Trump ends covert CIA program to arm anti-Assad rebels in Syria, a move sought by Moscow

Sorry to make objection, but Communism is totalitarian!
In political science, totalitarianism is a dictatorial form of rule which, unlike an authoritarian dictatorship, strives to work in all social conditions, often connected with the claim to form a "new man in a new society" according to a certain ideology!
So what is the goal of communism again please?

 

Goal of communism is a new society, but - not control over each and every aspect of person's life. It's goal is a society without different social classes, different citizenships, money. With common ownership over means of production. With core principle being "Each gives as much as can, each receives as much as needs."

Despite having philosophy of "new society" it does not suggests control over each and every aspect of life, leaving people free to use their knowledge develop their potential once needs of all members of society are satisfied.


Totalitarism came to scene once ideologists of communism in, for example, RSFSR and later USSR have faced impossibility of communism flourishing on level pf production that existed in their time, as well as probably lack of personal interest in creating communist society. Instead new social classes took place of old ones, means of production instead of being in common ownership been in state ownership, with state itself becoming isolated from influence of people, and forming a what you would call "totalitarian society" - where government formed by political elite strived to control as much aspects of citizen's life as possible to weed out any potential competitors and dissidents and secure it's elite social position. The pseudo-pursued ideology of communism served as excuse for exploitation of people by this newly formed elite in it's pursue of increasing its political weight and projection of power over the globe.

That resulted in, mainly due to actions of Joseph Stalin, Union acquiring more regions that system, created by government of USSR, could handle - with bureaucracy expanding further, making it harder to maintain control over who gets to valuable governmental positions. And later this system collapsed, giving place for rise of governments influenced by people and interested in more effective and flexible democratic system. Never the less, what Soviet Union had was pretty much good example of totalitarism - where group of people in elite position in society strived to control rest of it. In actual communist society such action would've not been possible due to absence of political elite.


Equasion between totalitarism and communism, though, is explainable due to USA media and government highly concentrating on negative example of soviet presudo-communists during Cold War. Which, I remind to you, is an example of control over public opinion via propaganda. Thing that nor theoretical communist, nor real democratic society should ever accept. It may not be direct act of violence over person, but still an act of small elite group practicing control over rest of society.

 

Stop! Communism, according to its own definition, is the dictatorship of the proletariat to achieve the aim of the new society with new people!

And practice shows that all ... but also really all the attempts of communism ended up in totalitarian regimes, often damn bloody with millions of victims!

If I come to you with Stalin, you may agree or not, but just look at the Khmer Rouge in Cambodia and the 1 million murdered people! Or just this idiot in North Korea!

Should the argument come that they are not Communists or they do not make true communism, then that is lame! THAT IS THE PRACTICAL COMMUNISM as it has always been in history ... sometimes lesser worse, sometimes more worse! The theoretic blasphemy and ridiculous discrepancies of because of subspecies such as Stalinism, Leninism, Marxism, socialism and whatever instead of communism is also just a ridiculous excuse for what happens in practice as a result!

 

Incorrect. Dictatorship of proletariate presumed to be a stage of transition of society to communistic. A period after struggle between proletariate and elites.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dictatorship_of_the_proletariat

And there we come to consensus: practice shows that dictatorship of proletariate is not better than dictatorship of aristocracy, that opression and violence lead to only opressed society and violent system. New elites, repressed people, and pretty much a failed state.


Communism can not be achieved via force. This is a thing that original ideologists of communism rarely talked about, but practice illustrates it well.

Well, and greek democracy had only elite of society having right to vote, and original french and american democracies had no right to vote for women, and modern democracies still have sets of political elites, residing in governments for decades. There always are differences, there always are flaws.

Point is - so far not a single communist society have been built, and probably won't be for a long time. It simply can not function right now. On top of that you forget that Stalin, Red Khmeres and Pol Pot, Mao and the rest all strived, first of all, to eliminate political opposition. Each of them, instead of giving people a choise - and communism was supposed to be a choise - was enforcing new ideology on people, and each have adjusted it to fit his needs.


So, as lame as it sounds - it is fact. Communism on itself is not a totalitarian system, but proven to inevitably fail to be achieved via it.


We can pretty much agree on that it does not works right now. And, hopefully on that should stay vigilant to not end up having totalitarian government disguised as some other political ideology, enforcing opinions on people, restricting them and exploitating them as expendable resource for needs of state and elite group in the government.

 

So you start the thread complaining that the US is going to stop arming groups who are trying to overthrow Assad, then go on to make a case that Assad is indeed the legitimate authority?

 

For God sakes man.. please read "In Context" before diverting into the dregs of semantics.

Communism in Russia was totalitarian. When Reagan demonized the President of Nicaragua by using the term "communism" he was referring to the cold war definition witch is referring to Russian totalitarianism.

 

I am apologise for bringing in the off-top.

 

OMFG

So Trump actually, FINALLY stops the US CIA from funding the most evil organization on the planet and its 'Russian Collusion'??????

