The New York Times keeps whitewashing communism’s crimes

[Gerald]

Demonstrators with flags and a portrait of Vladimir Lenin participate in a rally marking the 100th anniversary of the 1917 Bolshevik Revolution in downtown Moscow on Nov. 7. (Kirill Kudryavtsev/Agence France-Presse via Getty Images)The Trump administration marked this week’s 100th anniversary of the Bolshevik Revolution by declaring a National Day for the Victims of Communism. The New York Times marked the same anniversary in a different way: by running a series of articles extolling the virtues of communism.

The irony of the series’ title, “Red Century,” seems lost on the Times’s editors. The 20th century was “red” indeed — red with the blood of communism’s victims. The death toll of communism, cited in “The Black Book of Communism,” is simply staggering: In the USSR, nearly 20 million dead; China, 65 million; Vietnam, 1 million; Cambodia, 2 million; Eastern Europe, 1 million; Africa, 1.7 million; Afghanistan, 1.5 million; North Korea: 2 million (and counting). In all, Communist regimes killed some 100 million people — roughly four times the number killed by the Nazis — making communism the most murderous ideology in human history.


https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/the-new-york-times-keeps-whitewashing-communisms-crimes/2017/11/10/129f28e0-c5c3-11e7-84bc-5e285c7f4512_story.html

Something to bait on.:hmmm:

[Skybird]

Ba-ba-ba-ba-ba-bait! BAIT! Bait bait! Bait...! Badda-bait! BAIT!

Done.

[Rockin Robbins]

Just because it's bait doesn't mean it's false. Stalin made Hitler look like an altar boy.

[Skybird]

Who, me? You must not tell me, I hate socialism like the plague. Becasue that is what it is: a plague. And it kills. In scoresd and scores. Just give it the time it needs to catch up speed.

[Delgard]

Socialism is different than Communism and the New York Times is not necessarily "all the news that is fit to print".

[Méo]

On a side note, it's not because one ideology is evil that the other extreme is the best solution.

Oversimplified reasoning seems to be quite popular these days. :shifty:

[STEED]

http://www.weirdretro.org.uk/uploads/3/8/2/1/38217449/781856_orig.jpg

[Skybird]

Socialism is different than Communism.

And I don't pull the cat's tail, I just hold it tight.

[Delgard]

Am surprised about the comments referencing my statement. Definitely not at the upper collegiate level. Maybe they were to short to be clearly understood.

Nonetheless, many countries have a bit of many things in their governing philosophy. Just as much as the NYT has in their pages.

Just because it is there, does not mean it needs addressing.

Off to my boat. :salute:

[Skybird]

There are no profound differences, at best communism is the later end stage that socialism aims to reach. In the task of blinding the public, using the term" "socialism" is a way to mean "communism" without making oneself avialable for criticism over propagating communism. But its practically the same - a rhetorical trick. You mean to be communist, but claim you are not. You can hold the cat's tail, but claim you do not pull it. Just a rhetorical trick. You could as well want to differ between "social market economy", "third ways" and "planned economy" - but it all means one and the same ends.

[Delgard]

This was not an in-depth conversation that I wanted to have. Only to say that there was a difference between the first two and, then, that there was a difference between the NYT and "all the news that is "fit" to print.

The NYT tries to promote the quality of what they print, but the the original post is an example of their failure in the definition of "fit".

I see no desire to be lured into someone else's tangeant. My message was addressed to the original author and baiting quickly gets insulting.

G'day mate,
Del

[Onkel Neal]

Who, me? You must not tell me, I hate socialism like the plague. Becasue that is what it is: a plague. And it kills. In scoresd and scores. Just give it the time it needs to catch up speed.

That's a pretty food summary, Skybird. Socialism always looks good to the people who want someone else to support them, but over time it cannot be sustained and ends up sliding into a totalitarian state.

[Skybird]

^ Yes. Always. Necessarily. When the going gets tough and the resources that are to be consumed - rich people, or ordinary people who still own a little bit more themselves than others - are exhausted, only state terror can keep the system enforced and in place and running on a little bit longer before the motor nevertheless comes to a silent death. Socialism always must be totalitarian, and tyrannic, it cannot avoid not to become that. Latest and a textbook example, is Venezuela.

[em2nought]

Of course the fake news media is fond of communism. Unfortunately, it's all the rage with millennials too.
:lost: