MABB v6.6.6

You cannot answer this question without a proper understanding of the two systems, which sorry to say, Noyka and Redd clearly lack.



The difference was clearly severe enough to lead to a direct clash between the two systems in WW2.



The major difference, my friends, is that communism is the direct expression of the will of the majority, the most democratic of systems, whereas fascism is an ideology that represents the opposite.



Benito Mussolini, describes fascism as follows:



".Fascism [is] the complete opposite of…Marxian Socialism, the materialist conception of history of human civilization can be explained simply through the conflict of interests among the various social groups and by the change and development in the means and instruments of production.... Fascism, now and always, believes in holiness and in heroism; that is to say, in actions influenced by no economic motive, direct or indirect. And if the economic conception of history be denied, according to which theory men are no more than puppets, carried to and fro by the waves of chance, while the real directing forces are quite out of their control, it follows that the existence of an unchangeable and unchanging class-war is also denied - the natural progeny of the economic conception of history. And above all Fascism denies that class-war can be the preponderant force in the transformation of society...."



"After Socialism, Fascism combats the whole complex system of democratic ideology, and repudiates it, whether in its theoretical premises or in its practical application. Fascism denies that the majority, by the simple fact that it is a majority, can direct human society; it denies that numbers alone can govern by means of a periodical consultation, and it affirms the immutable, beneficial, and fruitful inequality of mankind, which can never be permanently leveled through the mere operation of a mechanical process such as universal suffrage...."



<!-- m -->http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Fasci ... olini.html<!-- m -->





Feel free to ask questions from someone who has actually studied the systems in detail rather than from someone who relies on a dictionary definition, and then stretches that definition to accommodate preconceived notions.

Mussolini further says:



"...For Fascism, the growth of empire, that is to say the expansion of the nation, is an essential manifestation of vitality, and its opposite a sign of decadence. Peoples which are rising, or rising again after a period of decadence, are always imperialist; and renunciation is a sign of decay and of death. "

-----------------



Socialism/Communism resolutely opposes this viewpoint by being staunchly anti-imperialist. The ideology of communism is totally opposed to the subjugation of other nations which Fascism recognizes as a core principle.



Throughout the 20th century, socialists everywhere supported national liberation movements that sought to throw off imperialism (word comes from empire). Vietnam, China, Africa, Latin America you name it



Communists are of the opinion that no nation has the right to oppress or enslave another, and express solidarity with the working class of the entire world, which must unite on the basis of the common cause of liberating themselves from the real enemy, i.e. the capitalists of their own countries.

anarcho-communism >>>>>> state communism

[quote name="Chaohinon"]anarcho-communism >>>>>> state communism[/quote]



name one example where this is true.

You cannot answer this question without a proper understanding of the two systems, which sorry to say, Noyka and Redd clearly lack.

Hence why I asked what the difference was.

The difference was clearly severe enough to lead to a direct clash between the two systems in WW2.

Hitler didn't invade the USSR because he was anti-communist, he just wanted more fucking land. Why do you think he invaded Poland?

Socialism/Communism resolutely opposes this viewpoint by being staunchly anti-imperialist. The ideology of communism is totally opposed to the subjugation of other nations which Fascism recognizes as a core principle.

Oh, so why did Stalin then force Poland after the war to become a communist puppet state?

Nice job talking out of your ass while taking the time to try and bash the intelligence of people who never claimed to be experts on the subject at hand.



When talking about political philosophies I tend to go by the ddictionary definition because that's what most people understand the best. I don't believe in taking a lot of time to understand them because honestly there's not a lot of difference in any ofthem. I just go by my gut and what I know my beliefs are and fight for what I believe will help and fight against what I believe will harm.

how can you have like, an actual, conscious and deliberate opposition to understanding something. what the fuck

Wow, and people call me literal....



I meant that I get a general understanding, I don't go real deep into political philosophies, there's no need for it.

