Slavery

[ravenshrike]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VLJlVhKtNuI&feature=related

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=omg1dsTWa3o&feature=related

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wc_SgpyJWRY&feature=related

Angry people very easily get caught up in venting their anger with violence. LOTS of angry people are emboldened by being part of an angry mob. Once the lid is removed, all that backed up pressure needs to go somewhere. History is filled with incidents of violence when oppressed groups get the opportunity to turn the tables. http://www.historyguy.com/slave_rebellions_usa.htm#.T5fLNdXl-F9

The only violence is occurring to the people in those videos without guns, the Korean shop owners with guns were perfectly fine. Leave a squad of rangers(Remember, you'll be running your own base) and a shitload of weaponry in the hands of the women. Problem solved.

Its still different from slavery... only just tho. I think if I turned up in the 1600's with a team of trained troops and modern equipment and ongoing supplies, I would probably have done a number on the Hapsburgs and similar people. Of course I probably would have caught plague and died soon after but hey.

There's already a series about that.

http://www.baenebooks.com/10.1125/Baen/ ... .htm?blurb

[CaptainPatch]

When it comes right down to is, the underlying complaint is about humans being intentionally cruel and abusive to other humans. It's not necessarily the fault of the system that is cruel and abusive but rather the practitioners of the system that are cruel and abusive. Slavery _could_ be the ultimate in Social Welfare if the owners provided EVERYTHING that the "slaves" could want: food, clothing, shelter, full Medical, Education, good working conditions in a safe environment without overlong hours, Security from outside threats and dangers, etc. et al. If you are provided everything that you need or want, why would you need payment for services rendered?

In contrast to some of the almost-Social Welfare-ish owners, there is a llllooooonnnnggggg history of major industrialists that technically paid for their employees' services, but that amounted to so little that the workers were barely alive. [Watch the Western TV-series "Deadwood" and focus on George Hearst to see what I mean.] Further, they could freely have "troublemakers" killed with no consequences. To my mind, such vile "employers" are MUCH worse than many slave-owners. The general attitude towards slaves by owners was generally that the slaves represented an investment. Would you pays Big Bucks for a prize bull or stallion, and then beat the s*** out of it, just because you could? Or would you do what you could to nurture a better performance from your "livestock"? An insensitive way to view other human beings perhaps, but it _does_ motivate the owners to NOT be whimsically abusive.

[ravenshrike]

When it comes right down to is, the underlying complaint is about humans being intentionally cruel and abusive to other humans. It's not necessarily the fault of the system that is cruel and abusive but rather the practitioners of the system that are cruel and abusive.

Shades of The Evitable Conflict anyone? Or more simply the excuse that all the fucking idiots who are sympathetic to communism use EVERY DAMNED TIME someone points out that communism inevitably results in the deaths of millions of innocents. Any system that humans are part of MUST consider humanity's underlying nature. Any system that does not is doomed to spectacular failure.

[CaptainPatch]

... someone points out that communism inevitably results in the deaths of millions of innocents.

It can also be said that EVERY political system has resulted in the deaths of millions of innocents.

[ravenshrike]

... someone points out that communism inevitably results in the deaths of millions of innocents.

It can also be said that EVERY political system has resulted in the deaths of millions of innocents.

Within 60 years? And DIRECTLY responsible? No? Didn't think so.

Not to mention that any casualties resulting from war DO NOT COUNT since they're not included in my millions of innocents figure at all. Between 100 and 150 million civilians were slaughtered or purposefully starved to death by communist governments in the 20th century in a time-span of less than 60 years.

[Woolfe]

Oh I don't disagree with CaptainPatch. Every form fo government has tyrants, Every period of history has had murderers, those outright ones and those that hide behind a veneer of business.

It wasn't communism that killed all those people. It was the people at the top who made the decision.

Thing is tho. All of those governments and the tyrants that go with them, fail. All of those systems were at once brilliant and terrible. Because of course they fail to take into account the fact that people are inherently different.

I believe it has already been said, but Democracy is the worst form of government except for all the others.

Of course we actually live in a capitalism, not a democracy. Technically communist china is a democracy. But we don't call it that.

Capitalism is all about the dollars. Which works well until the dollars get in government and start changing things to suit them. Their was a separation of church and state, and in my opinion there needs to be a separation of corporate and state.

