Acceptance of Corruption and Communism.

For the serious discussion of weighty matters and worldly issues. No off-topic posts allowed.

Moderators: Azrael, Moderators General, Prelates

Beliar
Posts: 10
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2015 1:42 am UTC

Acceptance of Corruption and Communism.

Postby Beliar » Thu Jan 01, 2015 5:46 pm UTC

Hello there. 1st imposter :mrgreen:.

I was discussing communism in another forum and at some point I said that all corrupt communist leaders deserve death, please read on though... A lot (not to say all) communist 'leaders' are extremely corrupt and I can say that because I've lived under communist regimen probably more time than most of you have *lived*. I even mentioned that it's okay to be communist, after all we're all dreamers in some way, but most/all corrupt communist leaders have blood in their hands, either directly or indirectly (e.g. stealing the money for vaccines so half the country died). I'm talking mostly about Latin America and Africa here, most of these countries aren't considered communist, but in practice, the majority of people suffer from communist policies. I call these countries communist-wannabes, as they don't call themselves communists because they fear the international reactions, but in practice they're all communists to some degree (e.g.: Ecuador, Bolivia, Venezuela, Brazil, Angola, etc.). All those countries have something in common; they have lots of communist policies that doesn't work mostly because their communist 'leaders' are extremely corrupt. They take advantage of the facts that the people are either ignorant/innocent and that a portion of them are genuinely communists (i.e.: for them communism is not about money/living large but about having a fair society) and that they know no better society, to stay in the power at all costs.

When I said in that community that all these corrupt communist leaders should die for good though, for my surprise I was harassed and people were actually supporting the corrupt communists... Obviously I've assumed that they don't have the slightest idea on what communism is in practice, or perhaps they are just some kids (but kids are the adults of the future), but in any case, I was amazed that corruption (which should be frowned upon in any circumstance) and communism were receiving so much support from a community predominantly composed of people from the developed countries.

I would like to know your opinions on this subject and it's not mandatory, but I'd appreciate if you could tell where you live (even if only continent, but country is preferred), and your political influences. Thank you in advance.

NOTE: When you visit those countries (+Cuba) as a tourist, you don't get a real picture of the actual situation. The touristic places are basically theater stages. If you really want to know how things works in such countries, you have to visit a public hospital or school for example. Specially in hospitals, there's absolutely no dignity.

For the ones lazy to Google and read articles:
hastebin [dot] com [slash] iqumumebux
(Sorry, I can't post links/images here)

User avatar
Azrael
CATS. CATS ARE NICE.
Posts: 6491
Joined: Thu Apr 26, 2007 1:16 am UTC
Location: Boston

Re: Acceptance of Corruption and Communism.

Postby Azrael » Fri Jan 02, 2015 4:28 pm UTC

If all of the corrupt semi-communist nigh-dictators that you're grouping together died tomorrow for 'the common good', will anything have been actually been accomplished? Most political structures that support the sort of leader you're discussing have systematic issues throughout the government. Removing the figurehead won't change anything for the general populace in a meaningful fashion.

So, no. They don't deserve to die. They deserve to be overthrown by well supported, internal reformists and treated within a judicial system free of corruption. Even if that means they end up dead. Its the means, not the ends, that matter.

Admittedly, that's a bit of a utopian pipe dream. But your attitude is *exactly* what lead the superpower of the time on a series of attempts to assassinate or overthrow heads of state and governments throughout four decades post-WWII. None of those attempts ended well.

Tyndmyr
Posts: 11443
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2012 8:38 pm UTC

Re: Acceptance of Corruption and Communism.

Postby Tyndmyr » Fri Jan 02, 2015 4:35 pm UTC

Azrael wrote:If all of the corrupt semi-communist neigh-dictators died tomorrow for the common good, will anything have been actually been accomplished? Most political structures that support the sort of leader you're discussing have systematic issues throughout the government. Removing the figurehead won't change anything in a meaningful fashion.

So, no. They don't deserve to die. They deserve to be overthrown by reformists and treated within a judicial system free of corruption. Even if that means they end up dead, it the means, not the ends, that matters.


Removal of them alone is insufficient, but their removal is a necessary part of change.

Deserve, however, is describing something rather different than the mere mechanical process. 's a moral question, rather than one of fixing things. What, indeed, makes a person deserve death? What makes people deserve things at all? I find that often when someone says "x deserves y", they are merely expressing a preference for that outcome, but the actual reasoning for that preference can vary significantly.

So, why do you want them to die? That's the crucial question, and it'll come down to your moral code. Some variant of poetic justice or something, most likely.

If I were to defend it, my reasoning would be somewhat different. Dramatic, heavily publicized death as part of a regime change can be effective in emphasizing that the prior system is over. A decisive defeat can pre-empt further conflict.

mcd001
Posts: 143
Joined: Tue Sep 09, 2014 7:27 pm UTC

Re: Acceptance of Corruption and Communism.

Postby mcd001 » Fri Jan 02, 2015 6:13 pm UTC

Beliar wrote:I would like to know your opinions on this subject and it's not mandatory, but I'd appreciate if you could tell where you live (even if only continent, but country is preferred), and your political influences.

I live in the U.S. and I'm a limited-government, free-market conservative. I have never lived under communism, but I don't need to in order to understand how it has never worked (and can never work) anywhere in the real world.

Do corrupt communist leaders deserve to die? Probably, given the death toll they inflict on their subjects, but I would say they deserve it no more than *any* corrupt totalitarian leaders who abuse their power and use brutal methods to maintain their hold on power.

Beliar wrote:When I said in that community that all these corrupt communist leaders should die for good though, for my surprise I was harassed and people were actually supporting the corrupt communists...

Some of that may come from a misguided support of communism, but I suspect most of it is due to the natural queasiness of good people at the thought of violence and/or vigilante justice.

Azrael wrote:They deserve to be overthrown by well supported, internal reformists and treated within a judicial system free of corruption. Even if that means they end up dead. Its the means, not the ends, that matter.

I'd strike the requirement that the reformists be well-supported, since I'm not sure what that means. Otherwise I agree.

Beliar
Posts: 10
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2015 1:42 am UTC

Re: Acceptance of Corruption and Communism.

Postby Beliar » Fri Jan 02, 2015 6:38 pm UTC

Thank you guys! I wasn't actually expecting civilized and polite replies! Let's try to maintain that level of education please! :D

Azrael wrote:If all of the corrupt semi-communist neigh-dictators that you're grouping together died tomorrow for 'the common good', will anything have been actually been accomplished? Most political structures that support the sort of leader you're discussing have systematic issues throughout the government. Removing the figurehead won't change anything for the general populace in a meaningful fashion.

So, no. They don't deserve to die. They deserve to be overthrown by well supported, internal reformists and treated within a judicial system free of corruption. Even if that means they end up dead. Its the means, not the ends, that matter.

Admittedly, that's a bit of a utopian pipe dream. But your attitude is *exactly* what lead the superpower of the time on a series of attempts to assassinate or overthrow heads of state and governments throughout four decades post-WWII. None of those attempts ended well.


Yes, I agree 100%, however, as a direct victim of communism (incl. death in family, etc.) I can't help but wish them all dead. I'm aware that the problem is not the very figureheads and they may either be replaced by even worse leaders (just like the communists, who killed "pretty bad" royal families/dictators only to become worse than them), or become martyrs and that stuff. Or both.

I was not actually expecting people to agree with me, because of course any 'outsider' have a much more impartial picture of the whole situation because they're not being affected either positively nor negatively by it.

I just wasn't expected hostile reactions from a well-educated community, or even worse, I wasn't expecting people to be supportive to the communists.

I used to be very 'open' to the idea of communism when I was young, I even read some stuff about Guevara and the likes, but the fact is, as good as it sounds, it doesn't work in practice... I don't know if the communist leaders had bad intentions from the very beginning, but what matter is that after they rise to the power, things change completely. So nowadays I'm anti-communist. It simply doesn't work because we're all a bunch of greedy and lazy beings. (no offense intended)

Tyndmyr wrote:
Azrael wrote:If all of the corrupt semi-communist neigh-dictators died tomorrow for the common good, will anything have been actually been accomplished? Most political structures that support the sort of leader you're discussing have systematic issues throughout the government. Removing the figurehead won't change anything in a meaningful fashion.

So, no. They don't deserve to die. They deserve to be overthrown by reformists and treated within a judicial system free of corruption. Even if that means they end up dead, it the means, not the ends, that matters.


Removal of them alone is insufficient, but their removal is a necessary part of change.

Deserve, however, is describing something rather different than the mere mechanical process. 's a moral question, rather than one of fixing things. What, indeed, makes a person deserve death? What makes people deserve things at all? I find that often when someone says "x deserves y", they are merely expressing a preference for that outcome, but the actual reasoning for that preference can vary significantly.