I have to agree with Ermy and Morty on this one, but also with Redd's version of WW2's facism-communism clash. It was a land thing.



With something like a simplistic dictionary definition of something inherently complex like fascism or communism, a deeper understanding is necessary to properly answer Redd's initial question. I've been waiting for Imran to chime in.

"Inherently complex" Oh you mean both systems ultimate goal of suffocating free thinking and encouraging dependency?



All of these systems are based on monetary based societies and therefore fundementally are exactly the same. Why should anyone waste their time trying to understand minute differences in something that ultimately leads to the same destructive paths we've always followed?

Tyrant

Fall of tyrent

Rise of capitlaism

Capitalism

Fall of capitalism

Socialism

Communism

Tyrant

We always follow the same patterns, it's an endless cycle. The proof is in every society that's existed ever, there's no fundemental difference.

two sides of the same totalitarian coin

[quote name="hafsteinn"]two sides of the same totalitarian coin[/quote]





Haffy has it

[quote name="ManOfSteel"]Feel free to ask questions from someone who has actually studied the systems in detail rather than from someone who relies on a dictionary definition, and then stretches that definition to accommodate preconceived notions.[/quote]



Hard offer to resist, when you put it so nicely.



[quote name="ManOfSteel"]Communists are of the opinion that no nation has the right to oppress or enslave another, and express solidarity with the working class of the entire world, which must unite on the basis of the common cause of liberating themselves from the real enemy, i.e. the capitalists of their own countries.[/quote]



It's quite cute to hear you speak on behalf of the world's communists.

Anyways, so what's China doing with Tibet and Taiwan these days?

Oh. Er. Um.

[quote name="Noyka"]"Inherently complex" Oh you mean both systems ultimate goal of suffocating free thinking and encouraging dependency?



All of these systems are based on monetary based societies and therefore fundementally are exactly the same. Why should anyone waste their time trying to understand minute differences in something that ultimately leads to the same destructive paths we've always followed?

Tyrant

Fall of tyrent

Rise of capitlaism

Capitalism

Fall of capitalism

Socialism

Communism

Tyrant

We always follow the same patterns, it's an endless cycle. The proof is in every society that's existed ever, there's no fundemental difference.[/quote]

You breaking down both to one end result does not eliminate the complexity of either system in their true form. Why should anyone waste their time understanding anything, by your logic?



Why bother learning anything at all? I cant even put into words the amount of fail in questioning the worth of learning.

learning's for wanklets and liberals, who gives a shit about learning when you've got gut instinct to guide you

here's what i think about the whole subject



...blah blah blah blah

[quote name="Chaohinon"]anarcho-communism >>>>>> state communism[/quote]



State communism? Please. Communism is communism. A stateless, classless society.



Define anarcho communism, or at least what you understand by the term and tell me why you think it is better than communism.

My impression is that she's referring to the anarcho-communist system from Monty Python.

[quote name="Redd"]Hitler didn't invade the USSR because he was anti-communist, he just wanted more fucking land. Why do you think he invaded Poland?[/quote]



It is not as simple as, - "Hitler didn't invade USSR because he was anti-communist, he just wanted more fucking land. Why do you think he invaded Poland?" - when you consider that Hitler resolutely hated Marxism and regarded it as propaganda of the Jews. One of the first groups of people he erased in Germany were the Marxists.



So yes, ofcourse he wanted to conquer territory. That is what fascism is about. Creating/expanding empires as I said. But the excuse he used was that Marxism, the Slavs, and the Jews needed to be destroyed. Marxism opposes fascism more resolutely than all other ideologies, and showed this in deeds as well throughout.



Now if you look at Poland's geographical location, you can see the strategic advantage of invading it with the viewpoint to attack the Soviet Union. Remember, Ukraine and Belarus used to be a part of the Soviet Union.



http://vlib.iue.it/images/europe-map.jpg



[quote name="Redd"]Oh, so why did Stalin then force Poland after the war to become a communist puppet state?[/quote]



This is a longer discussion but I will answer very briefly here by taking a piece out of an 'anti communist' webpage



"Stalin explained that throughout history Poland had either attacked Russia or had been used as a corridor through which other hostile countries invaded her. Only a strong, pro-Communist government in Poland would be able to guarantee the security of the Soviet Union. As a result of the conference the Allies withdrew their recognition for the Polish government-in-exile."



<!-- m -->http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/RUSpoland.htm<!-- m -->



This does not seem entirely unreasonable to me. Russia faced the worst devastation of any country in WW2.This was caused by Hitlerite Germany's assault, due in part to the errors of the Polish, and the hostile nature of the capitalist countries in the west (note Winston Churchill's staunch hatred for Communism, he went so far as to state that Bolshevism must be strangled in its cradle), it was very clear that the Soviet Union had to ensure its safety. But since Stalin was in a strong bargaining position at the Yalta conference, he made his case, and the Allies accepted by withdrawing recognition of the Polish government-in-exile. This last point is very important to understand. The Poland issue however deserves a more detailed response, and perhaps a separate thread, with the Katyn controversy all fresh today.

[quote name="Noyka"]Nice job talking out of your ass while taking the time to try and bash the intelligence of people who never claimed to be experts on the subject at hand.[/quote]



It seems from your own confirmation of my statement that I have not been talking out of my ass, but was in fact correct. You have affirmed that you do not know the systems except through 2 line dictionary definitions.



However, you are incorrect in saying that I bashed your intelligence. I do not know how intelligent you are, really. What I do have an issue with is that you used a dictionary definition to answer a question by stretching the definition to accommodate your erroneous opinion. You should make a more detailed study. I would be very happy if you made a detailed study of Capitalism itself. That doesn't sound like a bad idea does it?



[quote name="Noyka"]When talking about political philosophies I tend to go by the ddictionary definition because that's what most people understand the best. I don't believe in taking a lot of time to understand them because honestly there's not a lot of difference in any ofthem. I just go by my gut and what I know my beliefs are and fight for what I believe will help and fight against what I believe will harm.[/quote]



This is not a good attitude.

[quote name="beandorkio"]
[quote name="ManOfSteel"]Feel free to ask questions from someone who has actually studied the systems in detail rather than from someone who relies on a dictionary definition, and then stretches that definition to accommodate preconceived notions.[/quote]



Hard offer to resist, when you put it so nicely.



[quote name="ManOfSteel"]Communists are of the opinion that no nation has the right to oppress or enslave another, and express solidarity with the working class of the entire world, which must unite on the basis of the common cause of liberating themselves from the real enemy, i.e. the capitalists of their own countries.[/quote]



It's quite cute to hear you speak on behalf of the world's communists.

Anyways, so what's China doing with Tibet and Taiwan these days?

Oh. Er. Um.[/quote]



Tibet is a part of China. The Dalai Lama is a scum who represents the worst. Socialism was the best thing to happen to Tibet, whereby the parastic, tyrannical lamas were removed from power and the development of the people of Tibet proceeded.



Taiwan is also part of China, and unity needs to be achieved on socialist principles.

[quote name="ANGEL OF DESEASE"]
[quote name="hafsteinn"]two sides of the same totalitarian coin[/quote]





Haffy has it[/quote]



Quite wrong.

Yeah... I stopped reading at your first reply. Go learn WWII properly.

where do you disagree

"when you consider that Hitler resolutely hated Marxism and regarded it as propaganda of the Jews. One of the first groups of people he erased in Germany were the Marxists."



You need to remember that they tried to take over the government many times. He was trying to defend the Nazi regime by jailing ANYONE (communist, social democrat, etc) who opposed him.

I won't disagree that having Poland is a strategic advantage. And those excuses he used only for propaganda... real reason was land, always was land.



