# Somewhat shocking - - this Communist incident was actually reported by the liberal Washingon Post



## Acct2000 (Sep 24, 2005)

When the left wing goes nuts - - -




Unfortunately, the right wing policies allocating a huge percentage of the wealth to the 1% aren't working well either.

Can't we find something sensible in the middle that works?

Making political decisions based on anger and hatred always gets us in situations like this horrible one from China 1959-1962.


----------



## Tempest (Aug 16, 2012)

It is a shame that Hollywood seems to have a blind eye towards the evils of Communism, and the many, many millions killed directly by it.

I am a believer in real capitalism, and the problem is that we currently have crony capitalism, parasitic capitalism, corporatism etc. where the "invisible hand" of the free market is smacked by intervention, usually of the governmental kind. Of course the "free traders" of today are charlatans and traitors that gladly pretend there are level playing fields where there are none as long as they profit from it. 
As a small government type, I mainly ask that they get out of the way.


----------



## SG_67 (Mar 22, 2014)

It really is odd and curious that the cultural left has such a love affair with communist dictators throughout the 20th century. 

Men like Mao and Stalin were human monsters on Par with Hitler. Even Che Guevara though his body count was limited due to the lack of physical and logistical capacity for murder not denied others. Yet his face looks great on a t-shirt.


----------



## eagle2250 (Mar 24, 2006)

^^
Left wing ideology overpowering any degree of good sense seems to be occurring on an increasingly frequent basis as time passes! I am troubled by recollections of that old adage, "those who fail to learn from history are doomed to repeat it!"


----------



## Chouan (Nov 11, 2009)

People here seem to be confusing, at the least, the red emperors, Stalin and Mao, and their regimes, with communism. They're also failing to notice, perhaps deliberately, that the "cultural left" have condemned these regimes as much as they've condemned those of Hitler and Franco and the rest of the fascist, neo-fascist, rightist dictatorships. Have none of you read Orwell?
That Stalin and Mao used the guise of communism as a justification of their megalomaniac schemes is true, but their brands of communism had about as much to do with Marxism as Franco had to do with fascism.
I find it more surprising that some of you seem to have only just noticed the scale of the evil that Mao's regime carried out.


----------



## SG_67 (Mar 22, 2014)

^ I'm surprised that the WaPo has recently noticed it. It's been a well known fact by many. Apparently when the WaPo has such a revelation, it's news. 

Yes I've read Orwell and your claim that Mao and Stalin should not be confused with communism is absurd. Is there an ideal communist state that you have in mind that we should use as a model?


----------



## Chouan (Nov 11, 2009)

SG_67 said:


> ^ I'm surprised that the WaPo has recently noticed it. It's been a well known fact by many. Apparently when the WaPo has such a revelation, it's news.


Many forms of news media make similar discoveries from time to time....... On the other hand, they've been writing stories about it for years.



SG_67 said:


> Yes I've read Orwell


Then you'll know that the statement *"i**t really is odd and curious that the cultural left has such a love affair with communist dictators throughout the 20th century.*" isn't correct, unless you didn't understand his views.



SG_67 said:


> and your claim that Mao and Stalin should not be confused with communism is absurd.


In what way? An assertion of absurdity is hardly conclusive! As far as Mao's "communism" is concerned, look at the Taiping regime in China that predated any actual form of communism, which mirrored nearly all of Mao's policies, yet had to link to communism whatsoever. Stalin saw himself as a sort of Ivan the Terrible for the modern age, which had nothing to do with communism.



SG_67 said:


> Is there an ideal communist state that you have in mind that we should use as a model?


No, why should you think there should be? Communism was a political theory that some people espoused as an ideology, mainly to further their own ends. That people called themselves communist is irrelevant!


----------



## eagle2250 (Mar 24, 2006)

At the risk of exposing my personal ignorance, are we talking "Animal Farm" when speaking of having read Orwell? I think I still have a copy of it somewhere on my bookshelves.


----------



## Chouan (Nov 11, 2009)

eagle2250 said:


> At the risk of exposing my personal ignorance, are we talking "Animal Farm" when speaking of having read Orwell? I think I still have a copy of it somewhere on my bookshelves.


Not at all, Animal Farm, Homage to Catalonia, 1984, all are attacks on totalitarianism in general, and Stalin's "communism" in particular. As he was an avowed socialist, and thus a confirmed member of the "cultural left", the generalised assertion that the left admired Stalin and Mao is clearly not true.


