What would it take for Russia to be #1?
Posted 02 December 2003 - 09:10 AM
The first three points of Vital1 are all easily achieved in the quickest manner by an election victory of the Communist Party
and then the fouth point would follow.
One could say it was a loaded set but the greatest concerns are
the dominant feature, I dont take it he is not genuinely concerned about people first before ideology. The reality is that the Russian population
will shrink dramatically as a virtual crime against humanity if some
major change in the social environment doesnt come about.
The same could be said about the Iraqis due to radiation from
These are but two examples of the rapid and diabolical change that the planet is undergoing with greater subtlty than through the likes of Hitler, Stalin or Mao.
Non-the-less it can be attributed to madmen and not nature or accident. (No implication re Putin here)
We all agree that the priority is people not systems, the latter
is the servant not the master, likewise the person at the top.
I was intregued by Orwell's statement: " ..that the destruction of the Soviet myth (that Russia was in fact socialist- as pointed out earlier in the letter) was essential if we (? ,what body of people was he referring to) wanted a revival of the Socialist movement."
Did Gorbachev and Yeltsin undertake this destruction, unbe-known to them?
The socialist movement in Europe accepts the global corporate power even at the expense of local labour, and violently opposes
nationalism because it is anti-globalist. Lets remember the
international socialists were the first international movement and they want world govt as much as the NWO.
It wasn't just the corrupted socialism/abuse of state power of the societ Union but the cold war which kept the world split and impossible to unite under socialism with integrity.
So we see both of these removed and a great serge for control of the worlds resources before a world govt can come into play
and make the exploitation permantent and full protection for the elite who will buy and sell the bureaucrats and politicians of the world govt as they do now in individual nations.
Re Poverty: there is no shortage of material items such as for food clothing and shelter on the planet. Corruption prevents
equity and equality. It is simple to say the systems are corrupt
but they are designed and run by real and identifiable peopleand it is them that need to be identified and subjected to public pressure.
Whether in a socialist or capitalist country money is the means of distribution. Either the state system creates a budget for it or
in a capitalist country the people have the opportunity to aquire funds individually(eg employment, business) to effect distribution (purchase) and if they dont then they get a benefit/food tokens etc.
The same systems are always very expeditious at finding whats wanted in war time to waste almost as fast as its produced.
Once again its not nature or accident its madmen- abnormal.
IN practical terms, to answer Vitals question I have previously advocated democratising the money system so it supplies and serves society - by remuneration and a national dividend they will be supplied with the means of distribution.
Which means private banks will no loger create money at the touch of a keyboard key and hold the nation to ransome through debt. The democratic money will be debt free- redeemable by
goods and services- no taxes.
This is neither capitalism nor communism which both thrive on the exploitataion of the people (interest and taxes). A simple and close minature model is DonQ's beloved COOP.
I said a communist victory would be the shortest route, it may be inevitable but I dont advocate it as the answer for society because individuals are expendable for the benefit of the State
just as millions will die of poverty expendable to the prevailing environment.
Posted 02 December 2003 - 12:11 PM
Well, not exactly his words, but these are answers put together by experts based on Orwell's writings, written as if it was Orwell himself... Animal Farm and 1984 in particular seem critical of political regimes at either end of the spectrum. Does this reflect cynicism of politics generally, or do you have definite political leanings?//
You are not humanist Orwell, you are imperialistic pig.
Gorge Orwell, actually Englishman Eric Blair born in Bengal educated in Eton , high rank policeman in Burma , was colonialist worried that Colonial British Empire might fail under Socialist revolution. Orwell critic of revolution was pitiable attempt to save British Empire . Living in occupied country he had more for sure more information about imperialism than on Russian socialism where he never was.
And he was right in his worries; India and Burma gained freedom from England as a result of world changing socialist Revolution.
Posted 02 December 2003 - 06:12 PM
Eton and high ranking position are typical of the rewards for those who are "successful" even to the point of knight-hoods
for serving the internationalists, the elite, who are not communist sovialist conservative capitalist or anything else, but rulers.
In the west it was asumed that Orwell was exposing the whole
politcal game not just the socialists, in my understanding. You asume its is only anti-socialist, or perhaps it was commonly seen that way in the socialist countries.
Some of the greatest socialist brains are English. Who financed
socialism- not the workers or unions, but if you want to
play gulliver strung to the ground by delusions like dialectics, that your choice. Not for me.
One of the benefits of the state and its impliments of power is to
control the masses. If you were a decision maker of the elite
WOJ how would you control the masses. A private army paid for by you? How would you control their thinking? By creating a monoply private education system paid by you?
Why do you think corporatism has been elevated above the state? To use the mass as a guarantee. They are copying what the international banker have been doing for three hundred years.
The more powerful the state the more secure the elite and once we have global govt/state its game set and match.
But when the state monolith falls the elite dont fall with it. What
did Khordorkvosky do with his shares when he knew he was about to be arrested. He assigned them over the the Rothschilds.
They own the chess board. Are the Rothschilds socialist or anti-socialists. Rather meaningless isnt it?
Posted 02 December 2003 - 06:28 PM
One would not doubt, that he is either Mladic himself, or one of his butchers. No matter how many million words he posts, his lies are as clear as the nose on ones face.
Bader, how could you possibly know that the Rothchilds, now have the shares of yuko s that MR K gave up?
From whence did thee garner this highly private information?
Posted 02 December 2003 - 08:17 PM
Divide and rule is subject coupled with Orwell. You wouldn
Posted 03 December 2003 - 02:49 AM
In fact ,power tends to concentrate over time in the hands of few people .But is this power really belonging to them? One computer error today and tomorrow fortunes will be inexistent ,like they were never there.The whole global economy can fall in a week or two .But when this happens ,production assets will still be there.
It is impossible for one man to held greater power than 7 billions ,that's a dangerous ilussion.Historians say that a dangerous criminal called Adolf Hitler,held power over a great nation and droven them to war. That's a lie.German people badly needed that leader and that war to emerge from poverty.War was the only solution for them.
In the end ,we return to the question of the political system.We want one who encourages leaders to come forward ,not one who offer criminals ways to trick others and never worry again.I took the liberty to post a thread "a true representative democratic system" in the politics section,regarding an adaptation of an old democratic system (so we are not that young to democracy ,GI Joe!).
Posted 03 December 2003 - 05:00 AM
He would have to do what all banished communists can not seem to do. appologize. And they have so much to be sorry for.
The slavs gave every European country that ever had to deal with them militarily , a rough time.
Then they ran up against another type of power. and now they hate that power. they should hate their former rulers, ratko mladics ect, and be thankful for the yanks job with the euros
of ridding belgrade of a beast. and his lair of wild animals and butchers.
Posted 03 December 2003 - 10:50 AM
The true/full story about the War and Germany hasnt been told.
Popular notions have been repeated and repeated till they become true half-lies.
WOJ: it was well know that through the twenties into the thirties
many of the the top intellectuals/ students through top universities were communist (and gay). This is why many turned
fifth column like Anthony Brunt who was the key mole of the KGB.
Eton has the reputation of being the school for the internationalists. Gordonton where Charles went is another part of that system. Prince Charles has been playing a very significant role in bringing top international movers and shakers
together to facilitate global progress.
Orwell was considered by some to be an insider.
Posted 03 December 2003 - 01:51 PM
Are you suggesting that Orwell criticized communism because he was Eton student revolutionary intended to break British Empire? Ha, ha ha.
//Yet the atrocities of the third reich were a sideshow to those on the otherside of the iron curtain. //
With British atrocities in Iraq, nobody believes in British tears other WWII atrocities, but I am quite sure that British bawl , other the lands are lost, and about to be lost. . ha, ha ha.
Posted 03 December 2003 - 03:27 PM
As far of the yanks story, I'm a bit tired of endless american-russian cold war in Europe. Why not move in America or Mars?
Yeah ,yanks droven out Milosevic ,they also destroyed that country's infrastructure with their smart missiles ,not so smart in hitting tanks :only 7 destroyed in the entire war campaign.
Why do you always call Russians slavs? Chechs ,Slovens,Polish ,Bulgarians ,even Yugoslavs are slavs too.
Posted 03 December 2003 - 04:45 PM
wall, but even walls have ears, and they can percieve the truth , it pierces thru the demogogs phyche, and burns a hole in thier demented logic. Bader invokes many strong responces,because he touches a nerve of the mentally inslaved slavs......... joe
Posted 03 December 2003 - 06:07 PM
If Russia doesn't ratify the Kyoto Protocol, it may very well prove to be the "Russian Dinasaur," putting the interests of the few powerful ones over the many weak ones, probably to please that other hungry saurius; another example of the Law of the Jungle indeed. No wonder we are all in the list of 'endangered species'...:confused:
EVOLVE OR ELSE!
Once upon a time lived a race of dinosaurs whose violence and appetite alarmed everybody... One day a Little Ant, tired of feeling stepped upon, and worried about her cooperative enterprise, came up to the Americanus Raptor--the biggest dinosaur of them all--and asked: "Why you always have to protect the right of the dinosaurs, who do nothing but eat everything in their path? Why don't the little animals get a fair share of this world?" Then the dinosaur, who had a bad temper, replied: "Bigger is better, so get lost..."
The Little Ant, then, gathered the whole cooperative and said: "Comrades, our world is being threatened by the dinosaurs, so..." And at that precise moment the Earth was hit by a big ball of fire, destroying all but the small animals...
Russian Election Politicking Over Kyoto Protocol
IPR Greenpeace & WWF
Russian election politicking over Kyoto Protocol nothing more than hot air
Tuesday 2nd December 2003 Milan, Italy - The statement of a Russian economic advisor against the Kyoto Protocol was nothing more than pre-election bluster, ahead of Moscow's Duma election this Sunday, according to WWF and Greenpeace, participating in the Climate Change Conference in Milan.
A Russian economic advisor to President Putin, Andrei Illarionov, had stated today that he believed Russia would not ratify the Kyoto Protocol in its present form, because it placed "significant limitations on the economic growth of Russia".
Alexey Kokorin, the head of WWF's Climate Change program in Russia, said that Illarionov's statement is of a pre-election political manoeuvring and did not hold any weight as to what Russia would actually do.
"Illarionov does not speak for the President or the Russian Government," said Kokorin. "This is just the latest statement in a long line of predictions by Illarionov which have failed to eventuate. He opposed the Russian energy strategy which was then adopted in May 2003, and he poured cold water on the economic plan for GDP growth, which was also later adopted."
"While Illarionov's opinion will sound like music to the ears of the US administration, it's far too early to be reading the funeral notice of the Kyoto Protocol," said Steven Guilbeault, Greenpeace International Climate Campaigner.
Posted 03 December 2003 - 06:33 PM
It is rather a lot in comparison of 200 years something for US.
But let us return to dreadful facts. US and UK are responsible for using depleted uranium in Iraq and Yugoslavia, what make them human moral pariahs. .
Posted 03 December 2003 - 06:57 PM
"No question, now, what had happened to the faces of the pigs. The creatures outside looked from pig to man, and from man to pig, and from pig to man again; but already it was impossible to say which was which."
No need to call names. If you had paid attention to the ending of "Animal Farm" above, you would have predicted the outcome in places like Russia, and even China and Cuba.
Remember, Napoleon, I mean Woj, "the hope lies in the Proles...";)
Posted 03 December 2003 - 07:09 PM
It is rather a lot in comparison of 200 years something for US.
But let us return to dreadful facts. US and UK are responsible for using depleted uranium in Iraq and Yugoslavia, what make them human moral pariahs. .>
The fact that Russia may be an old dinosaur, doesn't take away from the fact that the little cute little animals want a place in the sun so they can prosper and be smart...
Posted 04 December 2003 - 12:34 AM
lLittle cute little mouse roared under sun coming from an ozone hole;
Constitutional Equality in Majesty of Law ,
forbids all men to sleep under bridges , to beg in the streets and to steal bread- the rich as well as the poor.
Posted 04 December 2003 - 09:50 AM
declared war on Germany after invading Poland. Two, it was the British seaman and British ships that went to the bottem of the icy North Sea getting billions of armaments to Russia, which were a gift from Uncle Sam (while Britain had to pay for hers).
Russian port workers, mainly women because men were preoccupied on the front, spat on the seaman unloading the ships.
Three, Churchill sent Fitzroy McLean into Yugoslavia to establish
who the British were going to support against the Germans.
They chose Tito. They then parachuted in arms to his "army".
I cant remember the detail of what Moscows responce was to
the German take-over there, I vaguely remember something like
abandoning or letting then down in some way. I think part of it was that they wouldnt arm Tito because that would mean they could have the means to resist Moscow should the Germans
retreat later and of course deny Moscow the opportunity of being the big liberating heros. As it was Tito proved to be his own man after the fall anyway and no wonder, he soon interpreted who he could and couldnt trust, and got a lot of respect for doing so. I dont recall any criticism against him during the Cold War.
There was an excellent book writen by a New Zealander called
"Guerilla Surgeon" he was Dr who served in the Tito resistence force, totally apolitical, but showed what those dedicated men and women went through. Men and women found making love were shot - a crime like a sentry sleeping on duty. I wonder if they are still honoured.
I am well aware of the Croat Ustashis led by a priest and their massacre of Serbs town after town. The toll was one and a
half million is what I remember. The world in general would not have been aware of this sort of past and its effects on the respective societies there when Nato played god of war.
Today, as for Blair he is a disgrace to the Anglo-Saxons.
Orwell's motive in writing the book- your guess is probably better then mine. He isnt the only "insider" who has chosen to reveal things, thats on the basis he was an insider. Prof. Carrol
Quigley (Clintons mentor of Georgetown Uni) wrote a very good book in 1964 called Tradegdy and Hope. He had access to information few are allowed and confirms what many already
had been alleging that the international bankers eg IMF etc were
running the world towards a global regime of their choosing, the reason he published it was he believed that this was the hope of the future and should be shared. Meanwhile it was only
conspiracy theories to the world at large.
I see he has another book on the market about the US and British Anglo-Saxon establishment, would be right up your alley Woj.
You can add Afghanistan to the other two countries Depleted Uranium has been used.
Thanks GIJ: some have thought I was a devious two-stepper.
But I expect I am not on the money where the US is concerned and Slavia-fanfasia. Wink.
Your question re Khordorvosky, I received a composit of three different media reports which all gave something the other
didnt up to the other executives scurrying to israel to avoid arrest. I think one was the Washington Post but I cant remember which part of the story nor the other papers and recently our computer swallowed the Outlook Express files and they are gone forever, so I dont have the information.
However if you go to "joevials.co.uk" you will find an article on the
goings on. He obviously has some good contacts and produces some very beafy stuff to chew on, so check out some of the others while you are there. Naturally not everyone agree with
everything anyone says.
1 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users