[Decky]

People like you are too used to dictatorships to understand why someone might be opposed to living in one, you all yearn for a Bonaparte or a Hitler or a Hapsburg to rule over you like a god. You can't even conceptualise why we don't want to be governed from a foreign capital do you? I expect you see the French resistance as silly provincials clinging to the past.

[Beren]

People like you are too used to dictatorships to understand why someone might be opposed to living in one

How are you opposed to living in a dictatorship when you claim you're a Leninist-Stalinist?

However, in my opinion you're just a lumpenprole consuming too much David Icke and Alex Jones, naturally tending to vote UKIP while pretending to be a leftist.

[Decky]

Stalin's Soviet Union was the most democratic state in the history of human kind. For once the working class were free to thrive and grow without the landlords and capitalists stealing all that they produced. What could possibly be more democratic than that? A multi party system you might say. I would argue it is better and more democratic to have one party of and for the working masses than ten parties that all represent the idle rich.

As for me being lumpen. I doubt someone like you has ever done any real work. You probably work indoors shuffling paper clips around a desk. There is one only person in this conversation that produces nothing at all for society and it isn't me.

[Beren]

As for me being lumpen.

I used the word in the Marxist sense. If you take David Icke and Alex Jones seriously, and seriously consider voting UKIP for whatever reason, then you must be a lumpenprole.

[Decky]

Nonsense.

The Marxist Internet Archive writes that "[lumpenproletariat] identifies the class of outcast, degenerated and submerged elements that make up a section of the population of industrial centers" which include "beggars, prostitutes, gangsters, racketeers, swindlers, petty criminals, tramps, chronic unemployed or unemployables, persons who have been cast out by industry, and all sorts of declassed, degraded or degenerated elements.

I am not supprised a middle class rootless cosmoploitan like you dosen't understand Marxian terminology.

[Beren]

The point is if you have class consciousness, which is more than realising you don't belong to the bourgeoisie and longing for a USSR in your country, plus hating "Eurotrash" wholeheartedly.

[Decky]

I have more class consiousness in my little finger than any suit wearing, coffee drinking avacado muncher has in their whole body. What would someone like you even know about class consciousness? How many winters have you been out on a scaffhold in the rain and the hail? How many 12 hour shifts in a car factory have you done? I can't belive some Tory like you even thinks you can lecure a working class man on class consciousness.

[Beren]

I wonder whether you'd let Marx himself lecture you on class consciousness. He was just a fucking philosopher for god's sake!

[Ned Lud]

A great deal better off.

Anyway the Roman conquest didn't have much effect on us in the long term. You would be better off using the Saxon conquest and the Norman conquest in your question (the fact I had to explain this to you shows how little you know about our history).

The employment of German mercenaries by the local bosses was hardly a 'Saxon conquest'. The latest estimates of German numbers in the Fifth Century, are going as low as 10,000 (they seem not to have used sails, so their rowing-boats were essentially troop boats), whereas the Population of Roman Britain is now estimated on archaeological grounds at over four million. The last book on the subject I read suggested, rather convincingly, that the local British bosses, like 'Cerdic' (Caradog, Caractacus) in Wessex, came to rely on their retinue/warband to such a degree that they adopted their language and their children intermarried. Who cared about nationality or culture when class-control was at stake?

[B0ycey]

Stalin's Soviet Union was the most democratic state in the history of human kind. For once the working class were free to thrive and grow without the landlords and capitalists stealing all that they produced. What could possibly be more democratic than that?

The ability to vote perhaps? Does it matter if the land is owned by one man or hundreds? Either way, Stalin staved the working class into obedience, took away their land, food and rights and still managed to trick his stooges to this day, 65 years after his death, into believing he was a Socialist. Who says propaganda can't affect the gullible into believing it over actual testimony from true working class Soviet Russians.

[Decky]

The employment of German mercenaries by the local bosses was hardly a 'Saxon conquest'. The latest estimates of German numbers in the Fifth Century, are going as low as 10,000 (they seem not to have used sails, so their rowing-boats were essentially troop boats), whereas the Population of Roman Britain is now estimated on archaeological grounds at over four million. The last book on the subject I read suggested, rather convincingly, that the local British bosses, like 'Cerdic' (Caradog, Caractacus) in Wessex, came to rely on their retinue/warband to such a degree that they adopted their language and their children intermarried. Who cared about nationality or culture when class-control was at stake?

Which is why we don't speak a germanic language today and the influence of the saxon invaders was totally minute... oh wait you are talking nonsense.

The ability to vote perhaps? Does it matter if the land is owned by one man or hundreds? Either way, Stalin staved the working class into obedience, took away their land, food and rights and still managed to trick his stooges to this day, 65 years after his death, into believing he was a Socialist. Who says propaganda can't affect the gullible into believing it over actual testimony from true working class Soviet Russians.

