He is aware of his own edge. I can't tell if he's being satirical or lonely. I don't really care to find out.
Oh. You classify those as “communist countries”. I see the problem now. Are you confusing communism with liberal democracies? Because that would explain a lot. None of those countries are communist (Poland *used to be* communist and was forced into that position via Soviet occupation, was East Germany, but that’s not what you mean, is it?). I’m so lost here - what point are you making?
False. 100 million is by far the most quoted, and generally agreed upon figure. You don’t have to agree with it, I don’t really care.
Excuse me?
Are you illiterate?
You can't "enforce' charity because the whole concept of charity is incompatible with the idea of "enforcement". Even in Islam, which has the closest concept in religion to "forced charity" (pardon the oxymoron), that charity concept is limited to una tantum occurrence.
I feel like I’m rapidly losing brain cells just talking to you. I asked you to name *communist countries* that were established without bloodshed and not in the immediate aftermath of a revolution/some other similar conflict and you respond by giving me a list of countries that are not communist, then criticised *me* for pointing it out. I’m done with this discussion.
Type in “communism death toll” in Google and scroll down. This isn’t hard.
And I feel your dishonesty is reaching peak, thus wasting everyones time just to stroke your ego to even more megalomaniacal levels. That's not what you asked at all. We were talking about marxist principles which you said were unattainable without revolution, you disagreed and I told you were full of nonsense and then you asked me where. That's what we were talking about. Not about "communist countries". Stop attempting to misdirect.
I did, and I decided to stick with the geometric mean values that Wikipedia provided, because, as you mentioned, outlier values should be excluded. If we're going with outlier/hypothetical values, WW2 still comes out on top: https://www.nationalww2museum.org/s.../research-starters-worldwide-deaths-world-war
This is exhausting. I asked you a direct question. Your answer was gobbledygook. For the record, the precepts of *the Communist Manifesto*, which is what we’re taking about, cannot be enacted without bloodshed, you just don’t know what those precepts are (which is odd - it’s a 10-point plan, it’s really not that hard to digest)… so wrong on both counts.
That’s not what you did. You posted an estimated death toll of WWII (from the graph) and compared it to a number you pulled out from a hat. You’ve posted zero source links for your “64 million” figure - either you calculated it yourself from the non-exhaustive list of anthropogenic disasters/wars, *or* you pinched it from here:
Minimum LIVING wage. Welfare measures such as healthcare. See? That wasn't difficult was it? I have more
Utter nonsense again from you. I was right on both counts and you kept going on with your usual gaslighting and misdirection.
This is evidence you don't even read my posts, you're in soliloquy. My figure came from the other Wikipedia link I posted, the one you kept ignoring because you didn't like it.
The barrier is that you say something and mean something else, then forget what you post and complain I'm not following your script.
Now it’s pretty clear you didn’t read it. They’re called the ten planks. It’s a 10-step plan. Are you going to argue with Marx about what Marx wrote? This is why we can’t have a discussion.
What other link? Where is it? Where is the figure from? What did you add together to arrive at this estimate? I am scrolling, I really am, but all I see is a Wikipedia article on wars/anthropogenic disasters (if you added those figures then it’s non-exhaustive) and a WWII estimate on a different site.
No, the barrier is me explicitly asking you about examples of communist countries and you giving me back a list of democracies with social programs, with the justification being that you like socialism. You didn’t answer the question, you just spilled marbles and called it an answer, then accused me of gaslighting when the question was clear.
I am, for the second time, physically unable to untangle the way your thoughts connect. I am trying to make sense of what you’re saying, but your replies are not connected to what you’re responding to, which makes it difficult.
I always respond with a proper rebuttal, supported by an example when needed. You call me names, which I ignore.
Clearly it wasn't, you assumed it was so.
No, you always answer with your opinion and some low-key insults which I do not ignore.
Again, more gaslighting. The 10 planks are from a very specific document, his "communist manifesto", the one he was paid to write twice. I, since I studied MORE than that, and more of his works such as the Capital, which are considerably more elaborate and cannot be summarised in 10 points- as it would have been obvious if you read my first link about Marx.
I'm referring to both of these, and someone else did the math. Again, do you know more than the ww2 museum?
What you are doing is being daft on purpose, as I even made the effort to quote your message and somehow you claim to be unable to understand, which is ridiculous as obviously you are just being your usual contrarian self.
I didn’t make any “assumptions”, I asked a question, and you responded with marbles. My dude, we were discussing the Communist Manifesto, of course the planks are from there, that’s the exact document we were talking about. Was this somehow surprising? I was very specific. In any case, you were referring to both of those sites? How? “Communism” in its totality isn’t mentioned at all - individual events in human history are, and the list is obviously incomplete, the page says as much. I… I really don’t think I can do this anymore, it’s too much.
Extensive? It was literally there.
Well, we will have to agree to disagree then.
It really doesn't, as it states very clearly that ww2, as does the ww2 museum, was much worse - and again, I'm only humouring you with death tolls because somehow it's the only criterion you seem to like.
It’s a huge list, the number you’re referencing comes from the “Political Repression” section and the “Various Communist Leaders” row. Not exactly the terms we were discussing, nor is it even exhaustive. I don’t know why I’d be compelled to look there for a total under communism considering those deaths go beyond repression - I would’ve located it faster if you simply told me where it was.
Yes, we will.
I think I know what’s going on here. In your head, Nazi Germany started WWII, therefore Nazi Germany is responsible for any and all casualties of WWII, regardless of whether they were on the side of Axis or Allies. Am I correct in this assessment? Because it’s kind of asinine, but go for it, champ - let’s count casualties caused by the Allies. This is very sensible. There’s a reason why I said there’s an overlap here, but you go on and be you.
Communist regimes continue to be the most murderous bar none. No other system on the planet is more efficient at killing its own people.
You’re talking with me. I don’t care about any other conversation you may or may not be having on the side. I’m also not sure why you’d accuse me of sympathising with Putin, but then again, you always resort to baseless accusation when cornered.
Wrong on most counts and very disingenous in your calculations, stooge.
If the state redirects resources towards the war effort to such an extent that millions of citizens starve to death (which is what happened, let’s be real here), it’s absolutely the regime’s fault. The civilian losses seen in Soviet states (or states that fell under Soviet influence in the immediate aftermath of the war) are not replicated in any other state, including ones that were under complete Nazi occupation. If you can’t draw a conclusion from that, I can’t help you. An irresponsible government is irresponsible in times of peace and in times of war. We’ll just have to agree to disagree - a conclusion I predicted before this debacle even started.
Sorry for the delay, I was distracted by the French election and other issues, including that I travelled. As you said, we have to agree to disagree as I do not approve of your spin on facts just like you don't approve me relying on your playbook, ie being ridiculously selective on data and ignoring everything you don't like.
@
BigOnYa:
@
BigOnYa:
