Print Page | Close Window

Putin: Soviet collapse greatest century’s catastrophe!!

Printed From: History Community ~ All Empires
Category: Regional History or Period History
Forum Name: Modern History
Forum Discription: World History from 1918 to the 21st century.
URL: http://www.allempires.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=3208
Printed Date: 29-Mar-2024 at 10:34
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 9.56a - http://www.webwizforums.com


Topic: Putin: Soviet collapse greatest century’s catastrophe!!
Posted By: Perseas
Subject: Putin: Soviet collapse greatest century’s catastrophe!!
Date Posted: 02-May-2005 at 15:56
Here is a link to the story:

http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/20050425/ap_on_re_eu/russia_putin - http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/20050425/ap_ on_re_eu/russia_putin
 
What do you think about his statements? Do you agree that "the demise of the Soviet Union was the greatest geopolitical catastrophe of the century"? If you disagree, which one you think was the greatest geopolitical catastrophe???



Replies:
Posted By: ArmenianSurvival
Date Posted: 02-May-2005 at 19:28
I agree. It marked the fall of the last true empire on earth.

-------------
Mass Murderers Agree: Gun Control Works!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Van_Resistance

Քիչ ենք բայց Հայ ենք։


Posted By: Tobodai
Date Posted: 02-May-2005 at 19:30
it gave many people and nations too immature to handle themselves autonomy.

-------------
"the people are nothing but a great beast...
I have learned to hold popular opinion of no value."
-Alexander Hamilton


Posted By: Paul
Date Posted: 03-May-2005 at 07:38

Some parts of the former soviet block have definately suffered. There was no unemployment, homelessness and poverty, now there's a hell of a lot.

But I think it's the rest of the world that's really suffered.

The west has grown too powerful, and power corrupts. Already western societies are become less free, democratic and more autocratic.

The muslim world, the new target, isn't a viable opposition so the various countries have gone from being courted allies to whores or whipping boys.

The US so lacks any kind of opposing ideologies it's beggining intellectually to resemble China during the Cultural Revolution.

And Europe is doing it's best to reinact the last days of Pompei.



-------------
Light blue touch paper and stand well back

http://www.maquahuitl.co.uk - http://www.maquahuitl.co.uk

http://www.toltecitztli.co.uk - http://www.toltecitztli.co.uk


Posted By: iskenderani
Date Posted: 03-May-2005 at 07:48

### the demise of the Soviet Union was the greatest geopolitical catastrophe of the century ###

Geopolitically speaking he is absolutely right....

The fall of Soviet Union disrupted the equilibrium that existed and left one super power to act at hero OWN will lookin first her OWN interests disregarding if thse interests may NOT be for the common good , of the other democratic states...Example : Look at the oil prices , now that she controls the greatest reserves ever been....And the price is payed by EU , who has not enough oil for herself and her needs and has to import..

It is a political complexity that exists today , but in the background it is only the interest of USA.

Isk.



Posted By: Kalevipoeg
Date Posted: 03-May-2005 at 19:10
It probably was the greatest geopolitical catastrophy. It most certainly gave the USA dictatorship over most of the planet and its resources. But even if i dislike, or maybe despise ( i don't know yet) American superiority, i couldn't be more happier over the collapse of the USSR. I am free now and i can bitch about Estonian politicians and their messes, but not over some nobleman from Moscow. No big tears from me when a terrorist country falls into ruin, especcially the one one that usurped mine and tried to bring its ideals on me.

-------------
There is nothing in the world more helpless and irresponsible than a man in the depths of an ether binge...


Posted By: Thegeneral
Date Posted: 03-May-2005 at 19:19
I think it is a warning that Putin said that.  Just think what could and would happen should they become communist again.  It would horrible.  And although it is awful how much the country has deteriorated and sufferd, I am happy the Soviet fell.  ANd I couldn't be happier with American supiriorit!

