COMMENTS:
The people we have fought killed our men and women. Not our government.
in the last century, probably commies, however overall it has to be right wing seeing as the left wing didnt really exist until the 20th century
Well if you believe that the Soviet Union was left wing then I guess you could say the left, but as most intelligent people know that the Soviet Union was in fact a totalitarian fascist regime, then the answer would be the right.
well im not sure about the answere to that , but we do know this much , it was clinton and his liberal budds , that killed 3000 ppl on 9/11
how many times did al qieda attack americans on clintons watch , the attacks increased with intensity till 9/11 , thank god we have a man in now who is willing to fight the animalls
(hey bill u can take that cigar out of monica now we dont need you anymor ) !!
Obviously the left: red china, soviet russia, north korea, etc.
A far rightwing government, by the accepted definition, would be a near anarchy, libertarian style government. Those don't really exist, and as such haven't been able to kill anyone.
China, The Soviet Union, North Korea aren't communist? Yes, yes they're...
Yes steely, it's all a big conspiracy of the right to portray communist nations as leftwing.
Nutter.
Communist nations: state controls the entire economy, and runs all industry.
Rightwing nations: total economic freedom.
This is by the generally accepted definition of the two words. Now if you want to invent new definitions, fine, but give the rest of us a heads up.
Now, which of the two would you say the soviet union fell under?
Uh, herz ... you bandy "freedom" around as if it were a panacea.
But total freedom means no rules. That equates to anarchy. Which is not good.
Freedom and control are a spectrum and it is naive to attribute either pole to be best, IMO.
herz: I suggest there can also be far right dictatorships. In fact, that seems common, as dictators sacrifice pieves of ideology whenever convenient.
Oh wait ... so does today's GOP.
pieces
Cath: what is far leftwing? Communism, complete government control of the economy. So what would the opposite of that be? Rounding up jews into camps of course. That's the standard answer given and makes as much sense as saying the opposite of black is cabbage. The logical opposite of complete economic control is complete economic freedom: a totally free capitalist nation. The libertarian/totalitarian governments are on a different axis, and really can't be forced into the left/right spread. Although leftwing governments tend to be totalitarian, they don't necessarily have to be.
Now back to the question: which end killed more people, ones with complete economic control (which would include all communist nations) or ones with economic freedom (the west). That's a no-brainer.
herzog ... first, I have no diea who killed more. However, I am sure you're conveniently foirgetting or ignorant of all the uncounted live slost due to "business people's" greed, throughout the ages.
Not at all, but capitalists have some interest in keeping people alive. Dead people don't work for you, nor do they buy your products.
Communists have no such interest. Dead people don't plot against you.
That's why the west has never needed gulags, and the soviets couldn't do without them.
I get a bit tired of repeating myself, but there have been no communist nations.
The whole one nation communist statement is an oxymoron as true communism can only work internationally and not in one nation.
So your assertions are based on a false premise.
Steel: a communist nation is one where the government controls the economy and means of production. We've had plenty of those, far too many really. I get tired of repeating myself on this.
Now if you mean a communist nation as one where the government controls the economy and all means of production *and* it is a success, with a booming economy, high quality of life, equality, and no mass graves, then no we haven't had one of those.
But you really should reconsider your stance on this, just because your experiment has been tried and proven to be a failure doesn't mean they screwed up the experiment, it means the theory behind it is horribly flawed and cannot work in reality.
The theory is sound and it is yet to be put into practice.
Capitalism is a failed philosophy, yet you will carry on defending it regardless, so your case about 'failed experiments' are a bit rich.
I know you have to try and support the indefensible by attacking a philosophy you either dont understand or do understand but attack because you know that it is the downfall of your corrupt capitalist ideals.
'The theory is sound and it is yet to be put into practice.'
So the fact that every time it has been attempted millions have died, millions more have been forced into poverty and oppression, and millions flee the country, that doesn't do anything to challenge the validity of communism? Alright, your love of communism has taken a religious slant, and as such I can't reason with you. You'll believe it to be a success no matter how many are killed, just as the mullahs believe their theocracies are successful, and manage to overlook the carnage.
'Capitalism is a failed philosophy, yet you will carry on defending it regardless, so your case about 'failed experiments' are a bit rich'
Capitalist nations have the highest standards of living, even for the poor, account for most of the worlds progress and economic production, and are able to support themselves. When was the last time you heard of cuba creating a new miracle drug? And why is it that north korea is begging the US for aid to keep them afloat, instead of the other way around? Why is it that people flee from communist nations to capitalist nations, never the other way around?
Steel: which nations do the most to feed the world? Communist nations or free nations?
Which have been responsible for the most advancements in medicine, computers, and every other field of research that makes our lives easier?
When was the last time north korea sent food to africa, or rebuilt a war torn nation, or made the next step in curing cancer?
Sorry son, but you're the one with an indefensible position, all the facts are against you and as soon as you take off your religious blinders you'll realize that.
|