So, why do you want them to die? That's the crucial question, and it'll come down to your moral code. Some variant of poetic justice or something, most likely.

If I were to defend it, my reasoning would be somewhat different. Dramatic, heavily publicized death as part of a regime change can be effective in emphasizing that the prior system is over. A decisive defeat can pre-empt further conflict.


In fact my intention was not to discuss that, but simply I'd like to understand why and how the opinions on communist and corruption have changed so drastically recently. You have a very good point though.

Perhaps I'm a bit conservative but I'd sentence to death a lot of people from the past... a recent verdict that in my conception --and of course measured based on my particular and cultural values-- was an aberration was that sentence of that guy who killed like 80 people and injured other 300 in Norway, and was sentenced to like 20 years if memory serves. That's completely unacceptable to me, and yet the people of Norway seemed to accept that quite peacefully and without much questioning.

The justice is represented by a two-pan weighing scale... if you put 80 lives and 300 wounds in one pan, It won't level when you put '20 years' on the other. It won't level even when you put even 50 lives on the other, so there's no other sentence possible imho than either death or lifetime incarceration.

Of course that whole thing is symbolic and our minds apply uneven 'external' forces on each plate :).

Tyndmyr
Posts: 11443
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2012 8:38 pm UTC

Re: Acceptance of Corruption and Communism.

Postby Tyndmyr » Fri Jan 02, 2015 7:18 pm UTC

Beliar wrote:Yes, I agree 100%, however, as a direct victim of communism (incl. death in family, etc.) I can't help but wish them all dead. I'm aware that the problem is not the very figureheads and they may either be replaced by even worse leaders (just like the communists, who killed "pretty bad" royal families/dictators only to become worse than them), or become martyrs and that stuff. Or both.

I was not actually expecting people to agree with me, because of course any 'outsider' have a much more impartial picture of the whole situation because they're not being affected either positively nor negatively by it.

I just wasn't expected hostile reactions from a well-educated community, or even worse, I wasn't expecting people to be supportive to the communists.

I used to be very 'open' to the idea of communism when I was young, I even read some stuff about Guevara and the likes, but the fact is, as good as it sounds, it doesn't work in practice... I don't know if the communist leaders had bad intentions from the very beginning, but what matter is that after they rise to the power, things change completely. So nowadays I'm anti-communist. It simply doesn't work because we're all a bunch of greedy and lazy beings. (no offense intended)


It's quite reasonable to dislike things that have hurt you in the past...I dare say this is pretty common, even.

No offense taken. Humans are humans, we all have potential for many things, including greed and laziness. I view it as simply a systemic failure because it's a concentration of a giant pile of power in very few people. Non-communistic systems are also vulnerable when they do that(dictatorships are an easy example). Market based solutions are a widely distributed method of decision making, and thus, result in less concentration of power than very authoritarian systems, and are less subject to abuse. Not perfect of course, but hey, improvement's good.

That said, well educated doesn't mean polite, necessarily. Or right. Falls back to my earlier "humans are humans". Going to school doesn't prevent me from being an asshole, or wrong, or whatever. It just gives me more tools to work with.

In fact my intention was not to discuss that, but simply I'd like to understand why and how the opinions on communist and corruption have changed so drastically recently. You have a very good point though.

Perhaps I'm a bit conservative but I'd sentence to death a lot of people from the past... a recent verdict that in my conception --and of course measured based on my particular and cultural values-- was an aberration was that sentence of that guy who killed like 80 people and injured other 300 in Norway, and was sentenced to like 20 years if memory serves. That's completely unacceptable to me, and yet the people of Norway seemed to accept that quite peacefully and without much questioning.

The justice is represented by a two-pan weighing scale... if you put 80 lives and 300 wounds in one pan, It won't level when you put '20 years' on the other. It won't level even when you put even 50 lives on the other, so there's no other sentence possible imho than either death or lifetime incarceration.

Of course that whole thing is symbolic and our minds apply uneven 'external' forces on each plate :).


Well, communism and corruption are still fairly unpopular in the US, at least. Corruption is particularly unpopular. The red scare type of sentiment has died down, which is probably good for dispassionate judgement, and communism is mostly dead in the US as an ideology. Sure, it leaves lasting historical effects on a number of ideologies, so it's still relevant in a sense, but nobody is going to actually vote communist here.

As for sentencing people to death, that's a different topic. A number of people object to capital punishment on varying grounds, and this is quite apart from support for communism. Me, I object on a practical basis. Corpses are fairly unhelpful, most of the time, and if a mistake is discovered, or a person has mended their ways, a corpse cannot be freed. Thus, keeping someone alive preserves options. Also, at least in the US, it's cheaper.

Twenty years does indeed seem odd, but you have to take into consideration that Norway, etc generally have low crime rates, and a fairly friendly justice system as a result. By their standards, 21 years IS tough, even if it's seen as lenient here. And yeah, I'd lobby for life in prison for Breivik as well, but eh, their country, their rules. Rules that do seem to work fairly well the vast majority of the time, even if they are imperfect in this individual case.

User avatar
sam_i_am
Posts: 624
Joined: Mon Jun 18, 2012 3:38 pm UTC
Location: Urbana, Illinois, USA

Re: Acceptance of Corruption and Communism.

Postby sam_i_am » Fri Jan 02, 2015 7:24 pm UTC

Beliar wrote:When I said in that community that all these corrupt communist leaders should die for good though, for my surprise I was harassed and people were actually supporting the corrupt communists... Obviously I've assumed that they don't have the slightest idea on what communism is in practice, or perhaps they are just some kids (but kids are the adults of the future), but in any case, I was amazed that corruption (which should be frowned upon in any circumstance) and communism were receiving so much support from a community predominantly composed of people from the developed countries.


Pardon me for this show of mistrust, but experience has taught me that these kinds of second hand accounts about what a community says or believes are almost always wrong.

If you could tell us where these forums can be found and what threads to look for, that would help us understand what attitudes you were observing.

Beliar
Posts: 10
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2015 1:42 am UTC

Re: Acceptance of Corruption and Communism.

Postby Beliar » Fri Jan 02, 2015 10:04 pm UTC

mcd001 wrote:
Beliar wrote:I would like to know your opinions on this subject and it's not mandatory, but I'd appreciate if you could tell where you live (even if only continent, but country is preferred), and your political influences.

I live in the U.S. and I'm a limited-government, free-market conservative. I have never lived under communism, but I don't need to in order to understand how it has never worked (and can never work) anywhere in the real world.

Do corrupt communist leaders deserve to die? Probably, given the death toll they inflict on their subjects, but I would say they deserve it no more than *any* corrupt totalitarian leaders who abuse their power and use brutal methods to maintain their hold on power.

Beliar wrote:When I said in that community that all these corrupt communist leaders should die for good though, for my surprise I was harassed and people were actually supporting the corrupt communists...

Some of that may come from a misguided support of communism, but I suspect most of it is due to the natural queasiness of good people at the thought of violence and/or vigilante justice.

Azrael wrote:They deserve to be overthrown by well supported, internal reformists and treated within a judicial system free of corruption. Even if that means they end up dead. Its the means, not the ends, that matter.

I'd strike the requirement that the reformists be well-supported, since I'm not sure what that means. Otherwise I agree.


Thank you :).

Tyndmyr wrote:
Beliar wrote:Yes, I agree 100%, however, as a direct victim of communism (incl. death in family, etc.) I can't help but wish them all dead. I'm aware that the problem is not the very figureheads and they may either be replaced by even worse leaders (just like the communists, who killed "pretty bad" royal families/dictators only to become worse than them), or become martyrs and that stuff. Or both.

I was not actually expecting people to agree with me, because of course any 'outsider' have a much more impartial picture of the whole situation because they're not being affected either positively nor negatively by it.

I just wasn't expected hostile reactions from a well-educated community, or even worse, I wasn't expecting people to be supportive to the communists.

I used to be very 'open' to the idea of communism when I was young, I even read some stuff about Guevara and the likes, but the fact is, as good as it sounds, it doesn't work in practice... I don't know if the communist leaders had bad intentions from the very beginning, but what matter is that after they rise to the power, things change completely. So nowadays I'm anti-communist. It simply doesn't work because we're all a bunch of greedy and lazy beings. (no offense intended)


It's quite reasonable to dislike things that have hurt you in the past...I dare say this is pretty common, even.

No offense taken. Humans are humans, we all have potential for many things, including greed and laziness. I view it as simply a systemic failure because it's a concentration of a giant pile of power in very few people. Non-communistic systems are also vulnerable when they do that(dictatorships are an easy example). Market based solutions are a widely distributed method of decision making, and thus, result in less concentration of power than very authoritarian systems, and are less subject to abuse. Not perfect of course, but hey, improvement's good.