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


Posted By: wilpuri
Date Posted: 04-May-2005 at 02:26
American superiority...bah. I'd rather have the Americans running the show than the Soviets, but I'm happy that neither is doing that at the moment. Putin freaks me out though.


Posted By: Spartakus
Date Posted: 04-May-2005 at 06:43

Even if we do not like it there should be balance.If that balance stops,then things are going to become more harsh than it used to be when there were 2 super powers.



-------------
"There are worse crimes than burning books. One of them is not reading them. "
--- Joseph Alexandrovitch Brodsky, 1991, Russian-American poet, b. St. Petersburg and exiled 1972 (1940-1996)


Posted By: Guests
Date Posted: 04-May-2005 at 08:13
The collapse of the Soviet Union was definately good news for terrorists, narcodicators and other rogues. Now they'll get their AK47's and warheads much easier than before.

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


Posted By: Mosquito
Date Posted: 04-May-2005 at 12:56

Well, USSR was a trully an evil empire and all free people of the world should be glad that it doesnt exist anymore. Calling a catastrophe the fall of one of the most bloody regimes in the worlds history i treat as revisionism. And in fact rewriting history is what Putin is trying to do now. More will come in the 9th may when the chekist will be celebratating the victory of his evil empire over other evil empire.

 



Posted By: yan.
Date Posted: 04-May-2005 at 16:21

I wonder what geopolitical disaster Putin is talking about? The end of proxy wars, soviet interventions and soviet-funded insurrections and coups (*) throughout the 3rd world? The introduction of civil rights and democracy into the former soviet domain? The fact that the ex-soviet bloc countries have re-gained their independence? Or maybe the diminishing nuclear threat (probably still much lower than during the 80s)?

I think it's time for russia to stop mourning its colonial empire. Just like British and French have done long before.

 

 

(*)sure, we still have american interventions and maybe some american funded coups, but IMO they have rather decreased since containemnt of soviet influence is no concern anymore.



Posted By: yan.
Date Posted: 04-May-2005 at 16:23
Originally posted by Mixcoatl

The collapse of the Soviet Union was definately good news for terrorists, narcodicators and other rogues. Now they'll get their AK47's and warheads much easier than before.
Now they have to pay. Before they just needed to call themselves 'revolutionary'. 


Posted By: The Golden Phallanx
Date Posted: 04-May-2005 at 16:51

Originally posted by ArmenianSurvival

I agree. It marked the fall of the last true empire on earth.

cough cough* what do you call dictatori- *nudge* oops, I mean "socialist" china?



-------------
We are all a result of what we have lived. Culture, attitude, perspective. For everything we do, there is a reason. There is no true evil, only the absence of proper communication.


Posted By: Paul
Date Posted: 04-May-2005 at 17:43

Originally posted by Mixcoatl

The collapse of the Soviet Union was definately good news for terrorists, narcodicators and other rogues. Now they'll get their AK47's and warheads much easier than before.

One recent survey showed that terrorism has decreased since the end of the cold war. what has changed is who is doing it. during the cold war it was security agencies and groups backed by governments on the opposing sides oposing sides of the war that were responsible. Now it's done by independant groups without backing and finaces and a lot less effectively.



-------------
Light blue touch paper and stand well back

http://www.maquahuitl.co.uk - http://www.maquahuitl.co.uk

http://www.toltecitztli.co.uk - http://www.toltecitztli.co.uk


Posted By: Guests
Date Posted: 05-May-2005 at 06:45
Originally posted by Paul

Originally posted by Mixcoatl

The collapse of the Soviet Union was definately good news for terrorists, narcodicators and other rogues. Now they'll get their AK47's and warheads much easier than before.

One recent survey showed that terrorism has decreased since the end of the cold war. what has changed is who is doing it. during the cold war it was security agencies and groups backed by governments on the opposing sides oposing sides of the war that were responsible. Now it's done by independant groups without backing and finaces and a lot less effectively.


That's probably true.
But people tend tho find terrorism by non-government groups more scary then terrorism by government groups (which they call  'war', or more euphemistically 'armed conflict'). So the current terrorism, though less effectively, has more impact on world politics.



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


Posted By: Paul
Date Posted: 05-May-2005 at 18:13

Originally posted by Mixcoatl


But people tend tho find terrorism by non-government groups more scary then terrorism by government groups (which they call  'war', or more euphemistically 'armed conflict'). So the current terrorism, though less effectively, has more impact on world politics.

Or is it that terrorism by independant groups is allowed much more media coverage. Terrorism by your government is generally censored by your government.



-------------
Light blue touch paper and stand well back

http://www.maquahuitl.co.uk - http://www.maquahuitl.co.uk

http://www.toltecitztli.co.uk - http://www.toltecitztli.co.uk


Posted By: Guests
Date Posted: 06-May-2005 at 13:41
Or is it that terrorism by independant groups is allowed much more media coverage. Terrorism by your government is generally censored by your government.

DEFINATELY true


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


Posted By: doorman
Date Posted: 02-Aug-2005 at 18:52
The greatest tragedy was the November Revolution of 1917 and the communist take over.  The system that they setup was bound to collapse sooner of later . Once set  on the communist way  it was going  to be  painful to  go back on the path that the Russian Empire was  set(compulsary education , industrialization, land redistribution,etc...) In the long run the Russian  Empire was going to do this much more efficiently.



Posted By: kotumeyil
Date Posted: 03-Aug-2005 at 04:06

November Revolution of 1917 is the honour of humanity. Collapse of the USSR left the world defenseless against the neoliberal policies and exploitation. Unemployment, poverty are now the reality of ex-soviet people (except Russian mafia and petrol billionaires.) Also in the western world, all social rights given by the welfare state started to be taken away. The USA began acting as a shameless aggressive imperialist power.

What USSR brought to the world was the strength of leftist groups all over the world. All the social rights, social insurances were taken by this strength.

The USSR caused some unfortunate deaths at Stalin's time, but it also defeated the nazis with a lot of sacrifices. The last times of USSR wasn't bloody except the war of Afghanistan, which was the hot face of the cold war (it was implicitly between the USSR and the USA, i. e. bin Ladin)

What democracy are you talking about?!? The representative democracy is in crisis today, because although you elect your governments, all important decisions are taken by the global multi-national companies and financial capitalists. Or are you talking about the "democracy" in Iraq, which caused more than 100.000 deaths since March 2003!

After the Cold War, the USA invented another "evil" other: the terrorists. It attacks anywhere it wants and your civilised and lawful EU couldn't say even anything about the obvious violation of the international law (by the way, I don't believe that there is anything like this). 



Posted By: Kalevipoeg
Date Posted: 03-Aug-2005 at 15:16

"November Revolution of 1917 is the honour of humanity."

The revolution created a heavily nationalistic state whose interest was pure imperialism, disregarding any rights a person today seems to need. The Soviet Union failed on his first day as Uljanov had no idea what Marx was trying to say and therefore his country had nothing to do with communism . Just a terrorist state whose elite was just as bad as the modern American corporate leaders. How long will people believe the long dead lie of the Soviet Union being a socially more legal state. Soviet leaders cared as much about social rights as a rabbit cares of the space. Grrrr.....

"The USSR caused some unfortunate deaths at Stalin's time, but it also defeated the nazis with a lot of sacrifices."

The nazis acctually learned everything from propaganda to creating demise form the USSR, and the USSR helped the nazis get so far with the holocaust and conquering of the Lebensraum. Very easy to forget that part i think.



-------------
There is nothing in the world more helpless and irresponsible than a man in the depths of an ether binge...


Posted By: Illuminati
Date Posted: 03-Aug-2005 at 22:04

The November revolution only worked to replace one oppressive government with another. The intentions on Lenin was good, but communism is fundamentaly flawed and thus was bound to fail.

Communists are among the most imperialist in history. They finance guerrila groups, incite revolutions, invade innocent nations, and commit crimes just as much as the western nations they love to point fingers at. I see them as the ultimate hypocrites. 

Personally, I believe Communism has done more damage in the 20th Century than Fascism has. More people died under Communist rule than the Fascism ever killed. I guess its just Ironic that a system created from wonderful and peaceful ideas turns out to be the more damaging than Fascism, which is an evil and unfair system to the very core. There may have not been as much inequality and poverty in the USSR, but could Soviet citizens freely leave the USSR?? Could they openly and publicy criticize their govt?? No. They could not. In my mind, then debate ends there.

Communists always try and sperate themselves from other horrors of humanity's past by preaching of their humanisic ideals. But I believe it just proves true one of the most common trends history has shown us.....

It is often done with good intentions.

 



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


Posted By: kotumeyil
Date Posted: 04-Aug-2005 at 02:33

Kalevipoeg wrote:

"The revolution created a heavily nationalistic state whose interest was pure imperialism, disregarding any rights a person today seems to need. The Soviet Union failed on his first day as Uljanov had no idea what Marx was trying to say and therefore his country had nothing to do with communism . "

Throughout the life of the USSR sometimes the Russian nationalism got stronger, but as a state policy, the USSR never oppressed the identities of its nations, on the contrary it encouraged them.

Imperialism is a phase of capitalism, nothing to do with socialism. You may say expansionist, but not imperialist.

Lenin just adopted Marx's views in a semi-industrialised peripheral capitalist society so it cannot be expected that he would apply just the same things that Marx say about the central states of the capitalist system, i. e. England and France...

Disregarding any rights any rights a person today seems to need?! Do you think that the rights a person need are just voting for some bastards and overconsuming? Then today nobody needs employment, social security, free health care, free education, better working hours, etc...

Kalevipoeg wrote:

"...and the USSR helped the nazis get so far with the holocaust and conquering of the Lebensraum. Very easy to forget that part i think."

You are talking about the pact between Germany and the USSR. The USSR had to gain time for preparing its defence. Without that time it would be tottaly overwhelmed. Thanks to that defence that it could defeat the Nazis. D Day, etc. are just little tales when compared to the size of war on the eastern front.

Illuminati wrote:

"Communists are among the most imperialist in history. They finance guerrila groups, incite revolutions, invade innocent nations, and commit crimes just as much as the western nations they love to point fingers at. I see them as the ultimate hypocrites."

As I mentioned above, its not imperialist, you may say expansionist...

"There may have not been as much inequality and poverty in the USSR, but could Soviet citizens freely leave the USSR??"

At least they travelled money-free. Today they have the right to leave the country, but how many of them have the money for that travel? And thanks to this free movement, their women can come to our country for prostituting! How tragic and embarrassing for humanity... 

"Could they openly and publicy criticize their govt??"

You can publicly critise Bush, but he continues killing people in Iraq... 

 



Posted By: Kynsi
Date Posted: 04-Aug-2005 at 07:09
Originally posted by kotumeyil


Throughout the life of the USSR sometimes the Russian nationalism got stronger, but as a state policy, the USSR never oppressed the identities of its nations, on the contrary it encouraged them.



Not entirely true.

For example in Estonia the power was consentrated to the Estonia's communist party whose party leaders were mostly
Russians and was in the direct controll of Moscow. Thousands of Estonians deported to Siberia and their lands confiscated.

I think our friend Kalevipoeg could address you more about how Estonia was oppressed by the USSR.

And If I am not entirely mistaken thease kind of politics were executed in all of baltic countries.

Eaven in todays Russia some of the minorities are being oppressed for example the http://www.ugri.info/mari/index.html - the mari people and the government turns the blind eye.

-------------
If you keep one eye on the past then you are blind in one eye, but if you
forget the past then you are blind in both eyes -old russian saying


Posted By: Zagros
Date Posted: 04-Aug-2005 at 07:19

Communism is not flawed, men are flawed.

