Cuba has proven that capitalism and technology are failures - Page 35 - Politics Forum.org | PoFo

Wandering the information superhighway, he came upon the last refuge of civilization, PoFo, the only forum on the internet ...

All general discussion about politics that doesn't belong in any of the other forums.

Moderator: PoFo Political Circus Mods

#14918545
Pants-of-dog wrote:Hmm. You seem to have forgotten that you are discussing three things.



No, as the veto was for an amendment to the nationalisation law that would regulate said law. The nationalisation would still be legal. It would just be regulated.



Whether or not the refusal to carry out court orders was illegal or unconstitutional, this has nothing to do with the veto.



And finally, the motion was also not related to the veto or the refusal to carry out judicial orders, except insofar as all three were attacks against his presidency and his attempts to democratically institute socialism, and that each previous attack became a justification for the next one.

To be honest, Dorta is a little unclear here, but hey, English is not his first language and he is not a scholar.



Actually, he was attempting to give control of the means of the production to the working class while simultaneously following a legal system designed by the bourgeoisie and the aristocrats. This is, unfortunately, the burden of democratic socialism: to use the system against itself.

The vast majority of what he did was legal and constitutional.

His use of Decrees of Insistence were no different from any POTUS’s use of executive orders.

In fact, the only thing that he did that is arguably illegal was to selectively enforce court penalties. The correct response, in that situation, is to impeach the head of state and preserve government continuity, not get a foreign government to conspire with the military to install an authoritarian regime.

Apparently, you believe that “what all good citizens should do with a tyrant“ is sell out to a foreign government and get an even worse tyrant.



I am beginning to realize that Sivad has some of the most faulty, illogical, and nasty sense of political analysis and probably hates anyone who is poor.

Got to discard him as a man with no sense of fairness. None. Next!! :D

He should be thrown into the gulag where he might learn to be humble and have to share poverty for once and find out all his class conscious arrogant and erroneous opinions are totally worthless.

Seriously, Sivad is never going to understand anything about much.
#14918556
Sivad wrote:This is pofo man, we both know the pofo crew is never gonna read that. That's why you're here though, because you know you can get away with crazy shit like this on PoFo.


Again, I would like to know why you call Allende a gulagist when he never actually set up any gulags, while simultaneously turning a blind eye to countries that actually have gulags, like the USA.
#14918776
Pants-of-dog wrote:Again, I would like to know why you call Allende a gulagist when he never actually set up any gulags,


pretending like that hasn't been established is retarded.


while simultaneously turning a blind eye to countries that actually have gulags, like the USA.


retarded false equivalencies are retarded.
#14918777
skinster wrote:'Gulag' is just Sivad's favourite word, obviously. Let him have it. :D


Why don't gulagists ever admit what they are? Are you ashamed of your gulagism? You're a gulagist, you think it's acceptable to gulag an entire society if some people in the society disagree with your political views. It is fucked up but gulaging is what you're about, you should at least have the courage of your convictions and be upfront about the fact that you want to gulag all non-gulagists.
#14918781
Tainari88 wrote:I am beginning to realize that Sivad has some of the most faulty, illogical, and nasty sense of political analysis and probably hates anyone who is poor.



I don't hate the poor, I hate people in general. I just don't idealize or romanticize the poor, I recognize them for what they are. They're not the victims of history, there are no victims in history, they're just weak and stupid. Have you ever been around poor people? They do the same shit to each other that the rich do to all of them. If they weren't such ignorant, petty little simpletons they could take over the world. The fact that they haven't tells me all I ever need to know about them.
#14918866
Sivad wrote:pretending like that hasn't been established is retarded.


Your evidence so far has been scant.

If we ignore things that are perfectly legal, or that Allende did in reaction to a foreign power trying to subvert democracy in Chile, we are left with ine thing: a refusal to carry out the orders of the judiciary.

But since he did not actually put anyone into a gulag....

retarded false equivalencies are retarded.


I never claimed they were equivalent. The US has actually put people in gulags while Allende never did.
#14918888
I wrote: 'Gulag' is just Sivad's favourite word, obviously. Let him have it. :D


Sivad wrote:Why don't gulagists ever admit what they are? Are you ashamed of your gulagism? You're a gulagist, you think it's acceptable to gulag an entire society if some people in the society disagree with your political views. It is fucked up but gulaging is what you're about, you should at least have the courage of your convictions and be upfront about the fact that you want to gulag all non-gulagists.


See!

Gulag gulag gulag gulag gulag! :lol:
#14919134
Pants-of-dog wrote:Well, since there have never been victims of gulagism in history (according to @Sivad), it is a meaningless epithet.


The master logician strikes again. :lol: Just because the assholes that got gulaged didn't not have it coming doesn't mean nobody was ever gulaged by gulagists or that gulagism isn't total cuntery.
#14919153
Sivad wrote:The master logician strikes again. :lol: Just because the assholes that got gulaged didn't not have it coming doesn't mean nobody was ever gulaged by gulagists or that gulagism isn't total cuntery.


You said:

Sivad wrote:I don't hate the poor, I hate people in general. I just don't idealize or romanticize the poor, I recognize them for what they are. They're not the victims of history, there are no victims in history, they're just weak and stupid. Have you ever been around poor people? They do the same shit to each other that the rich do to all of them. If they weren't such ignorant, petty little simpletons they could take over the world. The fact that they haven't tells me all I ever need to know about them.


Since there are no victims in history, there can be no victims of gulagism.

I get the impression that gulagism is just a word you toss around to be judgemental and has no real significance in terms of political analysis.
#14919159
Pants-of-dog wrote:Since there are no victims in history, there can be no victims of gulagism.


In a certain sense we're all victims, but innocent or undeserving victims are exceedingly rare in this world. The problem with forcing people into mass gulags isn't that it harms the innocent, it's that it's counterproductive. It doesn't make anything better, it doesn't lead to anything good, it just inflicts pointless misery. Gulagism is not the answer.
  • 1
  • 33
  • 34
  • 35
  • 36
  • 37
  • 148

Isn't oil and electricity bought and sold like ev[…]

@Potemkin I heard this song in the Plaza Grande […]

Russia-Ukraine War 2022

The "Russian empire" story line is inve[…]

I (still) have a dream

Even with those millions though. I will not be ab[…]