Ricktloml

Well certainly not the over 112 million, (and counting,)murdered citizens, perhaps their surviving loved ones might have mentioned what a failure it was, (once they were actually free to do so.) There are those who survived torture and imprisonment at the hands of these governments who have pointed out how dismal, cruel, unjust, (and downright evil these leftist systems are.)

ReverseDiversity

If experience with law and lawmakers is consistent, that list will expand shortly.

albets

this is so, so true !! that's me... I am with neither party, so where does that leave a person like me ??

jim_shipley

Wherever...It should not last long with one side used to having guns and the other side afraid to touch guns.

ReverseDiversity

They get into guns when they realize that they can have their People's Revolution and achieve true socialism in their lifetimes with them!

RT friend Loc: Kangaroo valley NSW Australia

You could talk about the more recent wars like that and it bounces off people unless it conflates with their considered vested interests, which is why I mentioned cotton, the South in the Soviet Union were the Bolshevicks I didn't figure anyone would cotton on, and the North was the White's.

The Southern Peasants won because the North wanted slavery revisited.

Marx wasn't a Jew but every other Bolshevik was except for Stalin hence his ascent, but the Jews in Poland were know as the "Bund" and they turned on the Bolshevicks so in many ways like the American Civil War it was sort of an "inter in-law war", seriously internecine war or Civil War, actually what tipped the difference was vested interests the luddites lost then won in 1997 lost in 2012 and the, maybe, final outcome is now in the balance.

History has forced Putin's conversation he's no longer a Luddite, but he could convert again who knows with him and Trump anything goes.

The Jews in the South weren't peasants but they knew how to excite emotions by murdering Tsar Alexander 111.

The Jews in the North became Zionists and the Southern Jews "assimilated no more" the Fascists didn't kill them the Zionists did so the Russian Civil war is on going only the Muslims are standing in for the Jewish Assimilationists, aka Bolsheviks.

I support Christopher Read's assessment of the Russian Revolution "The Making and Breaking of The Soviet Union " but OPP is not about history it's about proselytizing, everybody knows that, this is my personal Theologica view which raises all kinds of interesting question.

Why did the Soviet Union prevail, why did the West ensure Communism's development as a Welfare state. ?

What caused Climate Change ? and would Communism have done the same since suburbanization and consumerism was not allowed.?

That's on the secular side, Theologically thinking why does Christianity support Talmudic Judaism ?.

Here's a couple of good ones, if Russia wasn't threatened by the West how far would President Putin go to create Greater Israel ?.

Why did so many Jewish Russian Oligarchs convert to Orthodox Christianity?.

ReverseDiversity

Solzhenitsyn said something similar, if memory serves.

RT friend Loc: Kangaroo valley NSW Australia

An interesting comment, not directed to me but if I might presume to reply since I sit at the feet of an expert on the subject Christopher Read who introduced Alexander Solzhenitsyn fairly often.

This is what he says about some of Solzhenitsyn's emotional allegations.

The difference between Solzhenitsyn and Medvedev Reed tells us, - Medvedev alleged Stalin was opposed to Lenin, and - Solzhenitsyn maintained Lenin and Stalin was the same. I noticed the Medvedev Trotskyists were applauding Pussy Riot, the Stalinist's put them in jail.

Solzhenitsyn was active during 1980's paralle with the dissident son of Stalin's FM Litvinov and Medvedev who was waiting for the Soviet Dubcek but the reformer remained absent. Gulag Archipelago first published 1973 and caused unrest Reed associates this period with the vodka culture, very credible taking Yeltsin into account.

Solzhenitsyn and Pasternak were symbolic of perestroika 1988-1989, cooperatives were doing well, anarchists took over Moscow square making speeches denouncing Marxism to sell their news papers, the Democratic Union was formed . Reed ties this in to the Orthodox Church making Religious Texts and Liturgical Books freely available sett up in public kiosks.

I can give lots more paraphrased quotes if anybody is interested.

ReverseDiversity

I think he's onto something. For bonus points, add Robespierre and Napoleon.

Carol Kelly

Except for one thing...Trump would have a landslide victory over either of them

Carol Kelly

Very wise.

RT friend Loc: Kangaroo valley NSW Australia

A good point but specialization prevents it, Professor Read (modern history) Warwick University.

Christopher Read is not an ideologue, if he were to write about his thoughts on political topics in Britain he would lose his standing as a practicing historian.

As far as I know Read does give an opinion about Republicianism but he doesn't appear to be Monarchical, the problem with Read is that his books are very expensive, more than double the price of less saught after historians.

Public libraries in Australia only hold his writings at Universities, and to get a loan it costs $25 so I'm not really up to scratch although I use his work a lot in my thinking, I readily admit I make stuff up.

Here's what I think Read says about Robespierre and Nepolean.

Read subliminally believes the Marxist theory of free flowing capital when in its form of machinery must have a monopoly consequence, the guillotine was such a monopoly control item and Robespierre's subliminal thoughts excepted him when the blade came smoothly down, he cursed his bad aim when he short himself in the head at point blank range and missed.

The Jacobine Club was a hot bed of both extremists and reactionaries.

Robespierre was on the right, Danton was a lefty, Danton inspired the second Commune Marx spoke about 79 years later.

No statute was ever erected to honour Robespierre in Paris but Danton was immortalised by the first Paris Commune and association in spirit with the second.

Bonaparte was the reactionary and was spared the guillotine because the "monopoly controlled item " had always chosen it's victims not for the high up or just from loud mouths but from, - quote - JM Thompson " ... between January 1793 and June 1795 the Revolutionary Tribunal sent 2,795 prisoners to the guillotine. These for the most part were ordinary citizens convicted, ... .... of offences against the State and the laws of the Republic .... .... ... ... .... The court held it's trials in public.; but the common assumption was that anyone the Government put on trial was guilty, and it was only upon rare occasions that the eloquence or attractive looks of the defendant won the favor of the audience and the votes of the jury. " end quote.

So Napoleon 1. missed the best bits before the monopoly imploded because the fun became nervousness when the citizens realised their logic was presumed to be what it really wasn't.

Quote - "But as a young Corsican Officer named Bonaparte, watched the scene in the gardens, remarked that if he was king he would not tolerate such things " end Quote.

The scene in the gardens was King Louis XV1 who had drclared war against Hungry and Bohemia.

This began the passage of history that led to Waterloo, Bonaparte was at the very beginning as a nobody witnessing the Crown being humiliated, after a crowd including Bonaparte had overflowed into the kings gardens after forcing entrance to the Palace grounds.

ReverseDiversity

Leftist societies seem to follow the same arc: take over from naturally talented people, replace them with a big fat System, then start starving, so turn to militarization and mass mobilization to keep people united, which then results in comical and failing wars to spread... the good news of Leftism.

Fodaoson Loc: South Texas

I connect them because they are both running for president and i support neither of them.