Ad rem - I think it's unfair to point out victims of revolutions while ignoring death, slavery and exploitation feudalism brought for hundreds of years.
Ad rem - I think it's unfair to point out victims of revolutions while ignoring death, slavery and exploitation feudalism brought for hundreds of years.
I agree with you. The conditions people are complaining about now in the West aren't anything comparable to what those people experienced though. The people who fought and died for those causes back then would likely think we're complaining about a whole lot of nothing.
I'm specifically talking about the developed countries, not those where the horrible conditions you describe still exist...
The best argument for property redistribution is the Rawlsian idea of the "Natural Lottery" where the distribution of natural endowments (Intelligence quotient, talents, physical attributes) is not equal and that institutions should correct that. The underlying idea is that its neither just nor unjust that natural endowments are unequal, but since natural advantages are undeserved there is a moral impetus to redistribute. When I first thought about political theory way back in 8th grade I independently arrived a the same conclusion, before quickly reconsidering.
The main criticism of this (and one that I buy into) is that it is entirely antithetical to the competing value of liberty and non-violence. Also, while it is true that someone's state in life is partially due to circumstance and natural endowments, it is not entirely so, and many of the inequalities we see do arise because of disparities in work ethic, drive, sacrifices, and choices about how to use your time. It is unjust not to consider those factors as well.
I think the correct equilibrium to reach is that redistribution should be limited and specifically target those with natural impediments (mainly the disabled, the very ill, and the children of poor parents) who, through no fault of their own, are disadvantaged in life.
On Nazism vs Communism While the evils of communism have been grossly underappreciated, I agree that Nazism is worse for one simple reason: In Nazism, mass murder was an integral part of the system, and genocide was intentional Under Soviet Communism, mass murder was incidental to the colossal systemic failures of any government designed around the underlying philosophy.
It is like the difference between intentional homicide and gross negligence. Both have a ton of moral fault, but the difference is like that between murder in the first degree and negligent homicide.
(Addendum: the mass murder of landlords by the Maoist revolutionaries IS the moral equivalent of intentional genocide. Perhaps "classicide" would be a good term to describe it.)
my brother still thinks i am a fascist but i dont care anymore...
Well the point I was trying to make was... -> The people who call people "fascists" and "nazi" are communists. -> Communism and Fascism actually is quite similar. -> Communists hate fascists not because they oppose the crimes that happen in Fascist countries, but BECAUSE THEY ARE COMPETITORS.
For instance the mainstream media has been praising North Korea. They recently praised the sister of Kim Jung-un who runs the brutal forced labor camps, the type of things that Hitler, Lenin, Stalin, and Castro ran.
Another thing was when Castro died. While Mao murdered the most civilians of any country, Castro murdered the most per population size and all these anti-fascist types from Justin Trudeau to the mainstream media to even The Pope were praising Castro. The New York Times put Castro in power; Fidel Castro in 1959 to New York Times reporter Herbert Matthews, "Without your help and without the help of The New York Times, the revolution in Cuba would never have been."
So if someone is calling you a fascist, they're likely defending Communist crimes.
my brother still thinks i am a fascist but i dont care anymore...
Well the point I was trying to make was... -> The people who call people "fascists" and "nazi" are communists. -> Communism and Fascism actually is quite similar. -> Communists hate fascists not because they oppose the crimes that happen in Fascist countries, but BECAUSE THEY ARE COMPETITORS.
For instance the mainstream media has been praising North Korea. They recently praised the sister of Kim Jung-un who runs the brutal forced labor camps, the type of things that Hitler, Lenin, Stalin, and Castro ran.
I think It's worth pointing out that you probably wont find a lot of purchase making an argument pointing out the "liberal media bias" by only referencing conservative sources. It's hard to get an objective stance on it that way.
