Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
essex canary

The Bolshevik Theory Explained

Recommended Posts

I was quite excited to see something about Lenin on here - I like a good political argument - but don't really understand the point¬†ūüėē

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

you can say what you like when you kill 20m people who oppose you  Bolshevik theory is kill everyone and anyone who disagrees 

 

and that is not counting the countless millions sent to work and re-education camps 

 

Including all the Socialists who formed the goverment they ousted do not forget they had the second revolution and never overthrew the tsar  lenin was in Germany at the time 

Edited by Paul101
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
3 hours ago, dylanisabaddog said:

21 million books is quite an achievement though, isn't it?

not as much an  achievement as killing nearly that many people 

Edited by Paul101
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Paul101 said:

not as much an  achievement as killing nearly that many people 

Good point well made 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, Badger said:

I was quite excited to see something about Lenin on here - I like a good political argument - but don't really understand the point¬†ūüėē

Join the club

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

From the first two sentences I thought it was going to be a neo-Marxist explanation as to how the intricacies of Wagner's tactical structure meant that he couldn't play Sainz or Van Hooijdonk for weeks.

But then I realised it was just mildly amusing Delia bashing.

  • Haha 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, Barham Blitz said:

From the first two sentences I thought it was going to be a neo-Marxist explanation as to how the intricacies of Wagner's tactical structure meant that he couldn't play Sainz or Van Hooijdonk for weeks.

But then I realised it was just mildly amusing Delia bashing.

a bit like using the Nazis to make a mildly amusing point 

 

Offensive 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Google Bot said:

Let It Bleed

That was the album that Delia for which Delia designed the cover. Some very interesting lyrics on the last track.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Barham Blitz said:

From the first two sentences I thought it was going to be a neo-Marxist explanation as to how the intricacies of Wagner's tactical structure meant that he couldn't play Sainz or Van Hooijdonk for weeks.

But then I realised it was just mildly amusing Delia bashing.

"Hegel is arguing that reality is merely an¬†a priori¬†adjunct¬†of¬†non-naturalistic ethics, Kant via the¬†categorical imperative¬†is holding that¬†ontologically, it exists only in the imagination and Marx is claiming it was¬†offside". ūüėČ

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Paul101 said:

you can say what you like when you kill 20m people who oppose you  Bolshevik theory is kill everyone and anyone who disagrees 

 

and that is not counting the countless millions sent to work and re-education camps 

 

Including all the Socialists who formed the goverment they ousted do not forget they had the second revolution and never overthrew the tsar  lenin was in Germany at the time 

Trotsky was the leader of the first 2017 revolution for a power sharing arrangement. Lenin having returned from abroad and being a Bolshevik which Trotsky wasn't was the architect of the  second autumn 1917 revolution. Stalin was the mass murderer whom Lenin warned against following his stroke in 1922 prior to his death in 1924. Trotsky was driven out by Stalin and murdered in exile.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
53 minutes ago, essex canary said:

Trotsky was the leader of the first 2017 revolution for a power sharing arrangement. Lenin having returned from abroad and being a Bolshevik which Trotsky wasn't was the architect of the  second autumn 1917 revolution. Stalin was the mass murderer whom Lenin warned against following his stroke in 1922 prior to his death in 1924. Trotsky was driven out by Stalin and murdered in exile.

Everyone of the communist party leadership was guilty 

Stalin just learned from his master 

 

Let's take a little history quiz. Which of the following features of the Soviet state were first introduced under Lenin, and which by Stalin:

1. The Gulag system of slave labor camps

2. The Cheka (secret police agency eventually known as the KGB)

3. Collectivization of agriculture leading to mass famines

4. Mass executions with little or no due process

 

5. A one-party state, with bans on all opposition parties (including socialist ones)

6. Suppression of freedom of speech and religion

7. Confiscation of private businesses, including even small businesses

8. Invading other nations in order to spread communism there

9. State control of the media for purposes of promoting regime propaganda, and preventing distribution of opposition speech

If you answered Lenin, you were correct in every case! And virtually every one of these measures was also supported by Trotsky, Bukharin, and other Bolshevik leaders

Edited by Paul101

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Graham Paddons Beard said:

Christ . Keep it light lads. Some of us are trying to find out if Hanley is fit . 

I wonder if Quotations from Chairman Mao Tse-tung has any infomation we can gain and use to analyse player injuries?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
13 minutes ago, Graham Paddons Beard said:

Christ . Keep it light lads. Some of us are trying to find out if Hanley is fit . 

He certainly is if you accept Hegel's argument that reality is merely an a priori adjunct of non-naturalistic ethics but if you believe Kant that fitness (as with all reality) exists only in the imagination, he isn't.

On the other hand, if you believe (and understand) the theory of the multiverse, as put forward by Hugh Everett, there are many universes where Hanley is fit, and many where he is not.¬†ūü§Ē

Edited by Badger
Added words

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
6 minutes ago, Badger said:

He certainly is if you accept Hegel's argument that reality is merely an a priori adjunct of non-naturalistic ethics but if you believe Kant that fitness (as with all reality) exists only in the imagination, he isn't.

On the other hand, if you believe (and understand) the theory of the multiverse, as put forward by Hugh Everett, there are many universes where Hanley is fit, and many where he is not.¬†ūü§Ē

...and some in which he is a footballer and some in which he is not

Edited by PurpleCanary

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Badger said:

He certainly is if you accept Hegel's argument that reality is merely an a priori adjunct of non-naturalistic ethics but if you believe Kant that fitness (as with all reality) exists only in the imagination, he isn't.

On the other hand, if you believe (and understand) the theory of the multiverse, as put forward by Hugh Everett, there are many universes where Hanley is fit, and many where he is not.¬†ūü§Ē

Yikes. Good job I didn’t mention Gibson. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Graham Paddons Beard said:

Yikes. Good job I didn’t mention Gibson. 

Yes, I imagine that even in the multiverse there aren't that many universes where they are both fit at the same time!¬†ūüėČ

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, Graham Paddons Beard said:

Christ . Keep it light lads. Some of us are trying to find out if Hanley is fit . 

He's got a case of the trotsky's i'm afraid.  Although should clear up within 24 hours. 

  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Bolsheviks are the 80%, the Mensheviks are the 20%. (I failed my history O Level but I think I’ve got that right).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Badger said:

He certainly is if you accept Hegel's argument that reality is merely an a priori adjunct of non-naturalistic ethics but if you believe Kant that fitness (as with all reality) exists only in the imagination, he isn't.

On the other hand, if you believe (and understand) the theory of the multiverse, as put forward by Hugh Everett, there are many universes where Hanley is fit, and many where he is not.¬†ūü§Ē

By this logic there is a universe where when the ball hits his head following an attacking corner, it goes in the goal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Mr Angry said:

The Bolsheviks are the 80%, the Mensheviks are the 20%. (I failed my history O Level but I think I’ve got that right).

Something like that. Trotsky was a 20 per center so Lenin is OK.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...