--------

Originally posted by kotumeyil

November Revolution of 1917 is the honour of humanity. Collapse of the USSR left the world defenseless against the neoliberal policies and exploitation. Unemployment, poverty are now the reality of ex-soviet people (except Russian mafia and petrol billionaires.) Also in the western world, all social rights given by the welfare state started to be taken away. The USA began acting as a shameless aggressive imperialist power.

What USSR brought to the world was the strength of leftist groups all over the world. All the social rights, social insurances were taken by this strength.

The USSR caused some unfortunate deaths at Stalin's time, but it also defeated the nazis with a lot of sacrifices. The last times of USSR wasn't bloody except the war of Afghanistan, which was the hot face of the cold war (it was implicitly between the USSR and the USA, i. e. bin Ladin)

What democracy are you talking about?!? The representative democracy is in crisis today, because although you elect your governments, all important decisions are taken by the global multi-national companies and financial capitalists. Or are you talking about the "democracy" in Iraq, which caused more than 100.000 deaths since March 2003!

After the Cold War, the USA invented another "evil" other: the terrorists. It attacks anywhere it wants and your civilised and lawful EU couldn't say even anything about the obvious violation of the international law (by the way, I don't believe that there is anything like this). 

^  Well said.



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


Posted By: Komnenos
Date Posted: 04-Aug-2005 at 07:40
Originally posted by kotumeyil

Imperialism is a phase of capitalism, nothing to do with socialism. You may say expansionist, but not imperialist


Hello Comrade kotumeyil!
How good and refreshing it is to have an old-style, orthodox commie on board,... seriously. I'm looking forward to lively discussions and you might want to get your, metaphorical, ice-pick out!

There are tendencies on the left who define the Stalinist Soviet-Union as 'state-monopol-capitalism" where the ownership of the means of production have not been transfered to the working-class, but are held by the state which emerges as the sole and total capitalist. As the workers still do not have any control over production, the character of the capital remains, and the exploitation of the workers is continued.
This form of capitalism was prominent in the Imperialist countries, where transport, arms manufacture, etc, had been monopolised by the state in order to advance their progress in the Imperialist race.
If you understand the Stalinist Soviet-Union as a state-capitalist society, then you could call Stalin's expansionist plans, Imperialist after all.

-------------
[IMG]http://i71.photobucket.com/albums/i137/komnenos/crosses1.jpg">


Posted By: Constantine XI
Date Posted: 04-Aug-2005 at 08:25
A few months ago when in a class we were asked who was really important, the alpha or beta male. To everyone's surprise the tutor answered the beta male, simply because if the beta male is weak the alpha male will slide into decline due to lack of opposition.

The USSR kept the USA on its toes, kept it focused on a very worthy and noble mission, of preventing the world's people of falling to totalitarian dictatorships. Now that that threat is gone the USA seems to be a nation poised for action, with no mission to embark on. As bad as the USSR was, it brought out so much of what was best in the USA. But today the alpha male lacks his rival, can he really be expected to be the impressive example of progress and prowess he once was?


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


Posted By: kotumeyil
Date Posted: 04-Aug-2005 at 10:11

Originally posted by Komnenos

Originally posted by kotumeyil

Imperialism is a phase of capitalism, nothing to do with socialism. You may say expansionist, but not imperialist


Hello Comrade kotumeyil!
How good and refreshing it is to have an old-style, orthodox commie on board,... seriously. I'm looking forward to lively discussions and you might want to get your, metaphorical, ice-pick out!

There are tendencies on the left who define the Stalinist Soviet-Union as 'state-monopol-capitalism" where the ownership of the means of production have not been transfered to the working-class, but are held by the state which emergence as the sole and total capitalist. As the workers still do not have any control over production, the character of the capital remains, and the exploitation of the workers is continued.
This form of capitalism was prominent in the Imperialist countries, where transport, arms manufacture, etc, had been monopolised by the state in order to advance their progress in the Imperialist race.
If you understand the Stalinist Soviet-Union as a state-capitalist society, then you could Stalin's expansionist plans, Imperialist after all.