As a side note - I think people should probably get off the high-horse when talking about democracies. Fascists did terrible things. Communists did terrible things. Democracies do terrible things too (Look at Colonialism and the British Empire, for example. Look at Belgium in the Congo to see how horrific capitalism can be. Look at how it took the US longer to end slavery than it took Russia to end Serfdom).
No ideology got out of the 19th and 20th centuries with their hands clean.
I honestly can't understand why Communism is not as hated as Nazism.
The invasion of Poland which started World War 2 is the main reason . Germany became the bad guy, the Soviets our defacto ally. It just turned out the enemy of our enemy WASN'T our friend after all...
Hitler and Stalin both invaded Poland about the same time. England, France and a lot of countries declared war on Germany and then let Stalin conquer half of Europe, including Poland.
The Allies also warred against on Finland, Romania, and Hungary merely for defending against Russia conquering them.
During the war, the Allies conquered peaceful, neutral nations just for territory and resources: England conquered the Faroe Islands and Iceland in 1940, then Iraq in 1941. Australia and England conquered Iran in 1941. Australia and the Netherlands together invaded Portugal in 1941.
It wasn't a police effort, it was an excuse to conquer from everyone.
The worst thing in World War II was that unlike Communist countries, Germany allowed anyone they wanted to leave. Then during the war, enemy countries blocked them kicking folks out. The German government's concentration camps all were during World War II. If it wasn't for the war, the people killed there would still be able to leave. The only thing was other countries viewed all jews as communists and so refused to take them (eg. MS St. Louis).
There was no move by Stalin to plunge Europe (and then the rest of the world) into the worst armed conflict in history.
Stalin was conquering all of Europe and so this caused war with Germany. Until Germany took on Russia, Germany was easily winning everything. Russia eventually destroyed Germany's army.
And then after that the USSR and USA had proxy wars everywhere.
Not a single one of these articles praise North Korea. The first one highlights "the North's repression and human rights" abuses, the second one called it a "rogue state," and the third one highlighted the Kim regime's habit of executing its political opponents. All of them describe Kim Yo-jong as a dangerous propaganda vehicle.
I think It's worth pointing out that you probably wont find a lot of purchase making an argument pointing out the "liberal media bias" by only referencing conservative sources.
Speaking of which, if you want a liberal source complaining about Kim Jong-yo being the representative of a murderous dictatorship, here you go.
The first one highlights "the North's repression and human rights" abuses
Actually, the first did not highlight that at all. They included it as a quote toward the end of the article. "Others said they were horrified by the notion that Ms. Kim could lull South Koreans, or anyone else, into forgetting the North’s repression and human rights abuses." "others"
Also, it is the headlines that are most offensive. Psychological study after psychological study have shown that headlines shape the way people view the news more than anything. The headlines in all three of the examples given are really rather horrible.
But none are as bad as CNN's piece.
Let's ignore the headline for a moment. This is how the meat of the article starts:
"If "diplomatic dance" were an event at the Winter Olympics, Kim Jong Un's younger sister would be favored to win gold.
With a smile, a handshake and a warm message in South Korea's presidential guest book, Kim Yo Jong has struck a chord with the public just one day into the PyeongChang Games.
"I hope Pyongyang and Seoul get closer in our people's hearts and move forward the future of prosperous unification," she said in her guest book message, referring to the capitals of North and South Korea.
Seen by some as her brother's answer to American first daughter Ivanka Trump, Kim, 30, is not only a powerful member of Kim Jong Un's kitchen cabinet but also a foil to the perception of North Korea as antiquated and militaristic."
They, like most of these articles, noted the North Korean governments horrendous atrocities, but they also heaped praise on someone who is very much responsible for many of them. All of this from CNN, the only cable news source worth anything.
When she says that she wants Pyongyang and Seoul to become closer what she means is that she wants Seoul to surrender, to give Pyongyang everything it wants--final victory in their conflict (they are still technically under a state of "cease fire"), as well as access to the South's money, infrastructure, and food.
