The BEST Guide to POLAND
Unanswered  |  Archives 
 
 
User: Guest

Home / History  % width posts: 180

Why did communism in Poland fail?


Polonius3 1,000 | 12,446
31 Jul 2011 #91
Today's communism is the PC dictatorship. Like all leftist utopias it too will collapse.
Sasha 2 | 1,083
31 Jul 2011 #92
Today's communism is the PC dictatorship.

Ouch.... :) Breivik got a PC?!
OP SeanBM 35 | 5,808
31 Jul 2011 #93
Today's communism is the PC dictatorship.

To say that makes me think you do not know what communism was/is.

You are comparing two very different things.
JonnyM 11 | 2,620
31 Jul 2011 #94
Today's communism is the PC dictatorship. Like all leftist utopias it too will collapse.

What 'PC dictatorship'?
Sasha 2 | 1,083
31 Jul 2011 #95
I believe it's from the Breivik's declaration. It's an acronym for "political correctness".
JonnyM 11 | 2,620
31 Jul 2011 #96
"political correctness".

Meaning using language in order to be positive rather than to demean. Some dictatorship!
OP SeanBM 35 | 5,808
31 Jul 2011 #97
"political correctness". Meaning using language

Even at its worst, PC is not the same as communism, to say that it is, is to demean how bad communism was.
I get that people will compare things they dislike with shocking things from history like Godwin's law, it is the same here with the use of communism rather than Nazism.

"As an online discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Nazis or Hitler approaches 1 (100%)."
that overuse of Nazi and Hitler comparisons should be avoided, because it robs the valid comparisons of their impact.

NomadatNet 1 | 457
31 Jul 2011 #98
Today's communism is the PC dictatorship. Like all leftist utopias it too will collapse.

You know where the term lefty arised first? Some say, before French revolution, some important people of the council/parliament sit on the left side as they opposed laws there.. Some say some other things..

Now, I am revealing the old real truth about where the term "lefty" came from.

In royal palaces, you know the rule: right hand for the knife or fork and left hand for the spoon. One day, a prince kid in a monarchy country was against this rule. Old aged royal lords, king, queen, etc had a serious meeting about this. They were seeing that prince kid like ordinary rubbish people outside who were always a potential rebels.. This royal prince kid too was being against a simple rule. So, they decided to make him obey the rule: right hand for knife!.. Kid was scared and used the right hand for the knife.. but, he never forgot it.. When he grew up, when he became teen, when he get stronger, he used his left hand again for the knife.. This time, royals responded by more physical force, and beated him.. He got silent again and kept using right hand for knife for a year or two more.. When he got stronger, he used left hand for the knife... this time, no other royals were able to do anything to him as he was grown, stronger.. he got power and moved to another country, a colony of kingdom, made it independent of kingdom and started a spoon-knife revolution there.. new rule was, from then on, everybody would be using left hand for the knife instead of right hand.. .. His name? Unknown. But, his nick given to him by people in his home kingdom was "lefty"...

..

.

.

.

(truth is he was a left-hand one - he was having trouble in using his right hand.. but, this started an enlightment, scientific developments etc too in his new country while his home monarchy country stayed unenlightened, they kept the rule of using always right hand for the knife.)
JonnyM 11 | 2,620
31 Jul 2011 #99
Now, I am revealing the old real truth about where the term "lefty" came from

It's actually comes from the seating arrangement at les Etats Generales.
NomadatNet 1 | 457
31 Jul 2011 #100
It is the story of elites..

(of course, my imaginary story too above was given in elite, royal story - but, the reality was anonymous actually. my story. not copied & paste anywhere.. i did mean there that "left"ism is about enlightment, not superior, but, awareness, mind clarification - learning their existence of left hand people too., and this knowledge makes people social.. So, royal palaces with strict rules are actually asocial places.)

So, leftism isn't utopia thing.
JonnyM 11 | 2,620
31 Jul 2011 #101
Hmmmm. Leftism and rightism both have their pluses and minuses - but too much social engineering tends to turn out badly.
NomadatNet 1 | 457
31 Jul 2011 #102
True, and it has turned out badly enough already..

lets not forget, big majority of people are right hand people and their rules of right hands have been dominating everywhere. one simple clear example can be seen in that rule of royal palace about right hand for the knife..

so, social engineering has been made by rightist people mostly.. but, they blame leftists as if leftists have been doing social engineering.
JonnyM 11 | 2,620
31 Jul 2011 #103
so, social engineering has been made by rightist people mostly.. but, they blame leftists as if leftists have been doing social engineering.

Generally they have. But in Poland some of the social engineering they did was necessary at that time.
NomadatNet 1 | 457
31 Jul 2011 #104
Talking about Poland during Soviet era?
JonnyM 11 | 2,620
31 Jul 2011 #105
Yes. People here - often ones born after it ended and on a different continent condemn it as if it were a hell on earth. Even though it achieved a lot.
NomadatNet 1 | 457
31 Jul 2011 #106
Their such words of Poles are similar to that kid, in my story above, who was forced to silence, who was forced to use his right hand for the knife and left hand for the spoon although he was a left handed one.. (now, Poles live in capitalist west.)

