain degrees a military style system could be good, where the government pays for, say, a medical degree and then you return the service by working at any government posting for the equivalent of the degree time. Raising the HECS repayment level to 35,000 might sound good but it means the money taks longer to be repaid back.
I'm finished my basic degree and hopefully will go on to masters or phd so the proposed changes won't effect me but they'll probably effect you guys. I hope the politicians get it right because once you fuck soemthing up like education, it will take a large amount of money to fx it

[geg the tired nutter]

"Trotsky was seen as Lenins successor, however he made people hate him through his arrogance"

yeah, that and Stalin made him look bad, by convincing that the day of lenins funeral wasnt the day eh thought, etc etc

[captain heinemann]

whats the most fucked-ed is that all these libs got their degrees free and are now turning around and saying that we need to pay for our degrees. perhaps we should make it everyone whos ever had a degree should now have to pay for it. okay inknow its ridculous but it pisses me off. have you heard about lathams child-superannuation plan? im not sure if its agood idea or not... :S

i dont think the government military thing is good. because like..not everyone would ahev the skills and..i dont know. :s