Let's ignore the headline for a moment. This is how the meat of the article starts:
"If "diplomatic dance" were an event at the Winter Olympics, Kim Jong Un's younger sister would be favored to win gold.
With a smile, a handshake and a warm message in South Korea's presidential guest book, Kim Yo Jong has struck a chord with the public just one day into the PyeongChang Games.
"I hope Pyongyang and Seoul get closer in our people's hearts and move forward the future of prosperous unification," she said in her guest book message, referring to the capitals of North and South Korea.
Seen by some as her brother's answer to American first daughter Ivanka Trump, Kim, 30, is not only a powerful member of Kim Jong Un's kitchen cabinet but also a foil to the perception of North Korea as antiquated and militaristic."
They, like most of these articles, noted the North Korean governments horrendous atrocities, but they also heaped praise on someone who is very much responsible for many of them. All of this from CNN, the only cable news source worth anything.
I'm really not sure what you're reading here that's so horrific? I havent read the article in question, so I am as of yet, unbiased from the headline and other details of the article. What you quoted didnt appear to itself not have any factual inaccuracies in it. It didnt whitewash or otherwise disregard NK's human rights abuses. It only focused on his Sister.
Decrying this as some sort of attempt by the media to make communism seem less bad is a big reach.
Personally - I think the reason why Kim Yo Jong has gotten a lot of airplay is because she puts a new a FAR less bellicose face on North Korea.
Comments
Okay, let's drop it.
Ad rem - I think it's unfair to point out victims of revolutions while ignoring death, slavery and exploitation feudalism brought for hundreds of years.
I'm specifically talking about the developed countries, not those where the horrible conditions you describe still exist...
The main criticism of this (and one that I buy into) is that it is entirely antithetical to the competing value of liberty and non-violence. Also, while it is true that someone's state in life is partially due to circumstance and natural endowments, it is not entirely so, and many of the inequalities we see do arise because of disparities in work ethic, drive, sacrifices, and choices about how to use your time. It is unjust not to consider those factors as well.
I think the correct equilibrium to reach is that redistribution should be limited and specifically target those with natural impediments (mainly the disabled, the very ill, and the children of poor parents) who, through no fault of their own, are disadvantaged in life.
While the evils of communism have been grossly underappreciated, I agree that Nazism is worse for one simple reason:
In Nazism, mass murder was an integral part of the system, and genocide was intentional
Under Soviet Communism, mass murder was incidental to the colossal systemic failures of any government designed around the underlying philosophy.
It is like the difference between intentional homicide and gross negligence. Both have a ton of moral fault, but the difference is like that between murder in the first degree and negligent homicide.
(Addendum: the mass murder of landlords by the Maoist revolutionaries IS the moral equivalent of intentional genocide. Perhaps "classicide" would be a good term to describe it.)
-> The people who call people "fascists" and "nazi" are communists.
-> Communism and Fascism actually is quite similar.
-> Communists hate fascists not because they oppose the crimes that happen in Fascist countries, but BECAUSE THEY ARE COMPETITORS.
For instance the mainstream media has been praising North Korea. They recently praised the sister of Kim Jung-un who runs the brutal forced labor camps, the type of things that Hitler, Lenin, Stalin, and Castro ran.