So hello to you comrade!

I think, as well as the ownership of the means of production, the main characteristic of the capitalist system is the endless accumulation of capital in private hands. I think this was not the case.

As for the state capitalism: I think this concept can be used for the capitalist countries in which the state implements etatist economic policies in order to create and develope a bourgeoisie and flourish the industries or where the state favours a group of capitalists against others by the means of state power. In both of these, the entrepreneurs have a legal and legitimate basis but in the USSR this wasn't the case. State owned the means of production and although some administrators had better economic conditions, there wasn't an endless accumulation of capital in their hands.

By the way, I don't say that the USSR didn't make any mistakes. If it didn't, sure it wouldn't collapse. But I'm against degrading one of the best accomplishment of the lower classes... 



Posted By: Kalevipoeg
Date Posted: 04-Aug-2005 at 13:31

Kotumeyl wrote: "Throughout the life of the USSR sometimes the Russian nationalism got stronger, but as a state policy, the USSR never oppressed the identities of its nations, on the contrary it encouraged them."

Indeed? That must be why we had to sing Russian songs on our National Song festival that has gathered hundreds of thousands of Estonians together since 1869. under one banner to sing folk songs. But the Soviets had to fill even that with some brainwashing songs that would even creep Hitler out. But acctually made me laugh when i saw it on TV. Russian was compulsory and everyone had to learn Russian, nobody of the Russians ever learned Estonian, Latvian and so on. There was no supporting of different cultures. Everything slowly Russiafied. The leader of the Estonian Communist state (the ENSV) who came to power in 1978., couldn't even speak a word of our native language. Once a year he attempted to say something in Estonian when the 1st May celebrations were in town. Pityful acctually.

There was also mixing of nations. Russians were brought in everywhere as workers. Not a good way of keeping alive different cultures huh. And about equality: When the Russians came in by hundreds of thousands to a country where the natives (Estonians) numbered a mere million, the Russians were given immidiate accomodations, but Estonians were put on standby. Estonians were second rated citizens whose needs were not state priority. Entire towns were filled with Russian populations in many cases. My grandmother and uncle live in Kohtla-Jrve, a city where to this day 80% are Russians. Russians were prefered everywhere, every day.

Although Stalin was Georgian and honored his native cooking, singing and wine - he was utterly pro-Russian in the way of spreading culture across the USSR. I seem to remember that he more than once kept his cronies from speaking their native languages, like Beria, or Mikoyan for example and ordered Russian to be spoken in the USSR.

The Soviet Union leaders had created a new type of man - a better person that had better morals, ethics and surpassed every other man, other than a fellow bolshevik. The Soviet leaders themselves thought of themselves as the prime examples. The Molotov family for example is somewhat as the Goering or Goebbels family in Hitlers Germany - a model family. All of this was totally equivalent to Hitlers uber-mensch (did i spell it right), the Arian race madness. There was little room for nationalism or for different nations at all.

Venestamine - Russiafication is a common word known by most Estonians who are now rid of it, at last.

Kotumeyl wrote: "You are talking about the pact between Germany and the USSR. The USSR had to gain time for preparing its defence. Without that time it would be tottaly overwhelmed. Thanks to that defence that it could defeat the Nazis. D Day, etc. are just little tales when compared to the size of war on the eastern front."

And about the fact that the USSR trained nazi officers, helped to put together airplanes for Hitler and favouring of its policies as it was, in Stalins eyes, something that prevented the Westerm powers of attacking the USSR. Stalin had many delusions you know.

Stalingrad happened due to the incompatance of the USSR, why does everyone only put pressure on its heroic victory, its a half truth this way.

Kotumeyl wrote: "Disregarding any rights any rights a person today seems to need?! Do you think that the rights a person need are just voting for some bastards and overconsuming? Then today nobody needs employment, social security, free health care, free education, better working hours, etc..."

I don't think anyone would choose the USSR  over todays Scandinavian countries.