That said, well educated doesn't mean polite, necessarily. Or right. Falls back to my earlier "humans are humans". Going to school doesn't prevent me from being an asshole, or wrong, or whatever. It just gives me more tools to work with.

In fact my intention was not to discuss that, but simply I'd like to understand why and how the opinions on communist and corruption have changed so drastically recently. You have a very good point though.

Perhaps I'm a bit conservative but I'd sentence to death a lot of people from the past... a recent verdict that in my conception --and of course measured based on my particular and cultural values-- was an aberration was that sentence of that guy who killed like 80 people and injured other 300 in Norway, and was sentenced to like 20 years if memory serves. That's completely unacceptable to me, and yet the people of Norway seemed to accept that quite peacefully and without much questioning.

The justice is represented by a two-pan weighing scale... if you put 80 lives and 300 wounds in one pan, It won't level when you put '20 years' on the other. It won't level even when you put even 50 lives on the other, so there's no other sentence possible imho than either death or lifetime incarceration.

Of course that whole thing is symbolic and our minds apply uneven 'external' forces on each plate :).


Well, communism and corruption are still fairly unpopular in the US, at least. Corruption is particularly unpopular. The red scare type of sentiment has died down, which is probably good for dispassionate judgement, and communism is mostly dead in the US as an ideology. Sure, it leaves lasting historical effects on a number of ideologies, so it's still relevant in a sense, but nobody is going to actually vote communist here.

As for sentencing people to death, that's a different topic. A number of people object to capital punishment on varying grounds, and this is quite apart from support for communism. Me, I object on a practical basis. Corpses are fairly unhelpful, most of the time, and if a mistake is discovered, or a person has mended their ways, a corpse cannot be freed. Thus, keeping someone alive preserves options. Also, at least in the US, it's cheaper.

Twenty years does indeed seem odd, but you have to take into consideration that Norway, etc generally have low crime rates, and a fairly friendly justice system as a result. By their standards, 21 years IS tough, even if it's seen as lenient here. And yeah, I'd lobby for life in prison for Breivik as well, but eh, their country, their rules. Rules that do seem to work fairly well the vast majority of the time, even if they are imperfect in this individual case.


Well, I didn't say I support death penalty, in fact, I think life prison is a much better choice considering the cost of death penalty and of course the chance of a mistake. I just said that it should be either death or life prison for Breivik, and even if the constitution forbid life prison, an exception should be made in cases like that. I don't understand why it's so expensive to kill someone though :twisted:.

You're right though - their country, their rules... in my opinion punishments for heinous crimes like that should be exemplar though. That's my opinion.

You said the rules work fairly well, I don't know... People in Norway are very educated and they have plenty of opportunities (plus there's less prejudice/civil disparities compared to most other countries), so I'd say they are much less likely to become criminals. For the people actually inclined to become criminals, I'd say that's an incentive though. I could be wrong but I don't see how that specific rule of 'not punishing criminals' reduce the crime... imho there's no crime because other "rules" like 'educate people so they don't become criminals' are effective. In any case, I'll never accept that. It's a disrespect with the society not to punish criminals imho.

sam_i_am wrote:
Beliar wrote:When I said in that community that all these corrupt communist leaders should die for good though, for my surprise I was harassed and people were actually supporting the corrupt communists... Obviously I've assumed that they don't have the slightest idea on what communism is in practice, or perhaps they are just some kids (but kids are the adults of the future), but in any case, I was amazed that corruption (which should be frowned upon in any circumstance) and communism were receiving so much support from a community predominantly composed of people from the developed countries.


Pardon me for this show of mistrust, but experience has taught me that these kinds of second hand accounts about what a community says or believes are almost always wrong.

If you could tell us where these forums can be found and what threads to look for, that would help us understand what attitudes you were observing.


Well, I definitely don't want to tell you what are the forums because I don't want to become infamous there, sorry... I can say though it's another quite well-know tech forum. I'd say people there are just well-informed and educated as the people here. Obviously it's not a 'communists forum' or some other obviously biased community.

moiraemachy
Posts: 190
Joined: Wed Jan 04, 2012 9:47 pm UTC

Re: Acceptance of Corruption and Communism.

Postby moiraemachy » Sat Jan 03, 2015 3:13 am UTC

Azrael wrote:(...) your attitude is *exactly* what lead the superpower of the time on a series of attempts to assassinate or overthrow heads of state and governments throughout four decades post-WWII. None of those attempts ended well.
Uh, is the jury out in this one? I mean, yeah, USA interventions during the cold war weren't very successful in bringing democracy and prosperity to the third world, but that was never the point, really. The point was to avoid losing these countries to the Russians, which would supposedly result in much more misery. And frankly, I buy that because Stalin.

User avatar
Zamfir
I built a novelty castle, the irony was lost on some.
Posts: 7604
Joined: Wed Aug 27, 2008 2:43 pm UTC
Location: Nederland

Re: Acceptance of Corruption and Communism.

Postby Zamfir » Sat Jan 03, 2015 9:17 am UTC

Beliar, just so we're clear: you want corrupt communist leaders killed, and your examples are
e.g. Ecuador, Bolivia, Venezuela, Brazil, Angola

So, we're not talking about posthumously executing Stalin here, we're talking about executing Dilma Roussef?

And you're surprised that not everyone agrees with you?

Beliar
Posts: 10
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2015 1:42 am UTC

Re: Acceptance of Corruption and Communism.

Postby Beliar » Sat Jan 03, 2015 4:51 pm UTC

Zamfir wrote:Beliar, just so we're clear: you want corrupt communist leaders killed, and your examples are
e.g. Ecuador, Bolivia, Venezuela, Brazil, Angola

So, we're not talking about posthumously executing Stalin here, we're talking about executing Dilma Roussef?

And you're surprised that not everyone agrees with you?

No, I'm not naming names, and I'm not surprised people don't agree with me, I'm surprised people support communism and corruption. I just mentioned those countries as examples that communism is still thriving in a rather 'sneaky' fashion in various countries.

Brazil is one of the best examples of that, I repeat, I'm not saying person A or B should be killed, but the country is being ruled by a coalition formed by communist parties, and even the ones that don't call themselves 'communists' (mostly because of international affairs) are so highly communist that their members even greet themselves with the communist greeting, including the members of the "Labor's Party", which is the one ruling Brazil, and is extremely corrupt. In the past Brazil were ruled by PSDB/socialists, another left-wing party (although not communist) and also extremely corrupt. Before that they have a few notably corrupt presidents (e.g.: Hernand Collor), and dictatorship for various decades.

The fact is, Brazil doesn't have a single 'right-wing' party, although it have a whopping number of 30+ parties. The "communist" coalitions are even accepting parties with other ideologies because obviously they are in that for the money. They absolutely don't give a single f for the people. Brazil has taxes so high that they scare even people from Europe/US, and yet there's absolutely no quality in public services, when there ARE public services, because a large part of that country is simply neglected.

I'm not even mentioning the fact that the highest positions in the state-owned companies are all occupied by members of that political coalition, people who obviously know absolutely nothing about what they 'should' be doing, because all that matters is to steal money for the communist parties and for themselves. That was the case of Petrobras (current international scandal), in which the Labor's Party, the Progressive Party (founded by Paulo Maluf, a well-know corruption 'lord') and the Democratic Movement Party (vice president) happened to steal dozens of billions of dollars with the help of other private companies. That's just ONE example, and obviously that number is just the tip of the iceberg.

The worse part is that all that corruption was discovered due international investigations, because obviously Brazil doesn't investigate their own corruption (at least as it should), and when an international investigation leads to the discovery of a huge scheme of corruption, the Labor's Party government claims that's because they are investigating the corruption, so for the people it looks like there's more corruption but in fact that's just because they are investigating while the previous governments didn't. Unfortunately most Brazilians seems to believe in that, even being obvious that they are supportive to corruption because they don't punish the corrupts. The best example of that is the "Mensalao" scandal, which was one of the biggest corruption scandals in the world (also from the communist coalition) and no one got punished.

It's roughly the same thing in all those countries mentioned, plus many others.

Fortunately the people of Brazil aren't headless, as the last elections showed (the communists won by only a few votes), but the problem is they're choosing between 'communism/extreme-left-wing' and the socialist coalition, which also happen to be 'far-left' if you take the whole coalition into account. Both governments provided public services so bad in the past (although there were a few serious people in the past who happened to solve big problems like Fernando Cardoso (solved the inflation problem with the new currency) and Serra (solved the aids outbreak)), that even stupid diseases kills lots of people and 2/3 of the students graduated from high school don't know the basics of math.

In Brazil people pay high taxes for public education, healthcare, transport, security, etc. but any Brazilian consider private education, healthcare, vehicle and security (condos w/ armed personnel and anti-personnel passive protection as you only see in war zones) basic needs. The worst part is that some people pay more taxes e.g. for public education than they pay for a private school. So, basically they pay for very expensive services that doesn't exist, and they have to pay again for the same private service, which sometimes happens to be cheaper, but with the different that it does exist.