Hold on wait what... Poland attacked the USSR? Why would they attack the USSR when their military was horribly outdated and they had Adolf and pals on their doorstep? Saying Poland started it is exactly what the Nazis did -- faked border incursions then lept into Poland. It wasn't due to any fault of Poland that they didn't hold off the Nazis from the Russians. Poland did not have the military strength and updated military to do that (you can also blame France and Britain for failing to react quickly enough). And Stalin fucking invaded them a few weeks after Hitler! I do agree that the Soviet Union had a right to ensure its safety, but when Stalin purged the military, that didn't help much. That lead to the victories that Nazi Germany had early in the eastern war.

[quote name="Redd"]
[quote name="Manofsteel"]when you consider that Hitler resolutely hated Marxism and regarded it as propaganda of the Jews. One of the first groups of people he erased in Germany were the Marxists.[/quote][/quote]



[quote name="Redd"]You need to remember that they tried to take over the government many times. He was trying to defend the Nazi regime by jailing ANYONE (communist, social democrat, etc) who opposed him.[/quote]



I would like to bring to your attention that Hitler's hatred of Marxism did not begin when he took the seat of power in Germany and thus had to 'defend' the Nazi regime from Marxists. His hatred of Marxism began much earlier. So your reasoning, that Hitler hated the Marxists because they posed a threat to the Nazi regime is quite wrong, considering that Hitler's hatred of Marxism began well before the Nazi regime. Like the Jews, he had made up his mind about what to do with them once he came to power, irrespective of whether they attacked the Nazi regime or not.



Read Mein Kampf if you wish for insight into what Hitler thought of Marxism.





[quote name="Redd"]I won't disagree that having Poland is a strategic advantage. And those excuses he used only for propaganda... real reason was land, always was land.[/quote]



Very strange logic. How did you come to the conclusion that Hitler did not GENUINELY want to eradicate Jews, Marxists, Gypsies and Slavs and establish white supremacy, fascism and colonize other countries? What makes you think that the ideology of Marxism ... that opposed such colonization and subjugation and thus stood in the way of Hitler's goals - even if they were to attain land -... did NOT pose a threat to the ideology of Fascism?



I think it makes perfect sense that if you want to colonize other nations, and there's these fellas that propagate a different ideology that opposes colonization, you would want to exterminate that ideology, and the propagators of that ideology.





[quote name="Redd"]Hold on wait what... Poland attacked the USSR?[/quote]



No. You have misinterpreted what I said.



[quote name="Redd"]Why would they attack the USSR when their military was horribly outdated and they had Adolf and pals on their doorstep? Saying Poland started it is exactly what the Nazis did -- faked border incursions then lept into Poland. It wasn't due to any fault of Poland that they didn't hold off the Nazis from the Russians. Poland did not have the military strength and updated military to do that (you can also blame France and Britain for failing to react quickly enough). And Stalin fucking invaded them a few weeks after Hitler! I do agree that the Soviet Union had a right to ensure its safety, but when Stalin purged the military, that didn't help much. That lead to the victories that Nazi Germany had early in the eastern war.[/quote]



This entire para is based on your wrong interpretation. I did not say that Poland attacked the USSR anywhere in my post.

can you explain please how giving "the majority" a monopoly on the use of violence doesn't strongly reflect the same values inherent in fascism?

This thread was actually a secret ploy to get more participation and discussion out of Imran.



I am not learned in the Marxist parts of that era. I need to read up on it.

All sheep need someone to tell them were to graze lest they go insane pondering the true purpose of existence

[quote name="ManOfSteel"]"Stalin explained that throughout history Poland had either attacked Russia or had been used as a corridor through which other hostile countries invaded her. Only a strong, pro-Communist government in Poland would be able to guarantee the security of the Soviet Union. As a result of the conference the Allies withdrew their recognition for the Polish government-in-exile[/quote]



Sounds like good old-fashioned imperialist empire expansion to me. So what, they've got justifications for it. EVERYONE always does.



