[KurtFF8]

Why is it that communism seems violent, for instence, one of the most poplular symbols of communism could probably be the AK-47, and alot of N. Korean propganda shows very violent immages, and lots of you have guns and things in your sigs (well they did in the soviet-empire.com forums).

Now I know that the idea of communism itself isnt violent (except for when it calls for rebelion), so why do you think that violence is often tied in with communism? (please dont give me that "capitalism is violent!" stuff, just answer to the communist parts)

[Krasniy Yastreb]

The 20th century was the most violent century in history, and communism had it's baptism of fire (literally) in that century. I don't think it's something carved into the core ideology or anything...

[Adrien]

Well i think many people had and have guns or soldiers in their sig because of the link that existed between the army and communism in the Soviet Union, with those beautiful military parades on the red square and the place of the army in the countries of the eastern bloc. So putting images of armed forces in your sig is nostalgia in some way.

Then it isn't communism's fault if Kalashnikov's rifle is the best.

[KurtFF8]

why would you want your ideolgy to be associated with military, which resembles war, which resembles death, why not have more peacefull symbols

[Adrien]

Well we use it not primarly because it's military but because it's a symbol of the USSR, and thus a symbol of our ideology, even if we are not really into tanks and rifles.

But you can notice that many many people prefer using the hammer and sickle or the red star to represent the ideology.

I guess people choose militaria over other symbols because of the respect it imposes and the might it represents, the might of the Soviet army over the western armies, another symbol of the "domination" of communism over capitalism, and if not the resistance of communism against capitalism.

[Putinist]

why would you want your ideolgy to be associated with military, which resembles war, which resembles death, why not have more peacefull symbols

You mean like this dove?



Surely this is also a peaceful (if threatening) symbol?



an avatar which I myself recommeneded for use here.

So is the now fully-restored Soviet-era Red Star okay aswell?

[Adrien]

Well the dove was often used in propanda posters, but nobody kept it as a symbol of socialism/communism because it's way too generic, everybody everywhere uses it to represent peace.

Hehe, it reminds me of Prince's song "when the doves cry".

[Putinist]

Well the dove was often used in propanda posters, but nobody kept it as a symbol of socialism/communism because it's way too generic, everybody everywhere uses it to represent peace.

Yes, I was being kind of sarcastic in my above post. The dove used for the front cover of The Perestroika Deception was intentionally defaced to try to illustrate what essentially happened when Gorbachev launched perestroika and glasnost. Every time I look at it in fact, I can almost picture that dove being released into the air from Gorbachev's own hands!

Hehe, it reminds me of Prince's song "when the doves cry".

Yes, the 1984 Prince song is just "When Doves Cry", not "When the Doves Cry". There's no "the" in the Prince song.

[Adrien]

Yeah if you want, but in french we don't remove articles so...

Something crossed my mind. Gorby received the Nobel prize of peace, didn't he? I guess that's another great victory for the deception.

[Putinist]

Something crossed my mind. Gorby received the Nobel prize of peace, didn't he? I guess that's another great victory for the deception.

He did indeed, and here is a transcript of his speech:

Your Majesty, Esteemed Chairman of the Norwegian Nobel Committee, Ladies and gentlemen,

I have been requested by the President of the USSR, Mikhail Gorbachev, to present his address to the Norwegian Nobel Committee and to all those present today at this award ceremony:

To the Chairman of the Norwegian Nobel Committee, Mrs. Gidske Anderson: Esteemed Mrs. Anderson,

I am deeply and personally moved by the decision of the Nobel Committee to award me the 1990 Nobel Peace Prize.

The prestige and authority of the Nobel Peace Prize are universally recognised. The prize has been awarded ever since the beginning of this century. The disasters and tragedies of this period, which have not managed to subdue man's optimism and unflagging belief in human reason, have given the Peace Prize the unique aura associated with it today.

Immanuel Kant prophesied that mankind would one day be faced with a dilemma: either to be joined in a true union of nations or to perish in a war of annihilation ending in the extinction of the human race.' Now, as we move from the second to the third millennium, the clock has struck the moment of truth.

In this respect, the year 1990 represents a turning point. It marks the end of the unnatural division of Europe. Germany has been reunited. We have begun resolutely to tear down the material foundations of a military, political and ideological confrontation. But there are some very grave threats that have not been eliminated: the potential for conflict and the primitive instincts which allow it, aggressive intentions, and totalitarian traditions.

I would like to assure you that the leadership of the USSR is doing and will continue to do everything in its power to ensure that future developments in Europe and the world as a whole are based on openness, mutual trust, international law and universal values.

The recent meeting in Paris of heads of state and government from the European nations, the United States and Canada, embodying all the best elements in international movements such as the Helsinki Process, has established the framework for a Europe based on the rule of law, stability, good relations between neighbouring countries and humane attitudes. It is my hope that such a Europe will be understood and accepted by nations and governments in other parts of the world as an example of universal security and genuine co-operation.

I do not regard the 1990 Nobel Peace Prize as an award to me personally, but as a recognition of what we call perestroika and innovative political thinking, which is of vital significance for human destinies all over the world.

The Nobel Peace Prize for 1990 confirms that perestroika and innovative political thinking no longer belong only to us, the people of the Soviet Union. They are the property of the whole of mankind and are an inseparable part of its destiny and of a safe, peaceful future. We are deeply grateful to Norway and other members of the international community who have shown such understanding and who, through their conduct in international issues and in their relations with the Soviet Union, have shown their solidarity as we proceed with our perestroika and their sympathy as we struggle to resolve our problems. If we all took this as our point of departure, mankind would have no cause to regret the loss of a unique opportunity for reason and the logic of peace to prevail over that of war and alienation.

Once more, I would like to express my appreciation for this very great honour. I intend to do everything in my power to live up to the expectations and hopes of my countrymen and all those who support the Nobel Committee's choice.

With my sincere wishes for peace and prosperity,

Mikhail Gorbachev
President of the USSR

[Cassius Clay]

Does every single thread have to be taken over by Putinist and this whole 'Deception' thing? Really everyone knows your theory and the thread to go to, they can make up their own minds. There's no need to keep on with it, it's annoying at best and at worst your ruining the board.

[Putinist]

Does every single thread have to be taken over by Putinist and this whole 'Deception' thing? Really everyone knows your theory and the thread to go to, they can make up their own minds. There's no need to keep on with it, it's annoying at best and at worst your ruining the board.

Yes, that thought did in fact occur to me just before I pressed the "Submit" button after posting Gorbachev's Nobel Peace Prize acceptance speech. Sorry about that, but the time was just right, after all.

[EDIT/Jkk] I strongly recommend that you don't bring up this issue in every thread you participate in. I understand it's of great interest to you, but I can't tolerate it forever. It's not just that people get tired of this theory but also that bringing it up often draws discussions completely off-topic. Please, try to keep this 'Great Deception' in threads that were specifically meant for it. Or if you want to concentrate on some specific part of this theory, start a new topic. I and many others would be very thankful if you could do that.