I don't expect people from US/Europe to believe that, specially because there's a lot of international government propaganda AND when you visit Brazil as a tourist you rarely see the actual situation. There are lots of blogs on the internet showing the reality of those countries and when you visit these countries you can see the repugnant reality by visiting a public hospital/school in a non-touristic area. I think most Europeans/Americans find that hard to believe because in fact they live in a completely different reality. It's so different that it's hard to find a comparison basis.

Let me know if you need sources. Please try googling first though.

User avatar
Zamfir
I built a novelty castle, the irony was lost on some.
Posts: 7604
Joined: Wed Aug 27, 2008 2:43 pm UTC
Location: Nederland

Re: Acceptance of Corruption and Communism.

Postby Zamfir » Sat Jan 03, 2015 5:42 pm UTC

You are talking about people who have blood on their hands and deserve to die. That's serious stuff. You don't get to play vague about who exactly should be on the execution list.

Beliar
Posts: 10
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2015 1:42 am UTC

Re: Acceptance of Corruption and Communism.

Postby Beliar » Sat Jan 03, 2015 6:01 pm UTC

Zamfir wrote:You are talking about people who have blood on their hands and deserve to die. That's serious stuff. You don't get to play vague about who exactly should be on the execution list.

Nope, and for two reasons:
1-I'm not going to kill anyone.
2-That's somewhat off-topic.

My intentions were to understand what kind of influences (political and from society) people who support corrupt communist governments had. Have you read the entire post?

User avatar
Zamfir
I built a novelty castle, the irony was lost on some.
Posts: 7604
Joined: Wed Aug 27, 2008 2:43 pm UTC
Location: Nederland

Re: Acceptance of Corruption and Communism.

Postby Zamfir » Sat Jan 03, 2015 6:47 pm UTC

Yes, I read the entire post. You mention twice in that post that corrupt communist leaders need to die. In your second post, you repeat this point. Twice.

At the same time, your concept of 'corrupt communist leaders' is extremely broad. Apparently, half the politicians of Brazil fall within this class, and the other half is at least suspect. You even imply that Brazil's dictators were corrupt communists, which would surprise them a lot.

Killing communist leaders is hardly a theoretical idea. Latin America has seen decades of actual killing of 'communist' leaders, based on similarly broad standards as you appear to use. Many nasty dictatorships there and elsewhere were explicitly founded on the perceived necessity of killing more leftists.

In that context, it matters how serious you are about communists deserving death, and who exactly you include among those deserving to die.

Beliar
Posts: 10
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2015 1:42 am UTC

Re: Acceptance of Corruption and Communism.

Postby Beliar » Sat Jan 03, 2015 9:47 pm UTC

Zamfir wrote:Yes, I read the entire post. You mention twice in that post that corrupt communist leaders need to die. In your second post, you repeat this point. Twice.

At the same time, your concept of 'corrupt communist leaders' is extremely broad. Apparently, half the politicians of Brazil fall within this class, and the other half is at least suspect. You even imply that Brazil's dictators were corrupt communists, which would surprise them a lot.

Killing communist leaders is hardly a theoretical idea. Latin America has seen decades of actual killing of 'communist' leaders, based on similarly broad standards as you appear to use. Many nasty dictatorships there and elsewhere were explicitly founded on the perceived necessity of killing more leftists.

In that context, it matters how serious you are about communists deserving death, and who exactly you include among those deserving to die.


Everyone has opinions, but personally, anyone who killed innocent people, directly or indirectly, solely for personal purposes (mostly money) would be on my list. I agree with Azrael though, only killing them without a trial won't solve the problem. You can't however compare Brazil's dictatorship with Pinochet or even the dictatorship in Argentina. Brazil was much more civilized back then. The entire dictatorship in Brazil killed a few hundreds of citizens, I'm not saying that's good, but you can't compare with dozens of thousands in Argentina and Chile.

Let me tell you a statistic though: in a single city of 350,000 inhabitants in Brazil, a recent study concluded that recently about 200 people died per YEAR (since 2009) waiting for medical care in the queue of public hospitals (i.e.: agonizing to death in front of a public hospital)*. And theres not a single recorded occurrence of that during the dictatorship. You tell me which government is more criminal. Although two wrongs doesn't make a right, in terms of dignity, things went downhill in Brazil after the dictatorship, and there are lots of statistics to back that up.

*-That was in a city in Sao Paul, which happen to be the most developed state in Brazil... That's only a SINGLE and not very large city though. I can't even imagine the chaos in the neglected regions like NE and N though. That's so wrong and unfair.

I would say that Brazil never had a head-of-state worthy of living. The same goes for all the countries I've mentioned.

Where did I imply that Brazil's dictators were communist?:
Beliar wrote:In the past Brazil were ruled by PSDB/socialists, another left-wing party (although not communist) and also extremely corrupt. Before that they had a few notably corrupt presidents (e.g.: Hernand Collor), and dictatorship for various decades.

I was simply saying that before the current communist government they had a 'socialist' government, and even before that they had dictatorship. Of course it wasn't a communist dictatorship. They were all extremely corrupt governments though. In fact, Brazil has a long history of overwhelming corruption, if you know spanish and are interested in the whole history, I can recommend you the books of "Laurentino Gomes", who is a serious (although a little bit biased imho) brazilian historian. His trilogy 1808-1889 shows very clearly how corruption among the Brazilian 'aristocrats' is a cultural thing. Never, in any moment of history after the empire, any stone was moved without a whole lot of corruption and personal interests.

If you really want to discuss this further, please open a new thread though and I'll gladly discuss this there. This thread is not intended for that kind of discussion. I just expressed my opinion, I didn't want to discuss that.

User avatar
Thesh
Made to Fuck Dinosaurs
Posts: 6598
Joined: Tue Jan 12, 2010 1:55 am UTC
Location: Colorado

Re: Acceptance of Corruption and Communism.

Postby Thesh » Sat Jan 03, 2015 11:33 pm UTC

Beliar wrote:anyone who killed innocent people, directly or indirectly, solely for personal purposes (mostly money) would be on my list.


I'm assuming you are American? If so, this sentiment amuses me.
Summum ius, summa iniuria.

Beliar
Posts: 10
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2015 1:42 am UTC

Re: Acceptance of Corruption and Communism.

Postby Beliar » Sun Jan 04, 2015 2:47 am UTC

Thesh wrote:
Beliar wrote:anyone who killed innocent people, directly or indirectly, solely for personal purposes (mostly money) would be on my list.


I'm assuming you are American? If so, this sentiment amuses me.

Nope, but I never knew my English was so good :).

Anyway, compared to the communists, and specially the corrupt ones, Americans are saints.

In some(/most?) of the communist-wannabe countries they even have private emergency services because the public ones are simply horrendous. So, all politics (and civil servants) in these countries they don't call the '911' when they need an ambulance, they call a separated private emergency service. I mean, not even the medics and the politics trust the system they work on, because obviously they know that even if the condition is fairly simple, the public services are so bad that there's a big chance they'll end up dead. And the worst part is that the budget for those public services is much bigger than some European countries that provide world-class emergency services. Yes, they steal basically all the money from most public services.

One of the most cruel things I've ever heard is that in Brazil they stole all the money of the public school meal, and I know that for a lot of children that's the most important meal for them, and in extreme cases their only meal. Unfortunately that happens quite often in NE and N of Brazil, and probably in other countries too. Obviously no one gets prosecuted/jailed/killed/whatever, and the money probably is spent on luxury cars and airplanes, no one cares. That's so cruel that sincerely I don't understand how someone can feel any kind of empathy for that kind of scum, unless they're scum themselves. They're worse than animals, I'd pull the trigger of a gun pointed at those guys heads without even thinking.

You think Americans are bad? Visit any of the countries mentioned in this thread (specially in South America because most aren't very poor countries) and disguise as a local, and see how the things work there in reality. You'll surely change your mind completely. Or just search for "public hospital <country_of_choice>" on Youtube and believe in your eyes.

Tourists are the most powerful propaganda, lots of tourists return from Cuba thinking it's not that bad... After some critical thinking though, anyone should conclude that if it's not that bad, why there are so many immigrants from Cuba, and no Cuban outside Cuba wants to go back? Seriously, why people would risk their lives crossing the ocean on any piece of floating stuff if the country isn't bad? Why >10% of the Cuban population had/attempted to immigrate to the US, a lot of them putting their lives in serious danger? Are they suicidal? Are they simply deluded with the American way of life?

User avatar
Thesh
Made to Fuck Dinosaurs
Posts: 6598
Joined: Tue Jan 12, 2010 1:55 am UTC
Location: Colorado

Re: Acceptance of Corruption and Communism.

