it does me no good to walk around with errors. i may be stubborn on points, but the second your right, or prove the issue, i flip like a flap jack, and am happy to do so. the more correct my internal model of the world is, the more effective i am in the world…

thanks…

You’re welcome, my friend.

Well I’ve learned such a lot from you, and no kidding–so it’s only fair and just that I be able to teach you a bit in return, that’s what I say! 🙂 😉

The ultimate goal of the socialist society was to create a new person, the New Soviet Person, whose entire consciousness was shaped by the socialist environment. This new person would be enlightened, unburdened by psychological complexes, unblinded by distinctions of nationality and gender. They would live simply but cleanly, and their work lives and home lives would be stitched together seamlessly. Although the socialist person would be created by new forms of culture, they would be recognizable by their healthy bodies as well.

The state was often presumptuous in declaring that socialist consciousness had been created. The 1930 closing of the Zhenotdel (Women’s Section) was explained by the fact that its welfare activities were no longer needed. Social intervention could also be overbearing. In a collective society, privacy was obsolete, and no vice was beyond the judgment of the collective. This despite the fact that millions of Russians and other Soviet citizens still lived in squalor and poverty. For all the positive figures produced in reality and fiction, perhaps the most popular hero of 1929 was Ostap Bender, from Ilf and Petrov’s comic novel Twelve Chairs, an unreformed con man whose ability to “speak Soviet” helped his criminal career flourish.

my apologies, i was writing fast…

on another note
As he put it, “We need to eliminate power structures that have been built through excessive accumulation so that not only a few individuals shall control a vast magnitude of resources as is the case now.” The senior Obama proposed that the state confiscate private land and raise taxes with no upper limit. In fact, he insisted that “theoretically there is nothing that can stop the government from taxing 100% of income so long as the people get benefits from the government commensurate with their income which is taxed.”
http://www.forbes.com/forbes/2010/0927/politics-socialism-capitalism-private-enterprises-obama-business-problem_3.html

tangential historical reading:
1947: End of Rationing
http://www.soviethistory.org/index.php?page=subject&SubjectID=1947ration&Year=1947

Rationing has been referred to as the “default option of Stalinist distribution,” and for good reason. Introduced during the First World War and continued through the Civil War, it was officially imposed again from 1929 to 1935 and from 1941 to 1947. Although occasionally justified as a method of distribution more appropriate to socialism than the variety of administrative and quasi-market mechanisms it replaced, rationing represented the state’s improvisatory response to especially disastrous economic conditions, and was abolished when conditions improved. During the war, it was largely confined to urban areas and covered most essential food items such as bread, flour, vegetable oil, meat, fish, and sugar. It also was socially discriminatory, with initially four major categories — manual workers, white-collar workers, dependants, and children under 12 years of age — entitled to different levels of rations. In February 1942, a fifth category, consisting of people employed in important war industries together with scientists and technicians, was added.

and for those bored enough to diversions, you can expand to this catdir.loc.gov/catdir/samples/cam034/89025153.pdf

I understand the 3/5 compromise. The fact that it even happened was, in fact, a recognition of the existence of slavery. No one tried to pretend that there wasn’t such an institution. It’s also true–and you didn’t mention this–that the reason for it was that the north wanted the slaves not counted, while the south wanted them counted, not as votes, but as bodies for representation purposes. Their votes weren’t at issue. Their countable bodies, for enumeration (census) and representation apportionment purposes, was the issue. It had nothing to do with how they would vote, because they wouldn’t. They were just to be counted, and figured into the numbers of how many Representatives would hold office in the House of Representatives.

Bribe-taking Russian officials could have their left hands branded under a proposed new blitz on corruption, RIA Novosti reported Tuesday.

Lawmakers from the Liberal Democratic Party want to see the letter K — a symbol for a bribe-taker — permanently etched on wrongdoers’ skin.

Party deputies Sergei Ivanov and Igor Lebedev suggested the severe measure in a new law-and-order bill due to go before Russia’s parliament, the State Duma.

They say the markings would heap shame on corrupt officials and alert Russian employers so they could refuse them jobs.

“The authors of the bill believe that branding bribe-takers with indestructible marks in a visible place to show that they have committed a crime will enable employers to refuse them employment,” the centrist party, which holds 40 of 450 seats in the Duma, said in a statement.

Strēlnieku visskaļāk kliedz
par 700 gadiem oppreseed tauta
Slepeni uz ilgu laiku palielinājusi nazi,
kas apvieno virves elpot

Tie ir strÄ“lnieki – kas ir ne vairāk un kurÅ¡ nav kādreiz atkal tikai savu mūžīgo godÄ«bu Will aizsargs tā patÄ«k kvÄ“lojoÅ¡s karogu.

Mūžības skartie – Touched by Eternity by Aleksandrs ÄŒaks

Krugman and these people they are what they are Хоть кол на голове теши.

We were all equal all right: an Engineering Designer of Category III, being employed at bureau under umbrella of, say, by Ministry of Heavy Machinery – either on a factory in rural Siberia or in Moscow-vicinity Yaroslavl was making exactly same 130 rubles a month. No check, just a clerk at the window at the “payment booth” would give you the bills after you sign in the book. Unifying to extreme…

Oh boy, I feel nauseated. I’ll go get my dark-roasted coffee by TJ now, to slap me back to glorious relity. At least for the time being – while krugmans’s dream is still a delusional drema.

actually not… the 3/5s is discussed in Douglasses speech i reference in the prior post.

the 3/5s compromise was because the south wanted to count the slaves as full humans with full votes to count that their owners would vote for them.

the issue here was that the north argued that property cant vote… so the south, which had a lot of slaves, was to be politically cut out because without the blacks vote being voted by the slaver, they didnt have any majorities.