I also like how you mention the Allies, just so that if we begin to think that barefaced aggressive greedy communist Soviet imperialist expansion into Polish territory was a bad thing....you can blame it on the West! Genius.



And very predictable.



[quote name="ManOfSteel"]Tibet is a part of China. The Dalai Lama is a scum who represents the worst. Socialism was the best thing to happen to Tibet, whereby the parastic, tyrannical lamas were removed from power and the development of the people of Tibet proceeded.



Taiwan is also part of China, and unity needs to be achieved on socialist principles.[/quote]



My bad! I forgot for a moment there that you blindly worship tyrannies and absolve them of their imperialist urges, whatever their motivations.



Mao, Stalin, Kim Jong Il, Saddam, Mugabe...you love 'em all, you little bolshie. I'm still waiting for you to come out all hot and sweaty for Hitler and Pol Pot. Or did I miss that post?

[quote name="Famous Mortimer"]learning's for wanklets and liberals, who gives a shit about learning when you've got gut instinct to guide you[/quote]



You totally missed my point but I've come to expect that from you. I've brought up facts like what goes on in other coutnries currently to back up every belief I hold politically.



The day someone on either extreme actually takes the time to learn will be the day pigs can fly.



[quote name="abzu"]
[quote name="Noyka"]"Inherently complex" Oh you mean both systems ultimate goal of suffocating free thinking and encouraging dependency?



All of these systems are based on monetary based societies and therefore fundementally are exactly the same. Why should anyone waste their time trying to understand minute differences in something that ultimately leads to the same destructive paths we've always followed?

Tyrant

Fall of tyrent

Rise of capitlaism

Capitalism

Fall of capitalism

Socialism

Communism

Tyrant

We always follow the same patterns, it's an endless cycle. The proof is in every society that's existed ever, there's no fundemental difference.[/quote]

You breaking down both to one end result does not eliminate the complexity of either system in their true form. Why should anyone waste their time understanding anything, by your logic?



Why bother learning anything at all? I cant even put into words the amount of fail in questioning the worth of learning.[/quote]



I'm not saying don't learn, I'm saying these systems are fundementally the same they lead to each other. There's not a lot of difference in any of them. All of our current systems are based on monetary based societies and therefore ultimately end up the same.



Being trapped in the mindset of we have to follow one system is a horrible way to be. We have to go by what we feel and what we know based on past societies and socities around us what works and what doesn't. What's stupid about that belief? Results are more important than what boil down to meaningless names.



Also, I'm an aspie our brains run on logic but my communication skills suck so if something I said doesn't make sense ask I'm more than willing to explain myself (or at least try to).

I would like to bring to your attention that Hitler's hatred of Marxism did not begin when he took the seat of power in Germany and thus had to 'defend' the Nazi regime from Marxists. His hatred of Marxism began much earlier. So your reasoning, that Hitler hated the Marxists because they posed a threat to the Nazi regime is quite wrong, considering that Hitler's hatred of Marxism began well before the Nazi regime. Like the Jews, he had made up his mind about what to do with them once he came to power, irrespective of whether they attacked the Nazi regime or not.



Read Mein Kampf if you wish for insight into what Hitler thought of Marxism.

You misunderstood me. The Nazis were fighting for votes in parliment (or whatever the Germans called it) so of course Hitler would hate them, and this was BEFORE Hitler became chancellor, this was during his days as a street politician.

Very strange logic. How did you come to the conclusion that Hitler did not GENUINELY want to eradicate Jews, Marxists, Gypsies and Slavs and establish white supremacy, fascism and colonize other countries? What makes you think that the ideology of Marxism ... that opposed such colonization and subjugation and thus stood in the way of Hitler's goals - even if they were to attain land -... did NOT pose a threat to the ideology of Fascism?



I think it makes perfect sense that if you want to colonize other nations, and there's these fellas that propagate a different ideology that opposes colonization, you would want to exterminate that ideology, and the propagators of that ideology.

You could say that for people supporting a democratic system as well.