Postby Thesh » Sun Jan 04, 2015 3:39 am UTC

I assumed American, because your usage of the word "communism" is what I tend to expect from someone with an American education.
Summum ius, summa iniuria.

elasto
Posts: 3778
Joined: Mon May 10, 2010 1:53 am UTC

Re: Acceptance of Corruption and Communism.

Postby elasto » Sun Jan 04, 2015 10:06 am UTC

Like others, I think your ire is being misdirected. I think you are railing against the corruption inherent to totalitarian regimes whose only goal is to maintain power. There's no reason a fascist regime couldn't have all the failings you describe. And there's no reason that a left-wing regime voted into power in a liberal democracy couldn't ruthlessly purge corruption.

Yes, it's important to dilute power as much as possible as a natural antiseptic to corruption, and a capitalist free market helps with that to an extent, but we're at the point now technologically where other means to 'return power to the people' are possible - ones that could work equally as well for an ideologically left-wing populace as a right-wing one. For example, all major laws and policy shifts could be ratified via country-wide referendums mediated online.

You risk a 'tyranny of the majority' there though - where politicians are now unable to make politically unpopular decisions that are none-the-less the right thing for the long-term health of the country (eg. people generally overplay the downsides and underestimate the benefits of immigration) - but surely some workable balance could be found.

Beliar
Posts: 10
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2015 1:42 am UTC

Re: Acceptance of Corruption and Communism.

Postby Beliar » Sun Jan 04, 2015 3:30 pm UTC

elasto wrote:Like others, I think your ire is being misdirected. I think you are railing against the corruption inherent to totalitarian regimes whose only goal is to maintain power. There's no reason a fascist regime couldn't have all the failings you describe. And there's no reason that a left-wing regime voted into power in a liberal democracy couldn't ruthlessly purge corruption.

Yes, it's important to dilute power as much as possible as a natural antiseptic to corruption, and a capitalist free market helps with that to an extent, but we're at the point now technologically where other means to 'return power to the people' are possible - ones that could work equally as well for an ideologically left-wing populace as a right-wing one. For example, all major laws and policy shifts could be ratified via country-wide referendums mediated online.

You risk a 'tyranny of the majority' there though - where politicians are now unable to make politically unpopular decisions that are none-the-less the right thing for the long-term health of the country (eg. people generally overplay the downsides and underestimate the benefits of immigration) - but surely some workable balance could be found.


Wow! Very nice point!

Letting the people decide everything surely isn't a good idea. To some degree any democracy is a little bit a 'tyranny of the majority' though, because the popular opinions surely have influence on the decisions of the politicians, but fortunately, in the developed countries most of them nowadays seems to be making the 'right' decisions when it comes to minorities (of course there's a long way to go though). It seems people are tolerating 'unpopular' decisions that benefits minorities a little bit better, but I really doubt most people would make those decisions if they had the power to do so. And of course, in a very intolerant democratic society, there's no need for an 'online referendum' to have a very strict 'tyranny of the majority'.

There's a problem with 'tolerating unpopular decisions' though, I mean, a society should tolerate decisions in favor of minorities to some degree (as long as things doesn't turn 180°), but not unpopular decisions focused on personal/political interests. It seems to me that the society is simply more tolerant to 'anything', and not because they know what is the right thing to do.

Another point worth of mentioning is that the immigrants in US are quite 'valuable' from a political standpoint. It's the same with the homosexuals. I wonder what was the decisive factors for the decisions benefiting them... there's 'political interest', 'popularity', and 'the right thing to do', perhaps the decisions are simply based on if the 'political benefits' overweights 'society disapproval', and 'the right thing to do' have absolutely no influence on their decisions.

With that said, I agree on using technology (as long as it's as safe as it gets, perhaps using ATM-like machines) to give the people the power to decide a lot of things, except when the decisions affects other groups of people and in other cases where people definitely will make biased decisions for personal benefits. I think a system like that could be used extensively and selectively, for example, people could have the final decision to increase/decrease the speed limit of a freeway. That would be awesome. Of course I'm not talking about people typing the speed limit, that would be dumb (and possibly you'd need jet engines to reach the maximum allowed), but you know, let the people who actually are affected by something decide what's better for them.

Thank you for your amazing reply :). Much appreciated.

moiraemachy
Posts: 190
Joined: Wed Jan 04, 2012 9:47 pm UTC

Re: Acceptance of Corruption and Communism.

Postby moiraemachy » Mon Jan 05, 2015 12:53 am UTC

Beliar wrote:Although two wrongs doesn't make a right, in terms of dignity, things went downhill in Brazil after the dictatorship, and there are lots of statistics to back that up.
Brazilian here, calling you on your bullshit. Here's statistics. That is, unless your definition of "dignity" is "not paying lip service to communism".

It is also pretty reasonable to argue that our economy was much closer to socialism in the dictatorship: public companies playing a huge role in the economy, high taxes, a lot of subsides, exemptions to "strategic sectors" and closed economy.

And communism is such a meaningless word in Brazil anyway. You get all sorts of people identifying as communist: from full blown totalitarian wannabes to people who just think the current wealth distribution sucks. Same with socialism.

Beliar
Posts: 10
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2015 1:42 am UTC

Re: Acceptance of Corruption and Communism.

Postby Beliar » Mon Jan 05, 2015 4:51 am UTC

moiraemachy wrote:
Beliar wrote:Although two wrongs doesn't make a right, in terms of dignity, things went downhill in Brazil after the dictatorship, and there are lots of statistics to back that up.
Brazilian here, calling you on your bullshit. Here's statistics. That is, unless your definition of "dignity" is "not paying lip service to communism".

It is also pretty reasonable to argue that our economy was much closer to socialism in the dictatorship: public companies playing a huge role in the economy, high taxes, a lot of subsides, exemptions to "strategic sectors" and closed economy.

And communism is such a meaningless word in Brazil anyway. You get all sorts of people identifying as communist: from full blown totalitarian wannabes to people who just think the current wealth distribution sucks. Same with socialism.

No respect huh?

Just one question: Do you consider the public services provided by your communist government any good? I mean, do you even use them? I guess not. I could bet you never even entered a public hospital.

I'm going to find that study showing the quantity of Brazilians who die waiting for medical care in the public hospitals doorways. If you think that's a dignified way of dying though, then I'm afraid it won't help much.

This thread is not for discussing Brazil/communism though, as I said before I think things will change dramatically in Brazil pretty soon, so for an analysis on 'nowadays'' communism I'd rather discuss Venezuela which is a much better example on the method of operation of the 'modern' communists.

I'm also not going to discuss HDI since some statistics are completely tampered, for example the statistics on education... here are the facts:
1- To receive financial aid from the social welfare program (which pays 25-50USD/mo to 25% of the population*) the children must attend school
(For external sauce, google for "Bolsa Familia")
2- Some states (e.g.: Saint Paul) have an education system where the student always advance in grade, no matter what they learn, yes I know it's hard to believe.
(http://www.globalpost.com/dispatch/news ... -know-math)

*-And before you say "prices in Brazil are lower than in US", nope, they're in fact higher, 5 liter of water for example costs 3.30USD
(http://www.paodeacucar.com.br/produto/66227)
and an iPhone 6 (not the plus model) costs 1200-1500USD
(http://www.pontofrio.com.br/TelefoneseC ... -_-3885525)

I'm not even mentioning the fact that the literacy criteria is simply ridiculous. I could even train a monkey to be 'literate' according to their criteria.

I'd like to let the other people reading this thread know that the Brazilian government employ people to spread communist propaganda on the internet, and I hope this forum is safe when it comes to anonymity because I don't want to end up like the Brazilian bloggers who were 'mysteriously' killed after posting the truth about the Brazilian government, and before someone says I'm paranoid, here are 3 names for you to google (I don't think you'll find content in English, but if you know Spanish, chances are you can read Portuguese):
-Décio Sá
-Marcos Guerra
-Cristiano Correia

I'm not going to discuss this further. There is enough data here and all over the internet for anyone to conclude for themselves. Personally I wouldn't trust blindingly on the statistics provided by the Brazilian governments (which are used to calc the HDI), specially because when I open my eyes what I SEE is the opposite of what the government says I should be seeing. And I rather believe my eyes.

Anyway, people believe what they want to. Arguments won't change that easily (don't look at the creationists now) :P.

User avatar
bentheimmigrant
Dotcor Good Poster
Posts: 1366
Joined: Fri Apr 25, 2008 9:01 pm UTC
Location: UK

Re: Acceptance of Corruption and Communism.

Postby bentheimmigrant » Mon Jan 05, 2015 11:25 am UTC

On education:
1. A mandatory education enforced using some sort of financial mechanism is fairly standard. What point are you trying to make with that?
2. In the UK, students always advance to the next year of education. There is no bureaucratic method of holding kids back, that I'm aware of.