----------



## eagle2250 (Mar 24, 2006)

^^
Thank you, my friend, for the clarification. Having read Animal Farm and 1984, I'm going to have to do a bit of digging to come up with a copy of Homage to Catalonia and add it to my reading list. An ironic similarity between the various systems of government, regardless of which we might choose to focus on, seems to be that while all can appear perfectly nuanced/virtually flawless on paper, they all seem destined to get mucked up as we load people into the process! :thumbs-up:


----------



## SG_67 (Mar 22, 2014)

Chouan said:


> Many forms of news media make similar discoveries from time to time....... On the other hand, they've been writing stories about it for years.
> 
> Then you'll know that the statement *"i**t really is odd and curious that the cultural left has such a love affair with communist dictators throughout the 20th century.*" isn't correct, unless you didn't understand his views.
> 
> ...


Orwell does not represent all of the cultural left and I think Orwell would himself take umbrage with being categorized as a man of the left. He hated totalitarianism in all it's forms; communism as well as fascism. I would urge you to read "why Orwell matters" by Hitchens, assuming you have not already done so.

As for the cultural left, I would offer Bernardo Bertolucci's "The Last Emperor" and "The Motorcycle Diaries". I see no films romanticizing the young Adolf Hitler or provided artistic cover for the rise of fascism in 1920's and 30's Germany.

You mentioned that Mao and Stalin did not represent communism. That suggests that there was, or is, an ideal communist state that serves as a model of just qualified distinction. So I will ask again; what is your example? Better yet, where did Mao and Stalin go wrong?


----------



## Chouan (Nov 11, 2009)

SG_67 said:


> Orwell does not represent all of the cultural left and I think Orwell would himself take umbrage with being categorized as a man of the left. He hated totalitarianism in all it's forms; communism as well as fascism. I would urge you to read "why Orwell matters" by Hitchens, assuming you have not already done so.
> 
> As for the cultural left, I would offer Bernardo Bertolucci's "The Last Emperor" and "The Motorcycle Diaries". I see no films romanticizing the young Adolf Hitler or provided artistic cover for the rise of fascism in 1920's and 30's Germany.
> 
> You mentioned that Mao and Stalin did not represent communism. That suggests that there was, or is, an ideal communist state that serves as a model of just qualified distinction. So I will ask again; what is your example? Better yet, where did Mao and Stalin go wrong?


If you assert that "the cultural left" have such a love affair, not some of the cultural left, or some members of the cultural left, but "the cultural left" then you are asserting a common attitude. As I said, Orwell was a Socialist, but was originally a communist, until he saw what "communism" under Stalin had become, and was, beyond any doubt, a man of the left. Orwell indeed hated totalitarianism, that of Stalin's Russia particularly. "Animal Farm" was written to show that Stalin's Russia was absolutely not communist, although using the name.

Bertolucci's film was actually very good, and showed how life experiences could direct a thinking man to the left. I'm not sure where you get the idea that Guevara was a similar kind of character to Stalin and Mao, though! That he thought himself a communist by no means suggests that his views were identical to their views!

Referring back to Orwell; if Orwell, a communist in his earlier life, argued through allegory, as well as in non-fiction, that Stalinist Russia was not communism, then that is, I would suggest, a good argument, and sound evidence, that the USSR was not a communist, or even a Marxist state.

Arguing that the USSR and Mao's China (literally) was not communist needs no reference to an ideal communist state. None has ever existed, and in Marxist terms, none could *ever* exist, as the "state" under true communism can't exist.

Where did they go wrong? One could argue that, for them, they didn't go wrong! They both died as supreme, absolute, leaders of their respective empires. Stalin might have had Beria killed, of course, which would have prolonged his life until natural causes carried him off, or until some other ambitious potential successor got rid of him, but Stalin's aim, from very early on, was simply to acquire power, and membership of the communist party was, for him, the best method of acquiring it. Mao similarly. 
Bizarrely enough, when one looks at the leadership of Mao's China, most were members of families that had been prominent leaders under the Empire, which even more supports the view that Mao was simply a new Emperor, who didn't use the title. China has a long history of peasant uprisings which end an imperial dynasty, usually on the grounds of re-distribution of land, fairness and equality, and replace it with a new Emperor and subsequently a new dynasty.
The "communist" or at least Soviet backed revolution in Ethiopia is a classic example of dynastic revolutionary politics. Mengistu, the new "communist" ruler/president/chairman/dictator of Ethiopia was a member of the Ethiopian royal family that was succeeded by Haile Selassie's family. The Ethiopian revolution was merely a palace revolution that used "communism" to gain Soviet assistance.

Finally, that the Washington Post has been reporting on the horrors of the "Great Leap Forward" for years rather spoils the heading of the thread, don't you think?


----------



## Tempest (Aug 16, 2012)

OK, when discussing things regarding the Communist Party of China (or the former Soviet Union) can we use capital C Communist as shorthand as opposed to, I guess, the hippies in their failed communal living arrangements??

Speaking solely for US education and pop culture, everybody has heard of Hitler and Nazis (perennial movie villains 70 years later!) and been forced to read some teenage girl's diary, but Communists are only mentioned regarding McCarthyism.