Hold on wait what... Poland attacked the USSR?

No. You have misinterpreted what I said.

Then tell me what I interpreted wrong instead of just saying "oh you didn't understand."

[quote name="Noyka"]I'm not saying don't learn, I'm saying these systems are fundementally the same they lead to each other. There's not a lot of difference in any of them. All of our current systems are based on monetary based societies and therefore ultimately end up the same.



Being trapped in the mindset of we have to follow one system is a horrible way to be. We have to go by what we feel and what we know based on past societies and socities around us what works and what doesn't. What's stupid about that belief? Results are more important than what boil down to meaningless names.



Also, I'm an aspie our brains run on logic but my communication skills suck so if something I said doesn't make sense ask I'm more than willing to explain myself (or at least try to).[/quote]

Fair enough.

This needed to be refined. To many mistakes in this post.

2,283 words is anyone going to read this?

Don't get me wrong, I fully support labor struggle, am a member of the IWW, and regularly distribute their literature where pertinent.



I'd like to think of marxists and socialists as potential allies, but you guys continually fuck up when you fail to differentiate between state-capitalism and the free market. Your theory needs serious revision, because it fails to address the very real problem of capitalists being continually at odds with capitalists.



Example: Monsanto and the FDA versus small farms. The regulatory quicksand that results from the collusion of government and big business only proceeds to do damage to your beloved proletariat, but it also harms small-scale capitalism. You desperately need to recognize entrepreneurs and free marketeers as being friends in a common struggle against the beastly state.



It's pretty simple really. You correctly recognize the workers as being the backbone of production pretty much anywhere, but when the workers merge with the state, they turn parasitical. By calling for nationalization, you're only pissing in your own cereal.



"Social democracy is the price you pay for corporate capitalism. If you are going to strip the majority of their property and independence and turn them into wage slaves, you have to provide for them." - Larry Gambone



State-socialism and state-capitalism are not enemies, you see. They're simply the yin and yang that results from the parasitical class gaining power.



I know this problem first hand, as several members of my family have struggled to run their own small businesses. I can think of tons of people who would have steady jobs, health insurance, etc. were it not for state regulations and taxes devouring the fruits of their labor. Corporatocratic capitalism harms these people, indeed, as has statocratic socialism in the name of the "common good."



I know my post is a little incoherent, so here's some light reading for you: Agorist Class Theory



The Ethics of Labor Struggle

[quote name="ManOfSteel"]2,283 words is anyone going to read this?[/quote]

I will eventually because



Whether or not I agree in the end is irrelevant.

"It follows that when government is abolished, wage slavery and capitalism must go with it, because they cannot exist without the support and protection of government." - Alexander Berkman

[quote name="abzu"]
[quote name="ManOfSteel"]2,283 words is anyone going to read this?[/quote]

I will eventually because



Whether or not I agree in the end is irrelevant.[/quote]

[quote name="ManOfSteel"]
[quote name="Redd"]
[quote name="Manofsteel"]when you consider that Hitler resolutely hated Marxism and regarded it as propaganda of the Jews. One of the first groups of people he erased in Germany were the Marxists.[/quote][/quote]



[quote name="Redd"]You need to remember that they tried to take over the government many times. He was trying to defend the Nazi regime by jailing ANYONE (communist, social democrat, etc) who opposed him.[/quote]



I would like to bring to your attention that Hitler's hatred of Marxism did not begin when he took the seat of power in Germany and thus had to 'defend' the Nazi regime from Marxists. His hatred of Marxism began much earlier. So your reasoning, that Hitler hated the Marxists because they posed a threat to the Nazi regime is quite wrong, considering that Hitler's hatred of Marxism began well before the Nazi regime. Like the Jews, he had made up his mind about what to do with them once he came to power, irrespective of whether they attacked the Nazi regime or not.



Read Mein Kampf if you wish for insight into what Hitler thought of Marxism.