Here's some aggregates complaining about it:
http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2018/02/liberal-media-fawns-over-kim-jong-uns-sister.php
https://www.theblaze.com/news/2018/02/11/mainstream-media-fawn-over-north-korea-at-olympics-and-ignores-their-massive-human-rights-abuses
https://www.westernjournal.com/reason-media-fawning-ruthless-dictatorship-winter-olympics/
https://thefederalist.com/2018/02/11/media-busy-fan-girling-sister-brutal-north-korean-dictator/
http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2018/02/11/medias-olympic-level-north-korea-fawning-is-disgrace.html
https://nypost.com/2018/02/11/the-perverse-fawning-over-brutal-kim-jong-uns-sister-at-the-olympics/
Some stuff the aggregates missed, direct articles praising North Korea:
http://www.nytimes.com/2018/02/11/world/asia/kim-yo-jong-mike-pence-olympics.html
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/5536578/kim-jong-un-sister-kim-yo-jong-north-korea-ivanka-south-korea-2018-winter-olympics/
http://www.newsweek.com/who-kim-yo-jong-kim-jong-un-sister-becoming-north-korea-most-powerful-woman-802439
Another thing was when Castro died. While Mao murdered the most civilians of any country, Castro murdered the most per population size and all these anti-fascist types from Justin Trudeau to the mainstream media to even The Pope were praising Castro. The New York Times put Castro in power; Fidel Castro in 1959 to New York Times reporter Herbert Matthews, "Without your help and without the help of The New York Times, the revolution in Cuba would never have been."
So if someone is calling you a fascist, they're likely defending Communist crimes.
I think It's worth pointing out that you probably wont find a lot of purchase making an argument pointing out the "liberal media bias" by only referencing conservative sources. It's hard to get an objective stance on it that way.
As a side note - I think people should probably get off the high-horse when talking about democracies. Fascists did terrible things. Communists did terrible things. Democracies do terrible things too (Look at Colonialism and the British Empire, for example. Look at Belgium in the Congo to see how horrific capitalism can be. Look at how it took the US longer to end slavery than it took Russia to end Serfdom).
No ideology got out of the 19th and 20th centuries with their hands clean.
The Allies also warred against on Finland, Romania, and Hungary merely for defending against Russia conquering them.
During the war, the Allies conquered peaceful, neutral nations just for territory and resources: England conquered the Faroe Islands and Iceland in 1940, then Iraq in 1941. Australia and England conquered Iran in 1941. Australia and the Netherlands together invaded Portugal in 1941.
This is from this chart: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Declarations_of_war_during_World_War_II
It wasn't a police effort, it was an excuse to conquer from everyone.
The worst thing in World War II was that unlike Communist countries, Germany allowed anyone they wanted to leave. Then during the war, enemy countries blocked them kicking folks out. The German government's concentration camps all were during World War II. If it wasn't for the war, the people killed there would still be able to leave. The only thing was other countries viewed all jews as communists and so refused to take them (eg. MS St. Louis).
Stalin was conquering all of Europe and so this caused war with Germany. Until Germany took on Russia, Germany was easily winning everything. Russia eventually destroyed Germany's army.
And then after that the USSR and USA had proxy wars everywhere.
"Others said they were horrified by the notion that Ms. Kim could lull South Koreans, or anyone else, into forgetting the North’s repression and human rights abuses."
"others"
Also, it is the headlines that are most offensive. Psychological study after psychological study have shown that headlines shape the way people view the news more than anything. The headlines in all three of the examples given are really rather horrible.
But none are as bad as CNN's piece.
Let's ignore the headline for a moment. This is how the meat of the article starts:
"If "diplomatic dance" were an event at the Winter Olympics, Kim Jong Un's younger sister would be favored to win gold.
With a smile, a handshake and a warm message in South Korea's presidential guest book, Kim Yo Jong has struck a chord with the public just one day into the PyeongChang Games.
"I hope Pyongyang and Seoul get closer in our people's hearts and move forward the future of prosperous unification," she said in her guest book message, referring to the capitals of North and South Korea.
Seen by some as her brother's answer to American first daughter Ivanka Trump, Kim, 30, is not only a powerful member of Kim Jong Un's kitchen cabinet but also a foil to the perception of North Korea as antiquated and militaristic."
They, like most of these articles, noted the North Korean governments horrendous atrocities, but they also heaped praise on someone who is very much responsible for many of them. All of this from CNN, the only cable news source worth anything.
Decrying this as some sort of attempt by the media to make communism seem less bad is a big reach.
Personally - I think the reason why Kim Yo Jong has gotten a lot of airplay is because she puts a new a FAR less bellicose face on North Korea.