Poles didn't have a word power in Soviet administration which was, as I said before, Russian nationalist/righties were power in socialist Soviet. If you look at the name of Libya, it too has socialism in its name, Libya Socialist Republic.. (Kingdoms, including Arap Kingdoms too, have an allergy against these names or what.)
rybnik 18 | 1,461
3 Aug 2011 #107
Yes. People here - often ones born after it ended and on a different continent condemn it as if it were a hell on earth. Even though it achieved a lot.

What did it achieve? I was in Poland from 1978 - 1985. I will acknowledge free education and health care as two things communism achieved however regarding the latter things were not always that rosy. If you didn't come with cash or something of equal value, your chances of getting babcia or dziadek into the clinic so they can be seen by the profesor were slim to none. The only ones who liked communism were the ones who were profiting from it.
f stop 25 | 2,513
3 Aug 2011 #108
I will acknowledge free education and health care

I never was a great fan of communism, but the two above are pretty big tickets. I also felt very safe there.
I have some some ties with Cuba now, and I'll be watching with great interest and some trepidation how it evolves.
Sasha 2 | 1,083
3 Aug 2011 #109
as I said before, Russian nationalist/righties were power in socialist Soviet

That's a total crap no matter how many times you've said that. Besides you failed to provide a single argument to support your conspiracy theory...

If anything that was the other way around - the Russians were oppressed on many occasions by the government which was all the way up to Brezhnev's stagnation non-Russian.

Another good question for you... if the Russians were nationalistic (as you claimed) then why did they eliminated their intellectual elites in millions during the Soviet era and by means of that made the Polish word "bydlo" so applicable to the nowadays Russian society?
Wroclaw Boy
3 Aug 2011 #110
what really is ironic with the whole communist / dictatorship argument is that people in the so called capitalist free world walk into dictatorships every single day, that dictatorship is known as work.

I spend quite a bit of time visiting these work places, especially industrial estates, its always the same story when you look at the cars parked in the car park. Most of the cars are very normal, but somewhere there will be a Porsche, Ferrari, £70k Mercedes or something, thats the dictators car right there. and he's usually an a$shole when it comes to treating his employees.
southern 75 | 7,096
3 Aug 2011 #111
Companies work more like dictatorships than democratically.
NomadatNet 1 | 457
3 Aug 2011 #112
Another good question for you... if the Russians were nationalistic (as you claimed) then why did they eliminated their intellectual elites in millions during the Soviet era and by means of that made the Polish word "bydlo" so applicable to the nowadays Russian society?

Is this a good question? Simple answer it has. First, Russia was a tsar-dom, i.e. a kingdom. Riches were those generated by tsardom, were people who were close to tsar, were royal families, as it always happen in monarchies, still so if you look at the House of Lords, 800 lords in today United Kingdom. You see them elites today? I don't. Maybe, they were useful in the past, centuries ago, but, not anymore. So, they are not elites. In 1917 revolution, these riches/lords of tsardom monarchy were arrested, killed, eliminated, etc. They too were Russians and they were nationalists who were also collobrating with the religious institutions, churchs. Design of revolution might be done by someones else, to win against the tsardom, but, appliers were poor workers anyway who were mostly Russians of whom there were many nationalists who were seeing Tsar and his lords were not enough nationalists.. So, those more radical nationalists killed those tsars, lords, etc who were seen as less nationalists.. Later, millions killed during Soviets, happened especially starting with Stalin, were mostly folks from other nations such as Turkics, etc as Soviets were forcing their locations to cut their connections. This was acceptable by Soviet Russian nationalist center to eliminate the threats against Russian nationalist center. Since they were Muslims mostly, it was acceptable by the church in Russia which had started to collobrate with Russian nationalist center of Soviets and by Europe churches as well.

Anyway, Soviets were not socialists really, it became visible especially starting with early 1930s. However, as mentioned above, one important thing entered the human life, historical existing socialism in their lifes of ordinary people became official name, became a governing system first time in the human history and some applications such as free education and free health care were enjoyed by ordinary people. These were being given free in religious government systems too, but, they were not systemized, they were like donations which caused discrimination, abusements, exploits.

Russian center of Soviets who were nationalists collobrating with churches inside Russia underground and churches of Europe returned to old monarchy system with nationalism and religious characters starting late 1920s and early 1930s. Also, while monarchy Europe, todays Western Europe who were collobrating with Soviet Russia nationalists for their movements about other folks' movements (Turkics, etc) who were mostly muslims, the same monarchies kept their rope of Russians by their other hands and pulled down slowly, till 1980s. Russians fell in the same old trap of monarchies who have been using nationalism and religiousism efficiently. Maybe, these characters of monarchies aren't seen so visibly in Western Europe monarchies. Just look at Saudi Kingdom. Their core is a monarchy with feudal system. They play Arab nationalism card in their ordinary folks and relgiousism card to other folks. Their lifestyle inside the palace is like socialism, communism, free-living if you define socialism/capitalism as free-living which is not understood by a person, who is called capitalist, who works hard to make money to live..