On prices, the cost of luxuries does not tell us anything particularly useful on the price of goods.
You have generally failed to present any kind of comparative argument. If you're making assertions about pre and post-dictatorship Brazil, then show how it's gotten worse. Especially if you're going to reject statistics.

If you're going to criticise the ability of a developing country to provide public services, show how they could be doing. How does Brazil compare to India, for example, on hospital waiting deaths?
"Comment is free, but facts are sacred" - C.P. Scott

Beliar
Posts: 10
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2015 1:42 am UTC

Re: Acceptance of Corruption and Communism.

Postby Beliar » Mon Jan 05, 2015 3:20 pm UTC

bentheimmigrant wrote:On education:
1. A mandatory education enforced using some sort of financial mechanism is fairly standard. What point are you trying to make with that?
2. In the UK, students always advance to the next year of education. There is no bureaucratic method of holding kids back, that I'm aware of.

On prices, the cost of luxuries does not tell us anything particularly useful on the price of goods.
You have generally failed to present any kind of comparative argument. If you're making assertions about pre and post-dictatorship Brazil, then show how it's gotten worse. Especially if you're going to reject statistics.

If you're going to criticise the ability of a developing country to provide public services, show how they could be doing. How does Brazil compare to India, for example, on hospital waiting deaths?

The point is the statistics on education are used to calculate the HDI, and the quality of education doesn't seem to matter. In Brazil the public education is a shame, whenever people have the money they pay private education for their children. There's an international ranking on education if you want to confirm how poor is the public education in Brazil. (I'm not going to link that, google is your friend)

Is water a luxury? Fyi, tap water is considered safe for drinking country only in some regions of the country, and I can't find a more basic item than potable water. If you consider water a luxury, just browse that supermarket website for other items, you'll find that all of them are substantially pricier than in US. But even if it weren't, I just said that to let you know that the welfare program that 'revolutionized the country' and 'eradicated the misery' pays only enough to buy 7-15 5-liter bottles of water in a month. How generous. (And yes, UN consider that enough)

Anyway, I'm tired of this discussion, I'm only wasting my time here...

Believe
in
whatever
you
want

Note: All the links above are on the first page of a Youtube search for "public hospital Brazil". Of course that's all a big lie, they're all actors, yeah.

Last post. Moderators can lock this if they wish. I'd like to thank everyone who genuinely contributed to the discussion with a open-mind.

User avatar
CorruptUser
Posts: 10548
Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2009 10:12 pm UTC

Re: Acceptance of Corruption and Communism.

Postby CorruptUser » Mon Jan 05, 2015 4:20 pm UTC

Are you sure removing these guys won't result in someone worse?

User avatar
Zamfir
I built a novelty castle, the irony was lost on some.
Posts: 7604
Joined: Wed Aug 27, 2008 2:43 pm UTC
Location: Nederland

Re: Acceptance of Corruption and Communism.

Postby Zamfir » Mon Jan 05, 2015 4:54 pm UTC

Even before we get to that question: who are we outsiders to decide on that in the first place? That's what elections are for.

Brazil just had elections, and the ruling coalition and president managed to hold on. That doesn't make them angels, and there is surely plenty of room for justified complaints. Corruption, problems with health care, with the economy.

But 'removing those guys', which I take as a euphimism for a coup? Let alone Beliar's hopeful deaths? To justify such measures, you need a much, much stronger case than just believing that other leaders would be better.

moiraemachy
Posts: 190
Joined: Wed Jan 04, 2012 9:47 pm UTC

Re: Acceptance of Corruption and Communism.

Postby moiraemachy » Mon Jan 05, 2015 7:44 pm UTC

Beliar wrote:Just one question: Do you consider the public services provided by your communist government any good? I mean, do you even use them? I guess not. I could bet you never even entered a public hospital.
Let me be clear: I do not think our public services are decent. My problem is when you say that our situation went downhill after the end of the dictatorship. This implies you thought something was better before. And yet, you failed to show what got worse. You only showed that now, it sucks.

Thing is, it sucked even more before. Seriously, go check some statistics. You are kinda into something when you say the average public hospital and the average public school got worse, but it actually happened for a good reason: these people who die at in public hospitals didn't have hospitals to die at before, and these kids who learn little from our crappy public schools just didn't have schools to go to before. This is because the system was expanded to neglected parts of the population, and many moved from rural areas to the cities, putting a great toll on public services which were exclusive to a richer part of the population. While this happened, the rich moved in mass to the private healthcare and education.

If you compare healthcare and education (or really anything) of the same economic stratum of the population, you'll see, clear as day, that it improved almost everywhere. The only exception I can think of, maybe, is lower middle class who lived in a big city, and got lucky enough to live near decent public schools and okayish public hospitals.

Look, I'd love to complain, for example, about Lula and his party's bullshit with you (for example, they willfully misrepresent economic facts in the most populist way possible), but until you accept that things actually did get better for the majority of the population during his government, I can't have this conversation. Because you are essentially saying that Brazilians reelected these guys because they are stupid and can't see the country going downhill.

Beliar wrote:I'd like to let the other people reading this thread know that the Brazilian government employ people to spread communist propaganda on the internet
Ehh, kinda sorta, the government has a advertisement fund which is spent with among all the media, and it is divided with supposedly fair criteria. Naturally, they game the system to help people on their side of the political spectrum. Bullshit, yeah, but not exactly "paying people to spread communism".

Beliar wrote: before someone says I'm paranoid, here are 3 names for you to google (I don't think you'll find content in English, but if you know Spanish, chances are you can read Portuguese):
-Décio Sá
-Marcos Guerra
-Cristiano Correia
Yeah, this does happen, and it is fucking scary, but not really evidence there is some sort of communist murder machine going on. This is a bunch of unconnected cases of some powerful person killing opposition. Since our country has a ridiculously high murder rate, this is, sadly, expected.

You can, however, be overtly conservative in Brazil without consequences. The country's most popular blogger is conservative, and this guy actually ran (but lost) for deputy in the state of São Paulo. FYI, those are "privatizing beams". Yes, that's his actual campaign ad. Your safety in Brazil depends on you not directly stepping into powerful people's shoes, not on your ideology.
Last edited by moiraemachy on Tue Jan 06, 2015 6:21 am UTC, edited 1 time in total.

Tyndmyr
Posts: 11443
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2012 8:38 pm UTC

Re: Acceptance of Corruption and Communism.

Postby Tyndmyr » Mon Jan 05, 2015 8:11 pm UTC

Zamfir wrote:But 'removing those guys', which I take as a euphimism for a coup? Let alone Beliar's hopeful deaths? To justify such measures, you need a much, much stronger case than just believing that other leaders would be better.


Why?

User avatar
bentheimmigrant
Dotcor Good Poster
Posts: 1366
Joined: Fri Apr 25, 2008 9:01 pm UTC
Location: UK

Re: Acceptance of Corruption and Communism.

Postby bentheimmigrant » Mon Jan 05, 2015 8:22 pm UTC

Because election gives them legitimacy?
"Comment is free, but facts are sacred" - C.P. Scott

Tyndmyr
Posts: 11443
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2012 8:38 pm UTC

Re: Acceptance of Corruption and Communism.

Postby Tyndmyr » Mon Jan 05, 2015 8:30 pm UTC

bentheimmigrant wrote:Because election gives them legitimacy?


Hell, US elections are pretty fair by any objective measure, with fraud being at least...relatively low compared to a great many other locales. But still, a huge pile of people don't vote at all, and even among those who do, allegations of unfairness and expressions of dislike are routine.

I understand that other countries have elections that are viewed as less legitimate than that.

So...meh.

User avatar
CorruptUser
Posts: 10548
Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2009 10:12 pm UTC

Re: Acceptance of Corruption and Communism.

Postby CorruptUser » Mon Jan 05, 2015 8:44 pm UTC

I'm not claiming removing a foreign elected official is morally acceptable or not, just that I'm more of the opinion that if the end result is worse, why even waste your time with the moral calculus?

User avatar
PolakoVoador
Posts: 1028
Joined: Fri Jun 10, 2011 11:11 pm UTC
Location: Brazil

Re: Acceptance of Corruption and Communism.

Postby PolakoVoador » Mon Jan 05, 2015 9:02 pm UTC

Tyndmyr wrote:
bentheimmigrant wrote:Because election gives them legitimacy?


Hell, US elections are pretty fair by any objective measure, with fraud being at least...relatively low compared to a great many other locales. But still, a huge pile of people don't vote at all, and even among those who do, allegations of unfairness and expressions of dislike are routine.

I understand that other countries have elections that are viewed as less legitimate than that.

So...meh.


In Brazilian elections, vote is obligatory, which means usually around 80% of registered voters showing up.

Zamfir wrote:Even before we get to that question: who are we outsiders to decide on that in the first place? That's what elections are for.