----------



## SG_67 (Mar 22, 2014)

The funny thing is that McCarthy was right. There were communists in state and DOD.


----------



## Tempest (Aug 16, 2012)

I'm pretty sure Hollywood keeps lamenting the McCarthy era as such a tragic time exactly because so many of their own, the cultural left, were exposed as card-carrying members of the Communist Party.


----------



## Chouan (Nov 11, 2009)

Tempest said:


> I'm pretty sure Hollywood keeps lamenting the McCarthy era as such a tragic time exactly because so many of their own, the cultural left, were exposed as card-carrying members of the Communist Party.


And, although the vast majority weren't, what if they were?


----------



## drlivingston (Jun 21, 2012)

This is like the Republican thread all over again.


----------



## Tempest (Aug 16, 2012)

Chouan said:


> And, although the vast majority weren't, what if they were?


Well obviously a good portion of Hollywood was commie sympathizers or we wouldn't have them still harping about it half a century later, same as they do against Commie-fighting WWII Germany.
They were under investigation by the House Un-American Activities Committee.


----------



## Chouan (Nov 11, 2009)

Tempest said:


> Well obviously a good portion of Hollywood was commie sympathizers


Were they? What if they were?



Tempest said:


> or we wouldn't have them still harping about it half a century later, same as they do against Commie-fighting WWII Germany.


Your point being? The US was at war with Nazi Germany after all.



Tempest said:


> They were under investigation by the House Un-American Activities Committee.


You haven't answered the question, what if they were?


----------



## Tempest (Aug 16, 2012)

My point is quite simply that Hollywood, by which I mean the movie industry, was infiltrated by a covert cabal of Communists. 
It seems quite reasonable that this partially explains why Communist villainy and atrocities are glossed over in pop culture, and also why we get movies villainizing McCarthyism instead.

It apparently needs explaining that communism was deemed antithetical to the American way of life and was literally our ideological enemy during the Cold War.


----------



## SG_67 (Mar 22, 2014)

^ I recall a recent movie that was a love letter to Edward R Morrow. A notorious leftie and commie sympathizer. 

The love affair hasn't ended. Take a look at Sean Penn and Oliver Stone.


----------



## Tempest (Aug 16, 2012)

SG_67 said:


> ^ I recall a recent movie that was a love letter to Edward R Morrow. A notorious leftie and commie sympathizer.


There are gobs of instances, but the two most overt in my mind were "Good Night, and Good Luck" and the 1999 honorary Academy award to Elia Kazan where an army of celebs came out to tsk-tsk naming the Red. The Hollywood narrative is "showboating Senator ruins lives with paranoid campaign", but the reality was more "influential media filled with subversive possible enemy agents with a lot to hide."


----------



## Chouan (Nov 11, 2009)

Perhaps this thread could be renamed as "Anti-left rant thread", or "Anti-left rant with awkward questions ignored", as none of the questions asked, or the challenge to the grossly inaccurate thread title have been responded to....... Not that I'm surprised!


----------



## SG_67 (Mar 22, 2014)

^ So Hollywood does not lean left and during the cold war we did not have Soviet spies penetrated into our government?


----------



## Chouan (Nov 11, 2009)

SG_67 said:


> ^ So Hollywood does not lean left and during the cold war we did not have Soviet spies penetrated into our government?


Still no answers, of course.


----------



## SG_67 (Mar 22, 2014)

I believe we've provided answers. They just don't fit into your worldview or the narrative, assuming you even have one. 

Please assume I'm so dense as to not understand the question you're asking and rephrase it. Thanks.


----------



## Tempest (Aug 16, 2012)

SG_67 said:


> ^ So Hollywood does not lean left and during the cold war we did not have Soviet spies penetrated into our government?


Does anyone dispute this?
See what I did there? Answering a question with a question? Does it make me look smart?


----------



## Chouan (Nov 11, 2009)

I asked two reasonable questions. You have both avoided answering them. You're still avoiding answering them! 
In case you don't get what the first question was, look at the thread title. You started with "Somewhat shocking - - this Communist incident was actually reported by the liberal Washingon Post"I pointed out that the Washington Post has been writing about it for years, I even gave you examples, so why do you find it shocking?


----------



## Chouan (Nov 11, 2009)

SG_67 said:


> I believe we've provided answers.


Only you haven't. You've both ranted about the left in Hollywood, but you haven't answered the question.



SG_67 said:


> They just don't fit into your worldview or the narrative, assuming you even have one.


No, it is because they weren't answers! I know that Tempest has an interesting view of Nazi Germany, he has posted plenty of comments that show his attitude to that particular regime, so I'm not surprised at his attitude towards the left. However, it is possible to dislike dictatorships of all kinds, isn't it?



SG_67 said:


> Please assume I'm so dense as to not understand the question you're asking and rephrase it. Thanks.