Read Wroclaw boy's post in that who says there are luxury cars of bosses and there are many poor cars belonging employee. It is true, but, at least, those bosses are either among ordinary folks or they worked hard before. Before them, there are monarchy royals, lords, etc who live luxury life from beginning to end. And, those monarchy lords have weapon powers, gun powers, laws on their sides as army guys, politicans, religious institutions, etc do not like those riches of whom at least some of them worked hard to make their money. Since ordinary people face these company owners more in their daily lifes, they become allergic to these company bosses while they don't see the big monster, monarchies and their lords. Sure, many of company bosses too are on their sides of monarchies, but, there are some who are challenging against them. To see these, look at Israel and Saudi Kingdom. One of them working hard, made money and bought the land and keep working. The other is lazily sitting, playing mind games and collobrating with monarchies of other parts of the world. And, the result is; big majority of world ordinary people are anti-israil. I am not Israel lover either, but, the main problem isn't them, it is Saudi Kingdom, Britain Kingdom, etc etc with monarchy systems who see all others below them, who don't like anyone else other than themselves. When monarchy system in the world is abolished, progression toward socialist system will be much easier. When you do a difficult work, if your leg is pulled back by someone, it is not easy to do any work. Monarchy system is doing that. For what? For nothing else than to save their positions, wealth and easy life and it is hard for them to accept ordinary common people who they have seen low people for centuries..
TheOther 6 | 3,692
3 Aug 2011 #113
Wroclaw Boy --- but somewhere there will be a Porsche, Ferrari, £70k Mercedes or something, thats the dictators car right there.

But you wouldn't mind having one of those cars yourself, wouldn't you? ;)
NomadatNet 1 | 457
3 Aug 2011 #114
Probably, he would. And, he has a chance for that even if it is little. Ferrari isn't an unreachable thing.

What if he'd want to be a royal, a price, a lord?
Wroclaw Boy
3 Aug 2011 #115
But you wouldn't mind having one of those cars yourself, wouldn't you? ;)

Having a nice car is one of the joys of the capitalist system - providing you are successful of course. Its simply not obtainable for the majority, hell i never used to think it was obtainable for me. Even if i had £500k spending money i still couldn't justify spending more than £30k on a car.

Anyway that's not the point i was trying to make.

And, he has a chance for that even if it is little.

I actually saw a Porsche 911 on a 2000 plate go for £11,000 recently, thats not out of reach at all.
TheOther 6 | 3,692
3 Aug 2011 #116
Wroclaw Boy --- Anyway that's not the point i was trying to make.

Me neither. I was actually talking about a vacant dictators' job, not about the fancy car that comes with it... :)
Wroclaw Boy
3 Aug 2011 #117
THE OTHER: I was actually talking about a vacant dictators' job,

Lets get back on topic

Lets get back on topic

Whats not on topic about company CEO's acting like dictators?

Plus: please don't delete my words and replace them with yours. Leave my text there and write yours underneath.
grubas 12 | 1,390
3 Aug 2011 #118
to much state control
lack of food choice
lack of food
biased media
no internet
lack of holidays
not easy to travel to none communist countries
fear of establishment
no freedom of speech
everyone and no one was an informant
Russia was at the head of it
curfews
prisons
communist police
social startification
stalin was a murderer
it was forced on Poland

No internet?Hahhaa,tell me who had internet in 1988?Your whole list is full of crap.99,9% of you "westerners" know nothing about communism.I would start with the question WAS THERE EVER COMMUNISM IN POLAND?I DON"T THINK SO.Now,systems of SOCIALIST countries differed drastically in some cases though all were "communist".Another question is which period of "communist" Poland you are refering to?Because you simple can NOT lump together Poland from early 50's and Poland from mid 70's.Two different countries.Tell me how was Poland communist if only 15% of farms were collecivised compared to 90% in Czech Republic?Do you even know what communism is?Give me a break.
Wroclaw Boy
3 Aug 2011 #119
No internet?Hahhaa

Listen mate somebody already quoted the internet thing and yes when i listed my reasons as to why communism failed in Poland i wasnt thinking 1988, so my mistake. As for all the others I think they're fairly good reasons, from an outsiders point of view.

Look, instead of criticizing me why dont you list YOUR reason/s for communism failing in Poland?

I would start with the question WAS THERE EVER COMMUNISM IN POLAND?I DON"T THINK SO.

Lets just assume Poland was under communist rule from 1945 till 1988 and let you take it from there..... Come on lets here it.....
Seanus 15 | 19,706
3 Aug 2011 #120
Poland wouldn't have fought socialism so tooth and nail. The heavy Russian hand came from communism. Sorry, queuing at 4am in the morning just ain't socialism. It's sth more.


Home / History / Why did communism in Poland fail?
BoldItalic [quote]
 
To post as Guest, enter a temporary username or login and post as a member.