Anyway too philosophical for this time of morning

[newyawk]

I think morality goes out the window for most people who are starving or just trying to survive. Slaves as food, help, hell I am sure there would be willing slaves as long as it meant meals, water and protection from underground dwellers

[cmagruder]

... someone points out that communism inevitably results in the deaths of millions of innocents.

It can also be said that EVERY political system has resulted in the deaths of millions of innocents.

Within 60 years? And DIRECTLY responsible? No? Didn't think so.

Not to mention that any casualties resulting from war DO NOT COUNT since they're not included in my millions of innocents figure at all. Between 100 and 150 million civilians were slaughtered or purposefully starved to death by communist governments in the 20th century in a time-span of less than 60 years.

Were Mao and Stalin and the others' governments really "Communist" or were they just authoritarian? In Russia, at least, there was a large contribution to the number due to the Nazis too. Don't get me wrong, I'm pretty sure tons died under Lenin, too (I remember reading about planting that involved throwing seeds on the tundra) but I don't think it was quite the same. Arguing that Communism empowered authoritarianism probably works better.

[ravenshrike]

In Russia, at least, there was a large contribution to the number due to the Nazis too. Don't get me wrong, I'm pretty sure tons died under Lenin, too (I remember reading about planting that involved throwing seeds on the tundra) but I don't think it was quite the same. Arguing that Communism empowered authoritarianism probably works better.

Again, not counting wars. Although I'll point out that even if you ascribe all war deaths in the European theater to Hitler himself along with all the people he killed on the side, he still killed less than a third the number of people Stalin was responsible for.

And again, with humans communism will ALWAYS transform into authoritarianism and pretending otherwise is fucking dogs bollocks.

Actually, that's not quite true. in small communities of less than 200 people it's possible because that's around the number humans evolved to deal with in their monkeysphere.

[CaptainPatch]

Although I'll point out that even if you ascribe all war deaths in the European theater to Hitler himself along with all the people he killed on the side, he still killed less than a third the number of people Stalin was responsible for.

Estimates of Russian dead due to the Germ invasion runs to about 24 million. Estimates on Russians killed because of Stalin is about 20 million.

And again, with humans communism will ALWAYS transform into authoritarianism and pretending otherwise is fucking dogs bollocks.

And in contrast, democracies tend to devolve into oligarchies of the Very Wealthy. Capitalism and democracy have been around for a lllloooonnnngggg time. Communism, otoh, has barely "had it's foot in the door" by comparison. If it had a few more centuries to work the kinks out (before the Capitalist nations did every thing in their power to sabotage a competitive Economic system) it may very well been as effective as any other socio-economic-governmental system.

[ravenshrike]

Although I'll point out that even if you ascribe all war deaths in the European theater to Hitler himself along with all the people he killed on the side, he still killed less than a third the number of people Stalin was responsible for.

Estimates of Russian dead due to the Germ invasion runs to about 24 million. Estimates on Russians killed because of Stalin is about 20 million.

And again, with humans communism will ALWAYS transform into authoritarianism and pretending otherwise is fucking dogs bollocks.

And in contrast, democracies tend to devolve into oligarchies of the Very Wealthy. Capitalism and democracy have been around for a lllloooonnnngggg time. Communism, otoh, has barely "had it's foot in the door" by comparison. If it had a few more centuries to work the kinks out (before the Capitalist nations did every thing in their power to sabotage a competitive Economic system) it may very well been as effective as any other socio-economic-governmental system.

The only way you get the 20 million figure is if you take soviet records at face value. Which is a bit like asking a compulsive liar to tell you the truth.

[CaptainPatch]

The only way you get the 20 million figure is if you take soviet records at face value. Which is a bit like asking a compulsive liar to tell you the truth.

So, upon what would you base an estimate? "I don't know what the number is. All I know is any number _they_ provide MUST be a lie!"?
http://www.secondworldwarhistory.com/world-war-2-statistics.asp
http://www.angelfire.com/ct/ww2europe/stats.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_War_II_casualties_of_the_Soviet_Union
http://sovietinfo.tripod.com/ELM-War_Deaths.pdf

The last is from the Soviets themselves, and not surprisingly they are claiming 36.2 million, so 24 million is a "light" estimate by comparison. The variance could very well be because poor census taking. Still, 24 million is significantly more than just 20 million.