And nobody likes KGB snoops watching over their shoulders over every so called "suspicious action" . And am i wrong when saying that the USSR had camps to send differently thinking people to, up to the 1980's? 

And atleast now i can go to a store and buy meat products, instead of walking into a store during Soviet time and see just half store full of one type of veggies which acctually was the case way too often. And i don't have to have relatives or friends as storekeepers to get hands on some sausage or meat for birthdays.



-------------
There is nothing in the world more helpless and irresponsible than a man in the depths of an ether binge...


Posted By: kotumeyil
Date Posted: 04-Aug-2005 at 14:19

I don't say that the USSR was a heaven but I'm against degrading all of its accomplishments. Was learning Estonian banned? Even the smallest ethnic minorities had their own autonomous administrations, at least nominally. Many people all over the world lacks even these. of course there were Russian nationalists and this isn't an adorable thing but Russian was the lingua franca of the Eastern bloc. And today in this "free" world English is the lingua franca. If you don't know it you cannot be employed or you cannot even write on this forum. This is a de facto problem.In the USSR the Russians were the majority so they actually dominated it. Again I'm saying, I don't defend such policies. also I don't defend the "police state" of the USSR.

On the other hand you are talking about the variety of goods you can consume, as an example of freedom. I know a lot of people who cannot have medical care because they have no money. They even don't have the freedom to live. There are many people who cannot find even a dry bread. Just because of you lacked some luxury of finding a variety of goods you shouldn't degrade what the November Revolution gave to the world.

also appreciate the social policies of the Scandinavian states but even there the social rights are started to be questionned after the collapse of the USSR...  

 

  



Posted By: Kalevipoeg
Date Posted: 04-Aug-2005 at 18:54

"I don't say that the USSR was a heaven but I'm against degrading all of its accomplishments."

All it accomplished here, was creating xenophobia towards Russians and funny stories and anecdotes about Soviet stupidity. And then there are of course the large number of elderly Russians who they forgot to take along across the eastern border when their country shattered under the weight of fredom. And those elderly Russians are still under a seventy year long propaganda rush! Really dandy to see this mob on TV on the May 9th every year. Thank you very much.

"Was learning Estonian banned?"

No.

"Even the smallest ethnic minorities had their own autonomous administrations, at least nominally. Many people all over the world lacks even these."

And only nominally it remained, remains and will remain for the near future.

"of course there were Russian nationalists and this isn't an adorable thing but Russian was the lingua franca of the Eastern bloc."

Russian nationalism was the state policy, certainly not on paper, but it was therre for a person who lived it for half a century.

"On the other hand you are talking about the variety of goods you can consume, as an example of freedom. I know a lot of people who cannot have medical care because they have no money. They even don't have the freedom to live. There are many people who cannot find even a dry bread. Just because of you lacked some luxury of finding a variety of goods you shouldn't degrade what the November Revolution gave to the world."

Having normal food like bread, cheese, milk or meat on your table is a right aswell. How long do those, or excuse me, THAT veggie last? Having free healthcare was wonderful, but todays medicine is a business and therefore, life has a price now. Greed is prospering in capitalism, but it was just as powerful during the timefrmae from Uljanov to Gorbatschev among the bolsheviks. It prospered during the USSR only the people weren't allowed to see it, or allowed to talk about it. The Soviet elite was just as todays - greedy, fancy cars, government cash for personal joy, pink poodles on fat mens laps and so on.

"Just because of you lacked some luxury of finding a variety of goods you shouldn't degrade what the November Revolution gave to the world."

It resulted in a government and a country, where a former peasant, a prisoner, a murderer, a craftsman instantly got to a high ranking job which he wasn't qualified for and used his newly found authority for personal pleasures of degrading his fellow countrymen for personal fun. It resulted in a cleansing of the society where everybody was a target without even caring who you were killing, starving to death. It resulted in a new way of terror that man has difficulty finding words to describe. It resulted also in a mass hysteria and hypnosis of the new country of terror and hubris - similar of what Hitler created in 1933. 