Do you genuinely think the ablilty to vote for a southern millionare in a red tie, a southern millionare in a blue tie or a southern millonare in a yellow tie means anything to anyone in the grand scheme of things? People really will belive anything as long as they are taught it by some Eton toff.

[Ned Lud]

Do read some books, lad. It was because the landowners lived by force and identified with the barbarians who did the enforcing, marrying the half-barbarian daughters of those who started the fashion of being too thick to learn languages, the thuggoes.

[Sivad]

[Ned Lud]

You think the Norman rapists and murders had a progressive impact on the country?

And you are still supprised we want to be free of imperialist Eurotrash?

Like the Germans before them, the Norman settlers were very few, yet but for the Hundred Years War we'd all be talking Norman French and you'd be writing that sort of thing in it.

[Decky]

Norman "settlers"? Do you also refer the the Wermact "settling" Poland in September 1939?

[Doug64]

And if the Romans had never conquered Britain, it would likely still have been invaded and colonised by the Germanic tribes during the Age of Migrations. The residual wealth left from being part of the Roman Empire's trade networks (while those still existed) just made it a more tempting target for takeover, that's all.

Britain does have the honor of being the last of the Western Roman Empire to be taken over by the Germanic tribes. Though one interesting book I read recently suggested that there wasn't exactly an 'invasion', because the Saxons were already on the island -- as auxilia brought in to replace the legions that were withdrawn.

And more on topic, here's a bunch of people that would rather be Poles than Europeans. At least, modern Europeans, they have a pretty strong resemblance to the Europe-that-was.

'More girls, fewer skinheads': Poland's far right wrestles with changing image

The presence of Islamophobic, homophobic, antisemitic and white supremacist chants and banners at last weekend’s March of Independence in Warsaw raised fears about the rise of the far right in Poland.

But interviews with nationalist and far-right leaders and their opponents reveal a more nuanced picture of a relatively marginal movement wrestling with its public image while hoping to seize the opportunities afforded to it by the success of the ruling rightwing Law and Justice party (PiS) and popular opposition to immigration from Muslim-majority countries.

Far-right insiders described a movement that has changed substantially in recent years – “more girls, fewer skinheads,” said one – with a marked increase in middle-aged and highly educated recruits. “A decade ago if you saw us in a bar you would know we were from the far right, but if you saw us now you would have no idea,” said one insider.

One factor in this change, they noted, was the influence on Polish society of young people returning from working in countries such as Britain. “So many young people travelled to work in western countries, and then came back and told their friends and families what was going on in western Europe,” said Krzysztof Bosak, of the ultra-nationalist organisation National Movement.

“They told them about the process of exchange of population, by which people of European origin are replaced by people from Africa and Asia, and about Islamisation.”

Aleks Szczerbiak, a professor of politics at the University of Sussex, said: “It was long assumed that young Poles would come to the west and become more secular, multicultural and liberal, and that they would re-export those things back to Poland. But instead their experience of the west seems to have reinforced their social conservatism and traditionalism in many ways.”

The march’s organisers included the National-Radical Camp (ONR), the successor to a pre-war Polish fascist movement; All-Polish Youth, a far-right youth organisation that has run social media campaigns condemned as racist; and the National Movement.

Despite their involvement, and the participation in the march of even more hardline white supremacist groups such as the National-Socialist Congress and the so-called Szturmowcy (Stormtroopers), the march also attracted thousands of people with little to no affiliation to nationalist or far-right groups.

To the march’s defenders, including the Polish National Foundation, a body with strong ties to Law and Justice that was set up by the government last year to “promote Poland abroad”, the international media’s focus on racist slogans and banners amounted to “slandering the good name of Poland and an insult to the Polish people”.

“Waving the white-red national flags, the supporters of Poland’s independence, veterans, Warsaw’s inhabitants and visiting guests all marched together. As in the past, a large percentage of the 60,000-strong crowd were families with children,” read a statement from the foundation, which described some of the media coverage as a “defamation”.

Critics argued that the presence of people with a range of political views at last weekend’s march was precisely the problem, because it amounted to a tacit acceptance of far-right extremism. “They may not all identify as nationalists, but they are being united by the language of nationalism” said Rafał Pankowski, a professor at Collegium Civitas in Warsaw and director of the Never Again association, an anti-racism campaign group.

“The fact there were families with children there doesn’t mean the march was OK, it means there is something wrong when people think there’s no problem with bringing their children to a far-right rally.”

Speaking to the Guardian, nationalist and far-right leaders distanced themselves from charges of racism, insisting their movements were dedicated to the preservation of Polish-Catholic culture and moral values, and not white supremacy.

