Are you implying that Michael Moore is not a communist? He made Bowling for Columbine (ban guns) Fahrenheit 911 (Republicans are evil and corporations rule america) Sicko (Socialism and Communist Cuba = better than the USA) and now he is making Capitalism (An anti capitalism film) What the hell would you call him? Middle of the road? ha ha ha ha ha
1 in 6 Americans in poverty?
- Thread starter Satya
- Start date
Are you implying that Michael Moore is not a communist? He made Bowling for Columbine (ban guns) Fahrenheit 911 (Republicans are evil and corporations rule america) Sicko (Socialism and Communist Cuba = better than the USA) and now he is making Capitalism (An anti capitalism film) What the hell would you call him? Middle of the road? ha ha ha ha ha
T
The Jester
No I was comparing you to the stereotype of the Communism-hating-American.
You did most of it yourself.
EDIT: to clarify, being spoonfed with the pro-American, anti-any other culture propaganda.
You heard it, you believed it and now you see it as the truth.
Last edited by a moderator:
Propaganda exists in many ways in America. You have to be careful what you believe. There is a lot of pro-America propaganda, but anti-America can be just as easy to find. Even many of the anti-war protests during the 60's were actually fed propaganda by the U.S.S.R.
Don't believe everything you hear or see, especially until you've consider both sides from a variety of resources.
As for Europe vs. America...don't make assumptions about either until you've lived in both, that's all I've got to say. They're different. I personally don't believe one to be better than the other, but they're different.
Where are you going in America? Back to Indiana?
Don't believe everything you hear or see, especially until you've consider both sides from a variety of resources.
As for Europe vs. America...don't make assumptions about either until you've lived in both, that's all I've got to say. They're different. I personally don't believe one to be better than the other, but they're different.
I'm going to AMERICA in early december
Where are you going in America? Back to Indiana?
Last edited:
Noooo, im a world traveler who has seen whats outside of the United States and If I had to choose where to live it would be in the USA it has the best elements for success. If I had to choose somewhere outside of the USA it would be Japan.
I do hate communism, sorry if you think that its a sterotypical attitude for me to possess, I just dont think communism is a good idea since it robs hard workers of whats rightfully thier, the fruits of thier labors.
S
Shai Gar
Except we now know that the reality was far worse than what was protested.
But not just on the side of the Americans. Actually, both sides did some horrendous things. That entire war was...well, it was not good.
T
The Jester
I understand that you hate communism for those reasons.
I like socialism, because I'd rather give up a part of my freedom, knowing that everyone in my country has a bed to sleep in and everyone has equal chances.
I don't think that in America I would be able to study at uni, being the son of a cook and an animator.
If I later get a well-paying job, I'll be happy to support the state that has supported me too.
In Belgium, it could be better, but I like the system how it is.
A government-industry cooperative capitalistic market? That is an ironic choice. Next time you are advocating for a free market, I'll have to remember this comment.
S
Shai Gar
Sure, but it's acceptable on the side of the defenders. A person defending their land and family can be forgiven a lot more than someone invading it.
You could study at a university with a cook as a parent. There actually is a lot of financial aid out there, if you know where to find it. My best friend is putting himself through uni with almost no help from his parents at all.
It's very possible to get places in America without a financial background -- the main problem is learned actions, such as poor financial decisions and whatnot. There is a lot more problems in low-income communities because there's not a lot of positive role-modeling, so a lot of times bad habits cycle. It's not all because of the system.
We weren't invading. There was a civil war between communist North Vietnam and republic South Vietnam, and we were aiding the South. We were asked to be there by the South Vietnamese, and not long after we pulled out, South Vietnam fell to the North.
It's actually kind of a complicated war -- there were a lot of political intricacies and whatnot. A lot of things aren't really clear about it.
But yeah. We actually weren't meant to attack any civilians at all -- we were helping to defend. You have it backwards.
S
Shai Gar
I don't think I will be missing out, maybe I just still like it the most compared to all the other countries I have seen. It doesn't mean that America is flawless but that I simply love it anyway, even though I think there is place for improvement. Yes so I have heard, I think that the the detrimental degradement is due to loss of faith in something, whether it is love, the American dream or God doesnt matter...
Everyone doesnt believe in it anymore, more and more people have lost faith to cynisism and because of it the strong unity slowly fades too. Personally I think there is a way to meet halfway without ruining America: establishing a health care reform easing life for alot of people yet not having INSANE taxation!
Its time to bring out the humility, seriously, raising the tax abit will not doom America. Although if it keeps increasing then thats a BIG WARNING!