I WOULDN'T ACCEPT FREE HEALTHCARE IF COUNTLESS MILLIONS OF PEOPLE WERE MURDERED, AMONG MANY MY OWN KINSMEN, DUE TO MADNESS BY THE SAME ADMINISTRATION.



-------------
There is nothing in the world more helpless and irresponsible than a man in the depths of an ether binge...


Posted By: kotumeyil
Date Posted: 04-Aug-2005 at 20:23

Don't misunderstand me, I respect your thoughts against oppression. What I want to say is that the November-October revolution brought some ideals to the world's agenda and for me they have utmost importance. The soviet experience wasn't successful and it couldn't realise most of its ideals but this doesn't make these ideals bad. Because you are an ex-soviet citizen you may have negative thoughts about it but the ideals brought by the revolution are humane and universal. I can't nevermind these and I can't accept what you said:

Originally posted by Kalevipoeg


 todays medicine is a business and therefore, life has a price now.



-------------
[IMG]http://www.maksimum.com/yemeicme/images/haber/raki.jpg">


Posted By: Kalevipoeg
Date Posted: 05-Aug-2005 at 12:38

Yes, ideals are wonderful, but they would have been just as wonderful without the revolution and waste of i don't know how many tens of millions of people.

And about medicine - a modern business. Medical companies of the west would keep the vaccine for AIDS from reaching the people if they didn't get their dollars first. Poor people are victims of a business of life and death. My grandmother needs about three or four different medicines, but she told me that she only buys one, because she can't afford more. Medical company holders or leaders or who ever they are, are probably as wealthy as oil magnates.

I don't see medicine as a humane industry in the west.



-------------
There is nothing in the world more helpless and irresponsible than a man in the depths of an ether binge...


Posted By: kotumeyil
Date Posted: 05-Aug-2005 at 15:10
Originally posted by Kalevipoeg

And about medicine - a modern business. Medical companies of the west would keep the vaccine for AIDS from reaching the people if they didn't get their dollars first. Poor people are victims of a business of life and death. My grandmother needs about three or four different medicines, but she told me that she only buys one, because she can't afford more. Medical company holders or leaders or who ever they are, are probably as wealthy as oil magnates.

I don't see medicine as a humane industry in the west.

This is just what I meant...



-------------
[IMG]http://www.maksimum.com/yemeicme/images/haber/raki.jpg">


Posted By: Kalevipoeg
Date Posted: 05-Aug-2005 at 17:16

Good to agree with someone!

Not much else to talk about anymore, or what...?



-------------
There is nothing in the world more helpless and irresponsible than a man in the depths of an ether binge...


Posted By: kotumeyil
Date Posted: 05-Aug-2005 at 17:37

Of course we can talk but it is obvious that it isn't likely that we will

have an agreement on politics...



-------------
[IMG]http://www.maksimum.com/yemeicme/images/haber/raki.jpg">


Posted By: Kalevipoeg
Date Posted: 06-Aug-2005 at 05:32

Well, i don't even have a clear political preference really.

Maybe if we don't keep talking about the USSR's fall, the subject will be closed or we banned.



-------------
There is nothing in the world more helpless and irresponsible than a man in the depths of an ether binge...


Posted By: Maju
Date Posted: 06-Aug-2005 at 09:46
Even if Putin has a point, what did he do to stop it? He backed Yelsin who was the one that declared the independence of Russia, causing the break out of the Soviet Union... he favors mafia capitalism instead of social policies... he's doing nothing of use in favor of Russia and it's lost might... and he licks the boots of GWB all the time.

I liked Gorbachev...


Posted By: Kalevipoeg
Date Posted: 06-Aug-2005 at 10:41
I don't like anything Soviet!

-------------
There is nothing in the world more helpless and irresponsible than a man in the depths of an ether binge...



Print Page | Close Window

Bulletin Board Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 9.56a - http://www.webwizforums.com
Copyright ©2001-2009 Web Wiz - http://www.webwizguide.com