 

Yes...
Here's the recent conjuncture for dummies:

• Assad is "somewhat" legitimate.
• Trump ""is"" tied to multipolar agendas.
• Russians are sometimes abusing Trump's position and sometimes can't even use it effectively. That's why Trump sometimes appears to be a Russian agent to many and Democrats are using it... and sometimes Mr. Lavrov can't even figure what to do with him when he recklessly makes threats about using his "information release powers" and doesn't even care whom may get hurt by those.
• Putin is 52% Atlanticist or at least that's the sort of percentage how scared he is of the globalist clique in Kremlin. So actually those stupid Atlanticists of the Kremlin are just about to fck everything up with the multipolar shift because Putin's tude is passive. Yes they are working for the globalists regardless of them being American or British. So they do everything in their power to make the shift benefits the globalists the most.
• Deep State USA's got two camps.
• The Democrat wing (Atlanticists/Globalists/Internationalists/Leftists) is generally upset about all this but there's little they can do as things have begun a decade ago. They thought they would be able to go into that multipolar phase with their guy in power while they had the master key already but things didn't turn out so. Take a look at the Republican candidates, they were all put on that stage to guarantee Trump's candidacy.
  That's the success of the Republican wing (Westphalianists/Eurasianists/Unitarists/Rightists). So the definition in parenthesis are actually making it all clear even to the dumbest fcks ever how come the right wing can partner up with Russia. They both are against globalization, stereotypical world order, integration, forced-mergers into unions, etc.
• Republican Deep State needed Trump because even the most prominent Republicans weren't there to support their cause neither mentally nor financially because in time they were all made stand with the democratic values. Trump used his wealth for the good of the cause and got given deals by Russia in return.
• Arctic was a tribute paid to the globalist vampires which could have been dodged if some real Russian stance had been taken
  
• Democrats are the Deep State's puppets, some knowingly (like Hillary and Sanders), some unknowingly (like their voters).
• Most republicans don't even know what the heck's happening. The ones who know enough have already adjusted themselves to Trump's way to secure their families and loved ones from not getting labeled as traitors or something. Teddy bear and lil Rubio are good examples.
• Iran's trying to get a bite to eat during all this turbulence but eating is not the smartest thing to do if you're living in a glass house surrounded by adversaries wandering around at a close by terrain full of stones of any size. So, you gotta secure home first and you know that's not going to happen merely by following and dictating your own real politics which require you to face the enemy as far away from the home as possible no matter what, because that train left the station when Syrian conflict sparked in 2011. So now, as Iran, you have to take into account the other bloc's demands unless you're ready to see those glass walls shatter. What they demand is simple tho; "making proper socio-economical adjustments" like "opening up a little more to the outside" to render similar law and order begin ruling the globe before getting that multipolar stage started to function fully.
• Demands from N.Korea is almost the same but its abuse by China is real strong, like much stronger than Russia's any possible abuse of Iran's resistance against the changes demanded that I mentioned in a nut shell above. Besides, there are -from geopolitical perspective of course- many historical differences in between N.Korea and Iran that make N.Korean case much tougher. I always say N.Korea does have a real significant chance to spark a world war than any other hot-spots across the globe does, including Syria, Ukraine and South China Sea because, in addition to it being that tough-nut-to-crack case, there are side factors that make North Korea even more problematic, like being used as a bargaining chip by Russia and China against the globalists on the table. These bargains may end up naturally as supply-demand curve meets at that optimum, or may not. The optimum saves us from a potential catastrophe. That's obvious.
• You are confused which is perfectly normal because this class has tons of prerequisites dude

 

Nice. What's up with the witch tho?

 

This is what I said:

This is what DickSon says:

Under this quote apparently got from some sort of a "serum"... lol :

Yes DickSon, such strong opinions regarding a topic I seemingly know absolutely nothing about... I mean do you even hear yourself?

Hint for the ones interested: The "underlined bold" is the master key.

Hint for DickSon: Well, keep up with the gulf-times, you're doing great dude

 

Pompous ass gets an ignore because he can't be civil.

 

You should actually be grateful for having been shown the stairways to the upper levels. If you think the average Joe tude that ignores what he can't comprehend harms anybody but the Joe himself, I say get a second thought on that V.

Lol...

 

Right here.

 

I have no idea what you are babbling on about. If you have a point, and you can locate your nads, step on up and make it, instead of pointing to Montezuma's key

 

???? Actually it was coined to define the political system of Soviet communism and Nazi Germany in the 40s

 

Not sure what you are referring to ?

 

This:

 

Please do not tell me you are pointing out a typo.

 

You gotta play some chess to make those cells talk to each other in order for them to get together to form you an "idea" about stuff like that dude. Otherwise you'll be stuck at that 2 dimension reality and remain seeing the 3rd as "babbling". Lol...

 

Haha I just did and I am proud of it...

 

I don't think you even read what you're replying to... Lol... There's NO denial sorry.

 

This is nothing to be proud of.

 

Easy dude, I was just teasing... Don't take it that serious... You the man...

 

Grammar and Spelling Nazi's should be put in prison !