Brazil just had elections, and the ruling coalition and president managed to hold on. That doesn't make them angels, and there is surely plenty of room for justified complaints. Corruption, problems with health care, with the economy.

But 'removing those guys', which I take as a euphimism for a coup? Let alone Beliar's hopeful deaths? To justify such measures, you need a much, much stronger case than just believing that other leaders would be better.


With Dilma's victory at these last elections, the Workers Party is going to its fourth consecutive presidential term. That's 16 years of holding on.

User avatar
Zamfir
I built a novelty castle, the irony was lost on some.
Posts: 7604
Joined: Wed Aug 27, 2008 2:43 pm UTC
Location: Nederland

Re: Acceptance of Corruption and Communism.

Postby Zamfir » Tue Jan 06, 2015 8:53 am UTC


With Dilma's victory at these last elections, the Workers Party is going to its fourth consecutive presidential term. That's 16 years of holding on

It's a long time, but not that exceptional. Looking at my own country, the Christian Democrats supplied the 2 prime ministers from 1977 to 1994. In various coalitions, though. The Christian Democrats in Belgium supplied (5 different) prime ministers from 1974 to 1999. Juncker was prime minister of Luxembourg from 1995 to 2013, and his 2 predecessors since 1979 came from the same party.

The Tories ruled the UK from 1979 to 1997, without coalition partners. The president of France from 1995 to 2012 came from the UMP. Helmut Kohl was chancellor of Germany from 1982 to 1998. After the war, 3 CDU chancellors ruled Germany from 1946 to 1969.

The extreme example would be Tage Erlander, who was prime minister of Sweden from 1946 to 1969, to be followed by his self-chosen successor Olof Palme until 1976. Palme returned as prime minister in 1982, until he was killed in 1986. So for Beliar there is a happy ending to this story.

User avatar
Frankenstein
Posts: 44
Joined: Tue Jan 06, 2015 10:15 am UTC

Re: Acceptance of Corruption and Communism.

Postby Frankenstein » Wed Jan 07, 2015 4:59 pm UTC

I'm from Brazil and I agree 95% with Belial.
Beliar wrote:some statistics are completely tampered

First of all, I apologize in advance for the long, but veracious rant below.

I agree that the statistics are all tampered, and of course the HDI, besides using the government statistics that are all tampered, it hardly means anything. I mean, the HDI is a dumb way of comparing quality of life, it may work for the western European countries, but you surely can't compare Brazil and USA using those numbers. You're not comparing apples and apples that way, you're not even comparing comparing apples and pears, you're comparing apples and silly putty.

The HDI takes into account life expectancy, and surely the life expectancy of the average Brazilian increased considerably, but that's not because the communists are magical beings or something, it's because of many years of vaccinations, better hygiene and sanitation (although it's still horrid), and of course the fact that the government doesn't kill people for sport. The sad fact is that the current government deludes the people into thinking they are the sole responsible for that increase in life expectancy. That's utter bullshit. The HDI also takes into account the years in school, and again, that number hardly means anything, because the public schools are very bad. Basically, the UN assumes that if you stood long enough into a classroom, then you're good to go. That's ridiculous.
moiraemachy wrote:Thing is, it sucked even more before. Seriously, go check some statistics. You are kinda into something when you say the average public hospital and the average public school got worse, but it actually happened for a good reason: these people who die at in public hospitals didn't have hospitals to die at before, and these kids who learn little from our crappy public schools just didn't have schools to go to before. This is because the system was expanded to neglected parts of the population, and many moved from rural areas to the cities, putting a great toll on public services which were exclusive to a richer part of the population. While this happened, the rich moved in mass to the private healthcare and education.

If you compare healthcare and education (or really anything) of the same economic stratum of the population, you'll see, clear as day, that it improved almost everywhere. The only exception I can think of, maybe, is lower middle class who lived in a big city, and got lucky enough to live near decent public schools and okayish public hospitals.

Because you are essentially saying that Brazilians reelected these guys because they are stupid and can't see the country going downhill.

The country's [url]most popular blogger[/url] is conservative, and [url]this[/url] [url]guy[/url] actually ran (but lost) for deputy in the state of São Paulo. FYI, those are "privatizing beams". Yes, that's his actual campaign ad. Your safety in Brazil depends on you not directly stepping into powerful people's shoes, not on your ideology.

I agree with you moiraemachy, the public services were expanded to neglected parts of the country, and perhaps that's why the thing seems much worse now, however, the previously existent public services got worse though. And yes, most of the people who depended on those services and had the money to pay, began paying for the privates ones, however, the people who didn't have the money and had decent quality public services before, they really got screwed.

I never ever found a 'okayish' public hospital in Brazil, there are the beneficent ones that are somewhat okay, like the Beneficencia Portuguesa in Sao Paulo, but they aren't public, they simply 'take care' (sorry my english) of a few (very few) patients a year who can't pay. That's a good initiative, but hardly changes anything in a population of 200+ million. I've lived in various (developed) cities of the South and Southeast regions and I can ensure you it's impossible to find okayish public hospitals; to find them you have to go south until people start speaking Spanish ;P.

I know that our mileage possibly varies a lot, but I see things improving only in statistics that hardly means anything, and in the government propaganda, they are everywhere, TV, radio, newspapers, magazines, internet. With my own eyes though, I've only seen things getting worse overall (few things gets better, most gets worse/doesn't change).

Unlike Belial though, I don't blame communism alone. I agree the communist approach of our government has a lot of fault, and it's ridiculous all these communist parties we have since it's proven that communism doesn't work, but the worse problem is corruption. However, the cause of that corruption is the people, there are good minds in Brazil, but unfortunately a lot of people (i'd say 2/3) are very ignorant. Of course they see the country getting better, but they see that on TV :mrgreen:.

Seriously, I wouldn't call the people who re-elected the very politicians involved in the Mensalao scandal anything but 'stupid'. Stupidity is like a trait of the Brazilian population though, perhaps the other readers of this thread are not aware, but in the 90's, F. Collor, at that time the president of Brazil, basically stole (ok, " "confiscated" ") the money of all bank accounts of all Brazilians; yes, he stole the whole country. He was impeached after that. However, surprisingly, he was elected again, and even today he is a senator of Brazil (and is still stealing). I'd call that pretty stupid. And that's only a single example of the stupidity of the population, like electing an illiterate and ignorant clown, and many, many other things you only expect to see in a "Dumb&Dumber" movie. Again, you can't generalize and there are lots of good people in Brazil. I'm just saying that Brazil is this crappy country mostly because of the population. A very smart guy once said: "In a democracy, the people have the government they deserve.". No truer words have been said. Ever.
Also, another smart guy once said that "democracy means that my ignorance is just as good as your knowledge", so, 1/3 of the population are basically paying the price for having 2/3 of ignorant compatriots. Or should I say comrades? :).

Also, of course the government is not going to kill the most notable anti-government blogger. That will do more harm than good. However, anyone less known who start to draw any attention for the truth, is almost guaranteed to end up dead. If I wanted to kill myself, I'd start a blog against the government. It's more guaranteed than jumping from the golden gate bridge.
bentheimmigrant wrote:On education:
1. A mandatory education enforced using some sort of financial mechanism is fairly standard. What point are you trying to make with that?
2. In the UK, students always advance to the next year of education. There is no bureaucratic method of holding kids back, that I'm aware of.

On prices, the cost of luxuries does not tell us anything particularly useful on the price of goods.
You have generally failed to present any kind of comparative argument. If you're making assertions about pre and post-dictatorship Brazil, then show how it's gotten worse. Especially if you're going to reject statistics.

If you're going to criticise the ability of a developing country to provide public services, show how they could be doing. How does Brazil compare to India, for example, on hospital waiting deaths?

The problem with not holding back the students until they learn something is they don't learn anything. I doubt the students in UK leave the high school knowing nothing more than the 4 basic operations in math. I've worked many years in a firm that hired a large number of young people in a medium town in the state of Sao Paulo (the most developed), most of them were graduated from public school (high school), and you wouldn't believe the number of them who couldn't even divide, and one girl couldn't even sum/subtract large numbers. That makes me wonder... home education is forbidden in Brazil, however, when my parents couldn't pay a private school when I was very young, and after experiencing the utter chaos of public schools, they decided to let me out of school, and both of them work, so, I just stayed at home, some of the time reading books because my father has a huge collection of them (and my grandfather also), I even started doing courses by correspondence and I liked to watch the 'telecurso' (education on TV) when I was young, but I ended up giving up on them, the fact is, on my first year without going to school, I was already reading about the laws of thermodynamics and discussing it with my grandpa (German-born/American retired engineer), while some people graduated from high school don't even know how to sum. In practice though that was not 'very' good because I don't even have a diploma of the elementary school, so I never had any job opportunity in Brazil, except for a friend of mine, but my salary was the minimum wage, so nowadays I work for people/firms in Europe, because some of them couldn't care less about your Brazilian diploma; they care about what you can do.

