yes a death threat,

more like Putin has sunk to a new low

Why else make the Aeroflot crack?

And putin you wonder why I thought you were fishing for threats?

Hey let's all go easy on the Put, beneath that tough exterior he is really fragile inside, like a very colourful, delicate and beautiful long slim Chinese porcelain vase. We would all feel so guilty if he fell off the shelf and smashed into a thousand pieces.

one less person to shoot after the revolution lol

^ ya that was a joke if you couldnt tell

Question for you Putin. I generally agree with you, (if I do find your method of debate at times a little much.) However I'm curious why you advocate socialism.

I know I support it because I'm an advocate for a more real form of freedom. The freedom for everyone to live a worthwhile life.

So why do you support it?

Yeah sic I saw the funny side of it.

"I know I support it because I'm an advocate for a more real form of freedom."

Freedom from choice? :-)

Ha ha, very funny Spyman.
Freedom from necessity.

The same reason you do. It's a matter of survival, for the species & the planet. The poor and laboring classes have suffered long enough. Time to fight back.

@Damien: "The freedom for everyone to live a worthwhile life."

Most of us want that. The question is how is this best achieved? Some people believe that free-market capitalism gives people the best chance to live that life. When Adam Smith wrote the Wealth of Nations one his goals (maybe even *the* goal) was to raise the standard of living for ordinary people.

How is this best achieved? I am in the free-market camp. We could talk about the theory behind why it is best economic system. Or we could just look at the world. The countries with the highest standard of living are free-market capitalist economies. Take America for example, it's not perfect, but to be born in America is to win first prize in the lottery of life - compared with most of the world. Australia, New Zealand, Canada, Great Britain etc - these are all countries that people from countries want to emigrated to, not from.

I am not totally committed to any ideology though. Material wealth is not everything. If the goal is more about how evenly the pie is split (even if it is a smaller pie), and if the real issue is not how much you have but rather how much you have in comparison to other people - then some kind of wealth redistribution is called for. IF that is the goal. But even if that is the goal, you are still better off with a free market economy: but redistribute the wealth via education, health, family payments, social services etc.

I also believe that there isn't any one best system for all cultures. I don't think the indigenous hunter gathers of the Andam Islands would be better of under free-market capitalism or communism.

Both capitalism and communism need for the people to have a sort of mind-set. They have to "get" the system and no how to play along with the rules. Perhaps this is why attempts to impose these systems on some third world countries have been unsuccessful? So I am not just a free-market capitalist. I am first a pragmatist.

"How is this best achieved? I am in the free-market camp. We could talk about the theory behind why it is best economic system. Or we could just look at the world. The countries with the highest standard of living are free-market capitalist economies. Take America for example, it's not perfect, but to be born in America is to win first prize in the lottery of life - compared with most of the world. Australia, New Zealand, Canada, Great Britain etc - these are all countries that people from countries want to emigrated to, not from."


there is a direct connection between the high standard of living in some countries and the low standard of living in others.
its called : exploitation

"Yeah sic I saw the funny side of it."

Anarchists have always had a sick and morbid sense of humor. If you're going to joke about killing me, at least make it a humorous one.

"The same reason you do. It's a matter of survival, for the species & the planet. The poor and laboring classes have suffered long enough. Time to fight back. "

like in north korea where they, apparantly, won. Now everyone there drinks cognac eats lobster

hey putin you're an asshole, I hope you die

ha
ha
HA

"like in north korea where they, apparantly, won."

Yeah they did. They won. They paid for it in blood with millions killed by the imperialists and their entire infrastructure destroyed, but they won. It'd be nice if you recognized achievement for once instead of spitting on everything and everyone.

"hey putin you're an asshole, I hope you die"

Put that knife away, Ninja. There's nothing more anti-authoritarian than stabbing someone.

Sometimes it is better to lose. Nothing was worth the price the North paid for their half victory, and certainly not the twisted form of Communism they've suffered with since.

So what did they win putin? A repressive totalitarian regime ruled by an eccentric tyrant.
Yes, by pointing out that the north korea of today is a brutal dictatorship, I am somehow pissing on the graves of koreans who dies 80 years ago to push out westerners. yeah you got it spot on man thats exactly it. makes perfect sense. no logical loop-de-loops or lack of common sense there at all

Putin, do you think it's POSSIBLE that
a several decades ago koreans valiantly, bravely, honorably fought off imperialist invaders
could maybe just MAYBE not be mutually exclusive with
b the 'north' korea of today is a repressive regime

The military regime that ruled South Korea for 30+ years was a heaven on earth, after all. Kwangju? Never happened. The fact that the DPRK thrived until the economic strangulation and natural disasters of the 1990s is of course, of no relevance.

As a point of history, it should be pointed out that the North Koreans and their Chinese allies did fight bravely and valiantly, and not in the style of conscripts being forced to fight. What they did they did (at least, to a large extent) with a firm belief that what they were doing was the right and just thing to do.

Siccy, do you think it's POSSIBLE that DPRK's current condition might be in someway related to its encirclement, economic sanctions, nuclear threats aimed at it, revanchist militarized neighbor backed by the world's lone superpower, and multiple years of horrible natural disasters which were a consequence of the war the imperialists waged against it?

Why do you continue to ignore conditions? Is it deliberate? How would you manage their situation? With anarchy? Good answer.

Dude fuck your either or dumbass thinking.
saying north korea is bad says NOTHING about south korea.
Please stop putting words into my mouth so I can stop imagining punching you in yours

Spy, you're confusing quality of life, with living a worthwhile life.

The man who works a job he hates to make money so he can do things. Is not living a worthwhile life.

The man who loves his work, no matter what he earns. Now that is living a worthwhile life.

Capitalism encourages the first.
Socialism offers more hope for the second, if they follow a platonic system of allowing people to work what they are suited for. While the necessary tasks are taken up in part by everyone.

That post was directed at Octavious, who said it would have been better in DPRK lost the war.

You're so violent. No wonder you think governments are nothing but gangs.

Siccy, do you think it's POSSIBLE that DPRK's current condition might be in someway related to its encirclement, economic sanctions, nuclear threats aimed at it, revanchist militarized neighbor backed by the world's lone superpower, and multiple years of horrible natural disasters which were a consequence of the war the imperialists waged against it?

of course it's possible. even likely. I'll go so far as to say that most of Nkoreas 'current condition' IS in fact due to these things. again you assume my position. stop it.

I'm not disagreeing with you on this. what I AM saying is that it is a repressive regime. which you... what? dont agree with? lol

@ Putin

Is it not true that, Western sanctions aside, the North was given favourable terms in trade and economic support from the likes of the USSR (while it lasted) and China? It may have had a lot of disadvantages, but it had a fair few things in its favour too.