Just in case you wrote this to avoid the issue, I've have indeed restated it.


----------



## SG_67 (Mar 22, 2014)

Chouan said:


> Only you haven't. You've both ranted about the left in Hollywood, but you haven't answered the question.
> 
> No, it is because they weren't answers! I know that Tempest has an interesting view of Nazi Germany, he has posted plenty of comments that show his attitude to that particular regime, so I'm not surprised at his attitude towards the left. However, it is possible to dislike dictatorships of all kinds, isn't it?
> [
> QUOTE=SG_67;1796541]Please assume I'm so dense as to not understand the question you're asking and rephrase it. Thanks.


Just in case you wrote this to avoid the issue, I've have indeed restated it.[/QUOTE]

I'm sorry, when have I defending right wing dictatorships in favor of left?

My point is that Hollywood is not producing romanticized stories of right wing dictators or regimes the same way as they romanticize Che Guevara or in the Last Emperor.

Consider the left's attitude toward Cuba. Consider the press coverage of Obama doing the wave w/ Raoul Castro.


----------



## Tempest (Aug 16, 2012)

Chouan said:


> I asked two reasonable questions. You have both avoided answering them. You're still avoiding answering them!
> In case you don't get what the first question was, look at the thread title. You started with "*Somewhat shocking - - this Communist incident was actually reported by the liberal Washingon Post"*
> 
> I pointed out that the Washington Post has been writing about it for years, I even gave you examples, so why do you find it shocking?


Let me get this straight. Chouan is mad that SG_67 and Tempest are failing to answer his question about the thread title made by neither of us. Are we mind-readers?


----------



## Chouan (Nov 11, 2009)

Tempest said:


> Let me get this straight. Chouan is mad that SG_67 and Tempest are failing to answer his question about the thread title made by neither of us. Are we mind-readers?


Read post 12. I directly asked the question to your mate. I've never suggested that your mate started the thread, but he was discussing the issue quite rationally at that point, so I asked his view.


----------



## SG_67 (Mar 22, 2014)

Chouan said:


> Read post 12. I directly asked the question to your mate. I've never suggested that your mate started the thread, but he was discussing the issue quite rationally at that point, so I asked his view.


I just read post #12 and it amounts to little more than a rant. I looked for a question mark in there somewhere indicating an actual question and all I found was an allusion to the WaPo's reporting on the Great Leap Forward and its horrors for years!

Interestingly, I don't recall the last story the Post did on this event in history. I'm sure they've reported on it and if so, what does that prove? It's sort of difficult to not report on something like that or not to call it out as what it is. You point to a few stories in a newspaper as your defense?

Why is the left always afraid of admitting to its views? Just embrace it. Your views align with those of a culture that makes apologies for communists based on some foundational principles outlined some 150 years ago.

When some of us denounce communism based on the horrors of the 20th century you offer a defense such as this was not real communism.


----------



## Chouan (Nov 11, 2009)

SG_67 said:


> When some of us denounce communism based on the horrors of the 20th century you offer a defense such as this was not real communism.


Because you aren't denouncing communism, what you are denouncing totalitarian dictatorships that used communism as a pretext. There is a significant difference, but it seems to consistently escape you.


----------



## Tempest (Aug 16, 2012)

If the thesis is that communism works in theory but not in practice, I'd agree.


----------



## SG_67 (Mar 22, 2014)

Chouan said:


> Because you aren't denouncing communism, what you are denouncing totalitarian dictatorships that used communism as a pretext. There is a significant difference, but it seems to consistently escape you.


I suppose when one lives in a world of ideas one has the luxury of making that distinction.

In practice however, where the rest of us live, I'm quite sure there hasn't been a utopian communist state.

Interesting how totalitarians use communism and socialism as a pretext and not liberal democracy.


----------



## Chouan (Nov 11, 2009)

SG_67 said:


> I suppose when one lives in a world of ideas one has the luxury of making that distinction.


We all live in a world of ideas.



SG_67 said:


> In practice however, where the rest of us live, I'm quite sure there hasn't been a utopian communist state.


Why should there be? I pointed out in a previous post, which you must have forgotten, or didn't read, or didn't understand, that communism isn't an ideology, it is a political theory, so the existence of a utopian communist state, or otherwise, is irrelevant. Especially the "state" part.



SG_67 said:


> Interesting how totalitarians use communism and socialism as a pretext and not liberal democracy.


Indeed. Both the "left" and the "right" use their respective ideological pretexts to achieve and maintain their positions of power. The oligarchs use a different ideological pretext to maintain their control; in their system people think that they have a say, through "democracy", but the same people are still in control and the system works to keep them in control.


----------



## SG_67 (Mar 22, 2014)

^ yes but there's something unique about how dictatorships typically follow from the pretext of socialism and trying to achieve some measure of "social justice".


----------