----

Water is a luxury? I have to buy bottled water for drinking and the price is simply ridiculous. Plus I can confirm that EVERYTHING is much more expensive than in USA, and you also have to take into account that the minimum wage in Brazil is 280USD and the mean is around 400USD per MONTH! Also, this is another polemical number, because the Ministry of Work has a much different number than the IBGE (Brazilian Institute of Statistics), the Ministry of Work says it's R$1,166, source:
http://www.brasil.gov.br/economia-e-emp ... r-1-166-84
While the IBGE says it's R$2,055:
http://noticias.bol.uol.com.br/enquetes ... lidade.htm
They are both governmental entities. That's ridiculous. And obviously the mean (average) means absolutely NOTHING because all the public employees have ridiculously high salaries and all kinds of benefits (like, thousands a month to buy "buttons for their shirts" (seriously)) that summed up are so high that even Berlusconi would be jealous. So, these salaries seriously increase the 'average'. When you talk about MODE though, the predominant range by very very far is between 280-350USD/mo.

I don't think the country is getting any better, the entire public machine stinks, did you know that recently some Judges (who also earn unbelievably high salaries) they even sued the state claiming they work in slavery conditions? That seems like a joke. Even knowing the Brazilian reality I wouldn't believe that should someone tell me. Unfortunately that's true. How these guys are judges? Seriously, they must think the holocaust was fair because even my pet nematode can tell what's wrong or right better than these Judges. And besides having huge salaries, they are also corrupt as hell - almost no exception... If that's being a slave, I want sooo bad to be a slave.
Not only they know absolutely nothing about slavery, but saying they are slaves "should" offend the descendants of the 'true' slaves in this country. That didn't happen though, they didn't seem to care. In fact no one seemed to care. People accept anything in this country, the government shit on their faces and they are like "m'okay".
NOTE: I'm not active in this forum any longer.

User avatar
Quizatzhaderac
Posts: 1821
Joined: Sun Oct 19, 2008 5:28 pm UTC
Location: Space Florida

Re: Acceptance of Corruption and Communism.

Postby Quizatzhaderac » Thu Jan 08, 2015 10:51 pm UTC

Beliar wrote:I would like to know your opinions on this subject and it's not mandatory, but I'd appreciate if you could tell where you live (even if only continent, but country is preferred), and your political influences.
Yourself as well please. I'm an American who briefly lived in England.
what communism is in practice
That word means so many different things in theory and practice you're going to have a hard time having a coherent conversation about it, especially internationally.
what kind of influences (political and from society) people who support corrupt communist governments had
Without knowing exactly what you're responding to I'd just say they don't see communism as the cause of the corruption. I have a Belorussian friend who's attitude of Russian history is that they had royalist czars, then communist czars, now capitalist ones.

That or they see the problems as caused by stupidity, not malace.
those countries (+Cuba) as a tourist, you don't get a real picture of the actual situation. The touristic places are basically theater stages. If you really want to know how things works in such countries, you have to visit a public hospital or school for example. Specially in hospitals, there's absolutely no dignity.
Cuban health care is a bad example, most international metrics put them above America (and way above the other countries you mentioned). There are , of course, other problems in Cuba
For the people actually inclined to become criminals, I'd say that [20 year sentence for mass murder] is an incentive though. I could be wrong but I don't see how that specific rule of 'not punishing criminals' reduce the crime
The first thing is that deterrents don't really scale, the threat of twenty years makes people think twice, but 40 years doesn't make them think a third time. The second thing is that people are products of their environments and harsh environments produce harsh people.
communism is still thriving in a rather 'sneaky' fashion in various countries
In America there's a long tradition calling a variety of things communism/socialism to vilify them. Very recently with objections to universal health care. We also have a history with social Darwinism (as do some other developed countries).
One of the most cruel things I've ever heard is that in Brazil they stole all the money of the public school meal
André Bauer, former governor of South Carolina wrote:[My Grandmother] told me as a small child to quit feeding stray animals, You know why? Because they breed. You're facilitating the problem if you give an animal or a person ample food supply.
To be fair to Mr. Bauer, he was only proposing to make lunches contingent on drug tests and parent-school involvement. A number of US cities also have laws forbidden feeding the homeless. I'm aware there are also plenty of reasons it''s better to be poor in the US than Brazil.

My point is that the question "Should the government help the poor" isn't politically settled in the U.S. You seem to be saying "It is right to provide X , it's worth taxing the population to pay for X, and it's terrible the money for X is being stolen." So I'm guessing think the government should provide most education, most health care, food for the poor, but it shouldn't run the oil companies or control all the land?
Last edited by Quizatzhaderac on Wed Jun 03, 2015 8:25 pm UTC, edited 1 time in total.
The thing about recursion problems is that they tend to contain other recursion problems.

User avatar
PolakoVoador
Posts: 1028
Joined: Fri Jun 10, 2011 11:11 pm UTC
Location: Brazil

Re: Acceptance of Corruption and Communism.

Postby PolakoVoador » Fri Jan 09, 2015 2:52 pm UTC

While re-electing Collor for anything is an amazingly stupid move, I find it funny your numbers about "1/3 of the population paying the price for the stupidity of the other 2/3". Just remember that the last election had an almost 50-50 result. It seems that a lot of sutpid people agree with you :P

User avatar
Frankenstein
Posts: 44
Joined: Tue Jan 06, 2015 10:15 am UTC

Re: Acceptance of Corruption and Communism.

Postby Frankenstein » Fri Jan 09, 2015 4:48 pm UTC

PolakoVoador wrote:While re-electing Collor for anything is an amazingly stupid move, I find it funny your numbers about "1/3 of the population paying the price for the stupidity of the other 2/3". Just remember that the last election had an almost 50-50 result. It seems that a lot of sutpid people agree with you :P


Nope, I'd say that of the 2/3 that are stupid, 1/4 aren't suicidal. Also, both coalitions are involved in all kinds of corruption. Although from what I've seen no one beats the commies :P.

You can't discuss too much about the politics in Brazil because it's a real circus (now we even have the clown! yay!).

I have contact with people from other countries and the best jokes I tell are the real stories that happens in Brazilian politics, for example: in Sao Paulo people elected "Cacareco", who is a rhino, yep, the animal. He couldn't assume the position though, I think he couldn't pass through his office door. There is also a penguin, and a chimpanzee, people say they vote on these animals (both literally and figuratively) as a protest, but the sad fact is they (the figurative ones) assume their positions and start to steal as much as they can, so, I don't know what's more retard, to elect these "animals" as protest, or to elect them genuinely thinking they would be the best politicians (hey, probably they really were much better than most of the 'men in black' ones). A nematode would be the best option though. Our politicians are so ridiculously bad that in fact a politician that does *nothing* is almost too good to be true here, because when the politicians 'work' here, they 'work' to steal the people.

Most people don't believe it, but Maluf was (re?)elected recently in Sao Paulo with the slogan "he steals but he does", as if that wasn't unbelievable enough, that slogan was plagiarized by various politicians, including Maluf, with the first appearance dating back to the 60's, when Barros was elected with that very same slogan (in PT_BR: "Rouba mas faz").
So basically, the politicians in Brazil were separated into two categories: "steals" and "steals but does". That is awesome. Things downgraded very recently though, the categories are more like "steals shitloads", "steals the whole country". I miss the days when politicians would "steal but do" stuff.

I doubt you can convince (e.g.) a German of that ridiculous reality. I have relatives in Germany and the old ones won't believe that, I've even sent an actual newspaper but it doesn't matter, it doesn't get into their heads that a country can be so stupidly corrupt and ridiculous. And that's considering their neighbors (countries) aren't that honest also (e.g.: Poland, no offense Polako). I wonder what happens if you tell that to a Japanese who had no contact with Brazil. I wouldn't even attempt that. It's likely to destroy the world due extreme cerebral explosion.

When people think about an image that represents Brazil, most of them think about football (UK), beaches, asses, carnival, Christ the Redeemer, etc.. The image that would better represent this country imho though is a clown, with a penguin under his arm, a huge bag with a "$" on the other hand, riding a rhino with its horn firmly inserted in the butt of a crash dummy that represents the people.

If someone is going to draw a cartoon of that, please add a chimpanzee holding the rhino by his tail, representing the socialist politicians. After all, we gotta be fair nowadays.

So, please don't try to defend the politics in Brazil because you'll always lose, even if we decided to solve that with a roshambow match you lose, because no one beats a rhino.

And since people seems to be somewhat fanatics in this forum, I must say again that there ARE plenty of good and decent people in Brazil and this post is abusing of freedom of speech, especially in that part about the dummy.
NOTE: I'm not active in this forum any longer.


Return to “Serious Business”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 8 guests