I Fully agree
Yes girl, I'm going to Indiana ^^
It seems like part of the issue for the U.S. is that there are ways free-market capitalism does not mesh well with the democratic process as it is in place here. The democratic process here is wholly dependent on a checks and balances between its power structures. The power structures that emerge from free-market capitalism have few or no such check and balances in relationship to the structures of democracy.
The problem is that the corporations gain all the benefits from those power structures without facing the natural consequences of the free-market. There probably should have been a mass extinction of corporations, but this would have resulted in tremendous suffering and poverty in the populace. Instead they propped themselves up on the democratic power structures. There is a parasitic relationship formed in which the less the government regulates the corporation, the more the corporation regulates the government. The elected officials in Congress represent the interests of the corporations that back them financially. The illusion that they represent the populace that voted them into office makes the democratic process nothing more than a front for corporate power.
The problem is that the corporations gain all the benefits from those power structures without facing the natural consequences of the free-market. There probably should have been a mass extinction of corporations, but this would have resulted in tremendous suffering and poverty in the populace. Instead they propped themselves up on the democratic power structures. There is a parasitic relationship formed in which the less the government regulates the corporation, the more the corporation regulates the government. The elected officials in Congress represent the interests of the corporations that back them financially. The illusion that they represent the populace that voted them into office makes the democratic process nothing more than a front for corporate power.
Yeah thats nice, except in order for that to happen you dont just give up your freedom, we all have to. And I am not afraid of failure so I am not apt to give up my freedom. Let everyone else fend for themselves, no ones putting food in my mouth or gas in my truck.
Agreed, the South Vietnamese and their American allies should be forgiven their atrocities they committed to defend south Vietnam.
And one thing people don't think about is the fact that both side committed atrocities. Consider the Huey Massacre. I mean, a lot of those things didn't get the media attention because of the attitude of the public at the time, but there definitely were atrocities on the other end as well. It was messy for both sides.
The Vietnam war was caused by the allied powers after WWII. Prior to WWII Vietnam was a French colony. In a nut shell, the Vichy French (pro Italian/German) took control of Vietnam when Germany invaded France. The Japaneses then invaded Vietnam. When the Japanese unconditionally surrendered the people of Vietnam widely supported their own 'democratic' government headed by the Viet Mihn. The allies decided this wasn't right, that the people of vietnam and the land were property of the French. The French were given south vietnam and china was given north. The Viet Mihn won elections in North and Central Vietnam but the French laned around 1946 (if I remember right) and ousted the Viet Mihn. In the following years the country and the people of Vietnam became puppets in the Cold War. Both the USA and the USSR tried to use vietnam as a way to contain the other. The innocent people are the Vietnamese. Had it not been for the Allies they would have been in independent nation following the fall of Japan.
I don't see how anyone can be forgiven for autrocities of war, be it the defender or the attacker.
I don't see how anyone can be forgiven for autrocities of war, be it the defender or the attacker.
Well, the Geneva Conference of 1954 basically put Vietnam independent of outside rule, including French and whatnot, and separated the country into communist North and non-communist South by the 17th parallel. They were meant to hold elections that would unite the country, but the South blocked the elections for fear of communist rule. From there, conflicts began to pick up -- the Viet Mihn began taking military action against South Vietnam, and the Vietcong, communist sympathizers in South Vietnam, used guerrilla warfare from within South Vietnam.
America began giving South Vietnam military training during Eisenhower's years because the South Vietnamese army was not really that great and they requested help, but we didn't actually send any troops to help in military conflict until Kennedy's presidency. From there, the conflict escalated until Vietnamization was set into motion.
The conflict was between the Vietnamese, and the Vietnamese were meant to fight. They were being heavily influenced from the U.S. and the U.S.S.R., but they were the ones fighting, and they were not "innocent victims." The only innocent ones were civilians, but that goes for any military conflict.
They quite possibly would have fallen to communism anyways. After Vietnam became communist, Laos and Cambodia became communist as well.
And no, atrocities shouldn't be forgiven, but they should be understood. We need to learn from that.
America began giving South Vietnam military training during Eisenhower's years because the South Vietnamese army was not really that great and they requested help, but we didn't actually send any troops to help in military conflict until Kennedy's presidency. From there, the conflict escalated until Vietnamization was set into motion.
The conflict was between the Vietnamese, and the Vietnamese were meant to fight. They were being heavily influenced from the U.S. and the U.S.S.R., but they were the ones fighting, and they were not "innocent victims." The only innocent ones were civilians, but that goes for any military conflict.
They quite possibly would have fallen to communism anyways. After Vietnam became communist, Laos and Cambodia became communist as well.
And no, atrocities shouldn't be forgiven, but they should be understood. We need to learn from that.