[quote name="Redd"]I won't disagree that having Poland is a strategic advantage. And those excuses he used only for propaganda... real reason was land, always was land.[/quote]



Very strange logic. How did you come to the conclusion that Hitler did not GENUINELY want to eradicate Jews, Marxists, Gypsies and Slavs and establish white supremacy, fascism and colonize other countries? What makes you think that the ideology of Marxism ... that opposed such colonization and subjugation and thus stood in the way of Hitler's goals - even if they were to attain land -... did NOT pose a threat to the ideology of Fascism?



I think it makes perfect sense that if you want to colonize other nations, and there's these fellas that propagate a different ideology that opposes colonization, you would want to exterminate that ideology, and the propagators of that ideology.





[quote name="Redd"]Hold on wait what... Poland attacked the USSR?[/quote]



No. You have misinterpreted what I said.



[quote name="Redd"]Why would they attack the USSR when their military was horribly outdated and they had Adolf and pals on their doorstep? Saying Poland started it is exactly what the Nazis did -- faked border incursions then lept into Poland. It wasn't due to any fault of Poland that they didn't hold off the Nazis from the Russians. Poland did not have the military strength and updated military to do that (you can also blame France and Britain for failing to react quickly enough). And Stalin fucking invaded them a few weeks after Hitler! I do agree that the Soviet Union had a right to ensure its safety, but when Stalin purged the military, that didn't help much. That lead to the victories that Nazi Germany had early in the eastern war.[/quote]



This entire para is based on your wrong interpretation. I did not say that Poland attacked the USSR anywhere in my post.[/quote]



My. God. You are on a completely different planet, aren't you?

I'd still like to know how my interpretation was wrong, Ironman.



our lord and master wants to know as well

our lord and master is a capitalist infidel salad bar pig

[quote name="Redd"]I'd still like to know how my interpretation was wrong, Ironman.



our lord and master wants to know as well[/quote]



Wait your turn. I replied to chaohinon's post first because it came first. After that one, I need a few days to build up my mood to reply to all the other posts. Maybe when I am chillaxing on Saturday or Sunday, I will reply in detail.

It's a shame that Erny only post under red flag these days. Come on man, every time you come here you only preach about Communisn, Sosialism or Fascism. Get the peanut out of your arse for a week and chill out.

[quote name="Pentelesh"]It's a shame that Erny only post under red flag these days. Come on man, every time you come here you only preach about Communisn, Sosialism or Fascism. Get the peanut out of your arse for a week and chill out.[/quote]



Seriously

[quote name="ManOfSteel"]
[quote name="Redd"]I'd still like to know how my interpretation was wrong, Ironman.



our lord and master wants to know as well[/quote]



Wait your turn. I replied to chaohinon's post first because it came first. After that one, I need a few days to build up my mood to reply to all the other posts. Maybe when I am chillaxing on Saturday or Sunday, I will reply in detail.[/quote]



I don't need an essay.

[quote name="Pentelesh"]It's a shame that Erny only post under red flag these days. Come on man, every time you come here you only preach about Communisn, Sosialism or Fascism. Get the peanut out of your arse for a week and chill out.[/quote]



Ok.



[quote name="Redd"]
[quote name="ManOfSteel"]
[quote name="Redd"]I'd still like to know how my interpretation was wrong, Ironman.



our lord and master wants to know as well[/quote]



Wait your turn. I replied to chaohinon's post first because it came first. After that one, I need a few days to build up my mood to reply to all the other posts. Maybe when I am chillaxing on Saturday or Sunday, I will reply in detail.[/quote]



I don't need an essay.[/quote]



So you like to read books on world war 2 and history, but you won't even read a few paragraphs from me? Please reconsider your comment. Tomorrow is good old Sunday. I have no activity lined up. So I will have a good time replying to the posts in this thread.

I don't feel like reading your "GLORIOUS PEOPLES' REVOLUTION" crap, so a simple explanation is all I need.

I just watched Che Part 1, land reform.. I supports it!