[cmagruder]

The only way you get the 20 million figure is if you take soviet records at face value. Which is a bit like asking a compulsive liar to tell you the truth.

So, upon what would you base an estimate? "I don't know what the number is. All I know is any number _they_ provide MUST be a lie!"?
http://www.secondworldwarhistory.com/world-war-2-statistics.asp
http://www.angelfire.com/ct/ww2europe/stats.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_War_II_casualties_of_the_Soviet_Union
http://sovietinfo.tripod.com/ELM-War_Deaths.pdf

The last is from the Soviets themselves, and not surprisingly they are claiming 36.2 million, so 24 million is a "light" estimate by comparison. The variance could very well be because poor census taking. Still, 24 million is significantly more than just 20 million.

24 is conservative. I usually hear 27.

[kira0202]

Fear is a key factor in becoming a wage slave. To borrow a phrase from English Romantic-era poet William Blake, the bonds of a wage slave are “mind-forged manacles.” Workers fear that if they didn't have to go to work, they wouldn't go, and they'd disappear down the rabbit hole of non-productivity and draw the ire of judging society.

Do you live to work, or work to live? Anyone who does either of these things runs the chance of becoming a wage slave, trading freedom for stingy subsistence, every single day. It's a slick slope that leads to choreographing every aspect of your lifestyle around living paycheck to paycheck.

The question is this: How to avoid the stagnation of wage slavery?

[Drool]

Workers fear that if they didn't have to go to work, they wouldn't go, and they'd disappear down the rabbit hole of non-productivity and draw the ire of judging society.

They're probably more concerned about homelessness and starvation than judgement.

[janiceB]

Worker drones are for insects, not individuals. In the event that you're a wage slave dwelling within the restricted limitations of your paycheck, there are ways to expand your world view. Learn the best way to regain control over your life. There are ways on How to avoid the stagnation of wage slavery. Some of it are live frugally, stay out of debt, earn money on your time, and expand your skills.

[CaptainPatch]

This is starting to sound like a sales pitch for "The Secret": The power of positive thinking. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u6sFFjG0mz8 "If you are a loser then it's your own damn fault because you _think_ like a loser!"

Easiest way to NOT be a wage slave is to be born to rich parents.

[suz]

Looks like blatant blog spam anyway.

[Tagaziel]

So, upon what would you base an estimate? "I don't know what the number is. All I know is any number _they_ provide MUST be a lie!"?

There can't be an estimate made, because the records made by the NKVD and Czeka are incomplete, sealed or destroyed. For many events they probably weren't even made. I'm referring to the number of people murdered by the USSR, be it in executions, through deportation/imprisonment in North Asia, denial of sustenance, collateral damage etc. Whatever the Nazis did, you can be sure that the Soviets pioneered and were more efficent at doing so.

If you want an example, the Holodomor. Between 2.5 and 7.5 milion Ukrainians dead because of deliberate denial of food to the Ukrainian SSR, and that's just two years (1932-1933). Then there are deliberate executions, like the mass murder of Polish intelligentsya and officers at Katyń, Miednoje and other sites.

There's also the problem of Soviet POWs captured by the Reich, later imprisoned by Stalinists in labour camps in Asia for perceived treason. If they die, are they a casualty of war or victim of the Union? And if they survive, wrecks of men after decades in the Soviet gulags, are they a casualty or not?

[b0rsuk]

This is starting to sound like a sales pitch for "The Secret": The power of positive thinking. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u6sFFjG0mz8 "If you are a loser then it's your own damn fault because you _think_ like a loser!"

Can't resist !
RSA Animate - Smile or Die
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u5um8QWWRvo

And by the way... inconvenient truth is that many people like being told what to do. Many religious persons are like that. Religion is not very compatible with critical thinking. Being free means being vigilant.
I don't have an issue with passive people most of the time, but they can become a dangerous tool and a threat to you in hands of a skillful and unethical puppet master.

A human society will always have some helpless people and industrious, intelligent, active people. It depends who is in power. Africa could be a superpower - vast areas, rich in natural resources, lots of people. But countries have trouble developing due to corruption. People in Poland are quite apathetic when it comes to politics compared to, say, Sweden or especially Finland. But it's getting better; people in Ukraine and Russia look upon Poland as an example of a succesful post-soviet country. Even Africa is getting better, in last 10 years it started to develop faster than Asia.