“Faith is very important to us, the Catholic religion is part of Polish national identity,” said Bosak, who served as an MP between 2005 and 2007. “We want Catholic morality and the social teachings of the church to be the base for the state policy, for the law, for a new constitution.”

Tomasz Kalinowski, a spokesman for the ONR, said: “We have much more in common with Cardinal Robert Sarah, an African conservative traditionalist Catholic from Guinea, than we do with a pro-EU, liberal, secular politician like Emmanuel Macron or a Polish Bolshevik like Feliks Dzerzhinsky.”

Observers argue it is hostility towards perceived western models of multiculturalism that binds the far right to the anti-immigrant populism represented by the ruling Law and Justice party – an alliance consummated each year by the March for Independence.

“The problem is not that there is a huge amount of support for far-right movements, the problem is that there is a lack of distinction between the conservative right and the far right, and that is very dangerous in a democratic society,” said Pankowski.

Seen this way, the March for Independence signals not a surge in support for far-right movements but the seeping of far-right ideas into Polish mainstream discourse. The far right is not leading from the front but being left behind.

“The far right is not able to build a party, an institution, that can get even 2% of public support, said Sławomir Sierakowski, of Krytyka Polityczna, a left-leaning thinktank. “The march is a sign of frustration, an alibi for their weakness, their opportunity to get some attention once a year. Without the media, they would be nothing.”

[Godstud]

The Dutch are also European. No one is proud to be European if the Dutch are included.



@Sivad Great argument.

[Rich]

Stalin's Soviet Union was the most democratic state in the history of human kind.

Stalin was a troll just like Donald Trump who couldn't resist degrading and humiliating his most loyal supporters.

Stalin didn't make Beria his terror chief despite that fact that he was a paedophile. He made him his terror chief because he was a peodophile. Beria was made terror chief for the exact same reason as his predecessor. Here's Boris Nicolaevsky on Nikolai Yezhov:

In the whole of my long life, I have never met a more repellent personality than Yezhov's. When I look at him I am reminded irresistibly of the wicked urchins of the courts in Rasterayeva Street, whose favorite occupation was to tie a piece of paper dipped in kerosene to a cat's tail, set fire to it, and then watch with delight how the terrified animal would tear down the street, trying desperately but in vain to escape the approaching flames. I do not doubt that in his childhood Yezhov amused himself in just such a manner and that he is now continuing to do so in different forms.

Or take Stalin's campaign against "rootless cosmopolitans". This could have been lifted almost word for word from Hitler's speeches. Hitler didn't generally refer to Jew's directly in his speechs, but referred to them indirectly, precisely as rootless cosmopolitans. Stalin conducted this campaign against rootless cosmopolitan (internationalist) Jews at the precisely the same time that he backed rooted nationalist Zionist Jews in Palestine. Again this was precisely Hitler's policy in the nineteen thirties. Hitler pilloried the internationalist Jews while helping to the lay foundations of the Jewish state in Palestine. As Ken Livingston so rightly and courageously pointed out Hitler was a Zionist "before he went mad".

But of course when Hitler attacked the rootless cosmopolitans he wasn't just attacking Jews, he was trying to conflate Jews and Marxists, Jews and Communists, Jews and Socialist, although he called his own party socialist. He was trying to conflate Jewish bankers with Jewish Marxists, Jewish bankers with Jewish critical theorists, Jewish bankers with Jewish avant-garde artists. He was trying to conflate bankers with radical artists and social theorists, even though I'm sure he was not adverse to receiving large donations from the non Jewish financial sector.

Stalin knew this. When Communists, and it was Communists all over the world not just inside the Soviet union that were required to follow Stalin's line, denounced rootless cosmopolitans they were not just denouncing internationalist Jews, they were denouncing themselves. The only comparison I can think of is if Decky, immortal Goon and Potemkin, all suddenly came on the forum tomorrow and started denouncing Cultural Marxism. Stalin's campaign against rootless intellectuals was a capricious, gratuitous, sadistic and almost insanely cynical move to get his loyal supporters to humiliate themselves.

Yes Donald we know you could shoot someone on fifth Avenue without losing your core supporters. Yes of course smart people like myself already knew that. But did you have to humiliate them by pointing it out?

[Decky]

The only comparison I can think of is if Decky, immortal Goon and Potemkin, all suddenly came on the forum tomorrow and started denouncing Cultural Marxism.

Why would we do that? Marxist culture was great. Veneration of the working class was the rule in the Soviet Union and its brother states rather than the mindless culture propagated in the west were the idle rich are treated as if they are gods.

Marxist culture is about respect for those who work, capitalist culture is about respect for those who consume while doing nothing at all in return.