the arguments got quite far out. because the north, which was more mechanized, then countered that if a slave has a vote, his harvestign machine gets one, and every farmer can vote every machine he has on property, just as south slave holder wanted to vote his harverster.

the reason that slavery ended here is for the same reason that they are removing religion. judeo christian religion pushes slavery out as a choice as over time one cant reconcile gods love of the INDIVIDUAL and their UNIQUENESS being sacred.

the state cant enslave the people and take all their property if they are judeo christian. the equality mentality has to be perverted to a mass idea so that the parts are interchangeable, and then erasing some and making some becomes just a supply demand object thing. you can work them to death the way you work any property, any MEANS OF PRODUCTION, only the few sociopathic leaders who own it all against all comers get to be special

You do realize that the Chinese, Japanese, Arabs, Other Islamic states, Russians, and Africans all still practice slavery? [some of them child slavery]

Your preaching to the wrong people, as you are referring to a time period when most of us were not there, and to people who planted the seeds of the destruction of slavery.

why are you not right now in China holding up a sign about their few thousand year history of slavery? why are you not over at a porno palace run by the russian mob in which the women are cattle? why are you not in UAE, on the street with a sign denouncing the slaves of the princes?

because you would rather protest what happened 200 years ago in the safety of your home rather than actually do something about some condition that exists now!!!

I should point out that the first black elected to the (progressive) democrat party happened in 1935.

The first black elected to an office in Russia was this year!

Look to this list and see that your side is the racist side! i can also show you the pinkerston trial testimony where democrats cut her breasts off to prevent those in landry parish from voting radical republican.

and i should also point out that the progress that was made below as completly rolled back by the socialist progressives, which is your side! they sided against the southern black man who came north and took jobs: ergo the “white mans union”. something the left liberal progressive communist labor movement was offering as a product to join. having ZERO morals they work whatever power base they think they can rile up (like you) to give them power.

U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
FIRST BLACKS WERE ALL REPUBLICANS

John Willis Menard (1838-1893); Republican — Louisiana; Term: 1868

Joseph Rainey (1832-1887); Republican — South Carolina; Term:1870-1879

Jefferson F. Long (1836-1901); Republican — Georgia;
Term: 1870-1871

Robert C. De Large (1842-1874); Republican — South Carolina; Term: 1871-1873

Robert B. Elliott (1842-1884); Republican — South Carolina; Term: 1871-1874

Benjamin S. Turner (1825-1894); Republican — Alabama; Term: 1871-1873

Josiah T. Walls (1842-1905); Republican — Florida;
Terms: 1871-1873, 1873-1875, 1875-1876

Richard H. Cain (1825-1887); Republican — South Carolina; Terms: 1873-1875, 1877-1879

John R. Lynch (1847-1939); Republican — Mississippi;
Terms: 1873-1877, 1882-1883

James T. Rapier (1837-1883); Republican — Alabama;
Term: 1873-1875

Alonzo J. Ransier (1834-1882); Republican — South Carolina; Term: 1873-1875

Jeremiah Haralson (1846-1916); Republican — Alabama; Term: 1875-1877

John Adams Hyman (1840-1891); Republican — North Carolina; Term: 1875-1877

Charles E. Nash (1844-1913); Republican — Louisiana;
Term: 1875-1877

Robert Smalls (1839-1915); Republican — South Carolina; Terms: 1875-1879, 1882-1883, 1884-1887

James E. O’Hara (1844-1905); Republican — North Carolina; Term: 1883-1887

Henry P. Cheatham (1857-1935); Republican — North Carolina; Term: 1889-1893

John Mercer Langston (1829-1897); Republican — Virginia; Term: 1890-1891

Thomas E. Miller (1849-1938); Republican — South Carolina; Term: 1890-1891 (He was adopted by slaves)

Slaves who adopted a white man! who grew up to become a republican in the house!

George W. Murray (1853-1926); Republican — South Carolina; Terms: 1893-1895, 1896-1897

George Henry White (1852-1918); Republican — North Carolina; Term: 1897-1901

U.S. SENATE — FIRST BLACKS WERE ALL REPUBLICANS:

Hiram Rhodes Revels (1822-1901); Republican — Mississippi; Term: 1870-1871

Blanche Bruce (1841-1898); Republican — Mississippi;
Term: 1875-1881

AND DEMOCRATS?

Arthur Wergs Mitchell / Democrat Representative — Illinois Term: 1935—1943

Democrats started the Ku Klux Klan (KKK) that became the terrorist arm of the Democratic Party.

While Republicans fought to end slavery, Democrats fought to expand slavery.

and you arent too bright, since you fail to notice that if slavery was the norm and the desired end, it woudl have been easyier to put it in the constitution.

but it was the southern slave states that threatened the union during the signing of the declaration, and later with the civil war.

you should take the time to read Douglas’s speech in Scotland (16 pages long), as to how the constitution and other things amounted to an ANTI SLAVERY missive when, as you said, slavery was the norm.

with Wilberforce in England the founders in the US, slavery as a norm became an evil. However, Germany, Russia, china, Cuba, and other places practiced work camp slavery. Our liberal leaders ahve seen fit to overturn the anti labor parts of the US laws to allow prisoners to be cheap labor, as in Germany. (van Jones the liberal wants to expand this gulag system (his words) and connect it to the economic system).

I fail to see your point unless the point is that no country which starts imperfectly can be considered ok in your eyes, and has to have a imperfect bloody revolution with millions dead to make it right. the civil war does not count, and the continued crimes of the other countries, despite the modern era being now, and the prior era being more primitive.

your basically arguing that since america once had slavery, its no good… and can never be good. so the solution is state slavery of all men, and their labor be given to a few white men in power!

your not the sharpest tool in the shed, are you?