Archive for the ‘Communism’ Category

I grew up under a strict travel ban and this is what it taught me – SBS

The first time I crossed the border of my birth country I was 19. My best friend and I squashed into a bus heading for Vienna from Bucharest to spend three days in the city of Strauss, before two more days on the bus.

We tried to stay awake to witness the moment we crossed the border. We expected it to have some instant magic to it. The air to have a different scent, the trees to have different colours, its foreignness gently hitting us over the head. It didnt.

A customs officer walked through the bus, inspecting everyones faces and looking at our passports. We skipped a few heartbeats, fearing something could still go wrong.

I have been living in Australia for the past 15 years, jet-setting between my two home-continents almost every year. The distance is not always comfortable, but its certainly made easier to take by knowing that I could board a plane on any day if my family needed me, or I needed them.

Except during a pandemic.

I could never have imagined that there would be a day when I wouldnt be allowed to travel to Romania. Even if I could by some miracle find a flight to take me there now, my Romanian passport has expired and my Australian one forbids me to enter my birth country.

I was eight when the communist regime fell, but its legacy stayed with us for a very long time, perhaps to some extent still is.

I was eight when the communist regime fell, but its legacy stayed with us for a very long time, perhaps to some extent still is. It goes without saying that having a passport, let alone travelling to another country was almost unthinkable.

The Outside, as we still sometimes call it, carried an enthralling mystique. We dreamed about it, we shared what we knew or heard of it, we made up stories about it, and we coveted anything that was smuggled in from there, from chewing gum to pirated Chuck Norris movies.

The strict communist travel ban allowed only a lucky few to step outside the borders. There were the sailors who brought back blue jeans and denim jackets. As a kid, I dreamed of marrying one when I grew up. There were also the few workers or professionals who lent a helping hand to countries with similar political regimes, like Syria, Iraq or East Germany. And the diplomats, of which I knew none, so they didnt count.

The Palace of Parliament in Bucharest, Romania. Source: iStockphoto

And then there were those who escaped by swimming the Danube at night in cold weather under the threat of bullets.

Leaving Romania and its confines was hard to imagine and yet The Outside busied our imaginations. We had no choice but to live and plan our lives within these restricting limits. The imposition, the lack of choice and of an end in sight, was the hardest limit to endure.

As an Australian, I have inherited a freedom of movement that was still hard to grasp for my grandparents. I could go anywhere, anytime, the only things between me and the world: money, time and my own inclination. And I know these can still be huge obstacles, but not as hard as those hard borders.

I could go anywhere, anytime, the only things between me and the world: money, time and my own inclination.

When the first whispers of closing borders because of COVID-19 started, I laughed and lashed at the fear-mongering, as I perceived it at the time. What a completely ridiculous, straight-from-a-dystopian-film idea it seemed.

And yet, with each new piece of information and each day that passed, it became clear that was the way we were heading.

I spent the first few weeks of the travel ban and impending lockdown in panic, not unlike everybody else. What if my family back in Romania got sick? Should we have left before the bans took effect. We dismissed it as a riskier decision, but had we been wrong? How long would we be prevented from leaving Australia?

But having experienced the communist border restrictions helped me look differently at the current travel ban. Even though the restrictions are much tighter now and they apply not only to the country, but to my home and my neighbourhood, there is a different feel to them. Apart from being a necessary act in the process of controlling the virus, it also feels like a contribution, a way of taking positive action by playing by the rules.

While the strict travel restrictions are nowhere near over, there is already a glimmer of hope. It may take six months, a year even, but this will be over. We will be free to go wherever we please again one day.

It may take six months, a year even, but this will be over. We will be free to go wherever we please again one day.

Post-communism, we Romanians became resolute travellers. I guess thats not unusual, but whether consciously or subconsciously, our thirst for travel has something more to it: a dont-waste-this-chance, you-owe-it-to-your-communist-ancestors kind of eagerness to know, touch, claim a place as seen.

I am reminded during these times to appreciate my democratic right to travel. I feel a renewed responsibility to not take lightly my right to move freely once it becomes the norm again.

Antoanela Safca is a freelance writer and editor. You can follow her on Twitter here.

People in Australia must stay at least 1.5 metres away from others. Check your states restrictions on gathering limits.

Testing for coronavirus is now widely available across Australia. If you are experiencing cold or flu symptoms, arrange a test by calling your doctor or contact the Coronavirus Health Information Hotline on 1800 020 080. The federal government's coronavirus tracing app COVIDSafe is available for download from your phone's app store.

SBS is committed to informing Australias diverse communities about the latest COVID-19 developments. News and information is available in 63 languages atsbs.com.au/coronavirus

See more here:
I grew up under a strict travel ban and this is what it taught me - SBS

John Wayne: The Hero We Need Now – National Review

Statue outside the John Wayne Birthplace Museum in Winterset, Iowa.(Carol Highsmith/Library of Congress)He survived the crash of 1929 by working from dawn to dusk, always loving America and defending its founding principles.

NRPLUS MEMBER ARTICLEAmerica fits into John Waynes filmography, and this does not make America small. It makes John Wayne huge. The coronavirus has brought us back to the Wild West. Lonely lives, deserted streets, looks of distrust, and whiskey for throat disinfection; the scientific community has not made an official statement as yet, but it seems unlikely that anybody would try to deny the benefits of whiskey in the fight against almost everything. John Wayne, who would be 113 years old this month, would not be shocked by social alienation and a life of isolation. They are part of his trademark. Once again, as on 9/11, John Wayne symbolizes everything you need to overcome this crisis and get back on your feet: individual initiative, freedom, old-fashioned values, and patriotism. In other words, everything that someone like Bernie Sanders as the new CEO of the unemployment and poverty home-delivery company, Joe Biden, Inc. cant supply

Like anyone who cherishes freedom, John Wayne was a steadfast anti-Communist. Stalin, the American Communists, and finally Mao Zedong would all try to kill him, an unusual strategy for drawing him to their cause. Its a testament to his heroism that John Wayne survived three attacks, particularly because the only thing the Communists excel at is killing. When Wayne was visiting U.S. troops at the Chu Lai base in Vietnam, in the summer of 1966, and signing autographs for them, a Mao hitman lined him up in his sights and fired several shots. He missed them all. Later, the Duke said he didnt know about the shooting until he saw the soldiers diving for cover. Impossible not to be reminded of his J. B. Books character: I wont be wronged. I wont be insulted. I wont be laid a-hand on. I dont do these things to other people, and I require the same from them.

Over the years, Wayne developed an extraordinary nose for detecting Communists. On one occasion, during a shoot in the middle of the Cold War, he asked the film director Edward Dmytryk, Are you a Commie? Dmytryk answered: If the masses of the American people want Communism, I think itd be good for our country. Well, to me, said the Duke, later recalling the exchange, the word masses is not a term generally used in Western countries, and I just knew he was a Commie.

Waynes anti-Communism is no outdated sentiment. The coronavirus crisis is reviving the worst ghosts of Communisms dehumanizing ideology: an overdose of regulations, massive surveillance, the presumption of guilt, venomous state paternalism, and economic aids that, although sometimes necessary, turn millions into passive citizens clinging helplessly to the public treasury. Dont forget that in any crisis there is always some enlightened person saying, Lets give the whole world a salary and end poverty. And then theres always some damned party-pooper-son-of-a-hyena innocently asking, And whos going to pay for that? More often than not, that damned party-pooper-son-of-a-hyena will be yours truly.

Wayne got it right; he drew no distinctions between liberals, socialists, and Communists. What separates Biden from Sanders is little more than a couple of bouts of sniffing a young girls hair and the occasional whoop. But the whole Left is marching toward the same precipice. Look at Venezuelan Chavism, Spanish socialism, European social democracy, or Cuban Communism. They are different degrees of the same project to annihilate individuality and strengthen the state. A brilliant P. J. ORourke wrote years ago (and its still true today), Giving money and power to government is like giving whiskey and car keys to teenage boys.

John Wayne abhorred the masses, even his own following. This set him free to be critical, even of his own people. And there lies the difference between conservatives and progressives: individual thought. The conservative tends to value his own thought. The progressive believes in collective thought, ignoring that, in human nature, such a thing simply does not exist. There are global fevers, such as the gold rush or tulip mania; theres widespread blindness, like the one afflicting so many Biden-loving reporters; there can also be a feeling that many people share, such as (in my case) an infatuation with tennis player Maria Sharapova. But there is no such thing as collective thinking.

Now that were looking for a vaccine against the coronavirus, it would be worth remembering that we also need a vaccine against Communism. Without Communism, we would not be searching for a vaccine, blindly, with no information about the origin of the disease. Without Communism, Xi Jinping would not be able to withhold crucial information about this pandemic. Without Communism, it is quite possible that the starving Chinese would never have dared to sink their teeth into a pangolin, but I admit that this is just my own theory; do not look for any scientific basis because I am still working on it, and, for the moment, the pangolin is refusing to cooperate.

In the face of the coronavirus crisis, the antidote comes in the form of a renewed patriotism. It is not a question of just waving a flag in an empty gesture. The patriotism we need is of the sort that the Duke displayed: content-rich Americanism based on old-fashioned values, practiced with vigor and including a heartfelt tribute to those who have died fighting for Americas common legacy. The alternative meaningless flags divested of their values has already been invented and is called Europe. And, sorry for the spoiler: It ends badly.

In one of the many memorable scenes from The Alamo, directed by John Wayne and left to us as his moral testament, Jocko proclaims, in the middle of a discussion about life after death: I believe. I can never find a way to argue down you that dont believe, but I believe in the Lord God Almighty. All-knowing and all-forgiving. I believe that Good shall be triumphant in the end and that evil shall be vanquished. Then Bob adds, Me, too. I figure a mans got to believe in those things. . . . Does he want to believe in the good things about man the real good things, like courage, honesty, and love?

The whole movie is an ode to eternal virtues. In the end, conservatism is conservation. Theres nothing wrong with preserving the good. Wayne tells us we dont have to be ashamed of safeguarding tradition. Always be wary of people who tell you theyve just discovered the next best thing in life: the next best friend, the next best car, the next best destination. Distrust them as if they were teetotalers.

In the final years of his life, Wayne was caricatured as a gross, illiterate cowboy. The Left fears leaders who move millions. The Duke was one of these. But John Waynes biographers have fought to break the stereotype, showing that he was an educated man. He was a great conversationalist who loved to learn from others and an enthusiastic reader with an insatiable curiosity. He was always looking to form his own opinion. And this is another essential characteristic of the conservative. We do not respond well to instructions. We respond to criteria. Our own. And not at random. We form our own opinions, enriched by independent views in conservative outlets such as National Review. Other times, we poke our nose out the window and stare into the street or watch a classic Frank Capra movie.

In these days of crisis, a look back at the crash of 1929 can teach us a lot. That drama hit actors hard. John Waynes reaction was to team up with Nat Levine, producer of Mascot Pictures, and work tirelessly from dawn to well into the night. We worked so hard on those shows that there was no time to think, Wayne said in an interview in the 1970s. A working day was 12 to 20 hours of work. I wasnt hired to act, he recalls, but to survive. I like the anecdote because it shows how John Wayne and the character of The Duke are merged. When necessary, he summoned his courage and walked for hours in solitude through the tedious wilderness of Mascots series.

Another stereotype about Wayne is that he was a doctrinarian. In reality, he was a free man. He believed deeply in the founding principles of America. That led him to write to President Carter, whom he opposed in every way but with whom he had a cordial epistolary relationship, to state his support for Panama in the Canal controversy. (Waynes first wife was a native of Panama.) It is not by chance that in The Alamo he praises the commitment of the Mexican fighters: He felt a reverential respect for his enemies. As a good conservative, he belonged to the Chestertonian line of warriors: The true soldier fights not because he hates what is in front of him, but because he loves what is behind him.

One more lesson. Wayne is often found deeply rooted in his world, fighting to uphold its values, to be true to what he believes in, and also to overcome his own hostility. He fights against himself, against his own character and pride. He ends by putting his neck on the line to face evil without hope for any reward. He fights to be a good man in the Wild West, which is plagued by as many bad guys and fools as my Twitter timeline. After a lifetime of spreading those universal values, and struggling to redeem his mistakes, it was no surprise that John Wayne ended up embracing the Catholic faith.

A few years ago, I was fortunate enough to be able to document the details of his baptism for the book God Always Calls a Thousand Times (available only in Spanish at the moment). Inquiring about his conversion, I was happy to discover Father Robert Curtiss note from June 15, 1979, which at the time went unnoticed:

John Wayne was received into the Catholic Church the day before he died. Mr. Wayne was conscious at that time. We will not disclose any additional information, as this is a private matter between the priest and the penitent.

So John Wayne was baptized before he died. But he was already Christian by his acts. And he was already Catholic in his universality.

Today his legacy is more alive than ever. Its that of a good man, at times an amusing scoundrel, often hidden, crouching behind his sense of humor, a common trench for intelligent men. The actor Red Buttons spent four months in Africa with John Wayne during the shooting of Hatari. Buttons said that on one of those African nights, while they were playing cards, a huge leopard came out of the bush and headed toward them. On seeing it approach, Buttons whispered, trembling: Duke, theres a leopard walking toward us. Wayne said, Buttons, see what he wants. That was John Wayne, Buttons said, laughing, recalling the story for The Man Behind The Myth.

On another occasion, film historian Michael Munn recounted, Wayne, in the twilight of his life, surrounded by all his grandchildren, was having lunch at his home with director Don Siegel. They were discussing the new trend of trying to modernize westerns by introducing swear words into the dialogue. Wayne refused to accept this and didnt like Clint Eastwoods doing it. Siegel defended Eastwood. Wayne pushed his point with a string of swear words and curses, to the amazement of Siegel, who said, Duke youre wrong about Clints films; and besides, listen to yourself speak. Wayne laughed and said, But youll never hear me use profanity in a picture.

Maybe thats why Ive had a giant John Wayne poster in my office for decades. I use it to scare away the self-conscious. It also works as an idiot detector. One day while I was interviewing a young editor for a job, to see if we would hire him at the newspaper, the boy pointed at the poster, wrinkled his nose, and exclaimed, That fascist pig violated the rights of the Indians! I couldnt say why, but we didnt hire him in the end. And its a shame. The kid had a great future. As a Cherokee Indian.

Translated by Joel Dalmau

Read the original post:
John Wayne: The Hero We Need Now - National Review

JFK bombshell: How Lee Harvey Oswald might have been TOLD to return to US – Express.co.uk

Oswald is credited with the assassination JFK as the presidential motorcade travelled through Dallas, Texas on Friday 23 November, 1963. The then 24-year-old initially escaped the police.

He was later tracked down to a theatre where he was arrested and taken to Dallas Police Headquarters.

Two days later, on Sunday 25 November, while Oswald was being escorted out of the station, local nightclub owner Jack Ruby fatally shot him.

It was but one bizarre event in a series of questionable happenings in the life of Lee Harvey Oswald.

In 1959, having served with the US Army for a short time, Oswald acquired a hardship discharge based on the need to support his mother.

Entirely randomly, he then took a boat to Europe, first to Finland, moving on to the Soviet Union.

On reaching Moscow, Oswald publicly announced he would provide Russia with US radar secrets.

From this point on, multiple divisions of US intelligence offices kept files on him.

Just two years later, Oswald, rather hastily, decided he wanted to return to the US.

JUST IN:Narcos: Who is Barry Seal? Is Barry Seal a real person?

This was despite having denounced the country and revealing to his brother, Robert, that he intended to never return to America.

He claimed to have fallen out of love with the Soviet Union and its rigid communism not allowing any recreational pastimes.

But, during the 2013 documentary, Killing Oswald, retired Major and author of Oswald and the CIA, John Newman, revealed how Oswald may well have been working with the US government, being called back for duty.

Mr Newman claimed: Oswalds decision to come back home may have not been his decision at all.

DON'T MISS

Kim Jong-un health: North Korean leader exposed in 'red flag' incident [LATEST]CIA secrets: Decisive moment agency began brainwashing exposed [UPDATE]How FBI agent claimed Lee Harvey Oswald was 'one of ours'[ANALYSIS]

If hes actually there on a mission he would have been told its time to come back home.

This whole time, his files were maintained in the counter intelligence area of the CIA.

It was in fact the mole hunting unit.

The story they had no interest in him, they were contacted and did know anything about him, doesnt add up.

Despite the CIAs close monitoring of Oswald, when he returned to the US, he seemingly slipped through their grasp.

On returning in 1961, Oswald was questioned little about his involvement with the Soviet Union or about his claim to revealing radar secrets.

To its proponents, the instance appears to further prove Oswald was a double agent.

Shortly after during the documentary, Professor Joan Mellen, described an event that suggested Oswald was working directly with the US authorities.

She said: When Oswald first arrives in New Orleans, what does he do?

He goes to 544 Camp Street or 531 Lafayette Street depending on which door you go in.

He goes into the office of Guy Banister, former special agent in charge of the FBI field office in Chicago now running a detective agency in New Orleans as a CIA operative of high level.

And, he asked for a job.

One day, the secretary said to Guy Banister look, theres your friend Oswald giving out pro-Castro leaflets downstairs.

And Guy Banister brushed that aside.

He said: Hes one of ours.

Oswald was doing his best to keep up his cover.

The CIA had a plan to blame Castro for the assassination and to make Oswald the agent of Fidel Castro.

See original here:
JFK bombshell: How Lee Harvey Oswald might have been TOLD to return to US - Express.co.uk

How Are Socialism and Communism Different? – HISTORY

Both socialism and communism are essentially economic philosophies advocating public rather than private ownership, especially of the means of production, distribution and exchange of goods (i.e., making money) in a society. Both aim to fix the problems they see as created by a free-market capitalist system, including the exploitation of workers and a widening gulf between rich and poor.

But while socialism and communism share some basic similarities, there are also important differences between them.

Socialism emerged in response to the extreme economic and social changes caused by the Industrial Revolution, and particularly the struggles of workers. Many workers grew increasingly poor even as factory owners and other industrialists accrued massive wealth.

In the first half of the 19th century, early socialist thinkers like Henri de Saint-Simon, Robert Owen and Charles Fourier presented their own models for reorganizing society along the lines of cooperation and community, rather than the competition inherent in capitalism, where the free market controlled the supply and demand of goods.

Then came Karl Marx, the German political philosopher and economist who would become one of the most influential socialist thinkers in history. With his collaborator Friedrich Engels, Marx published The Communist Manifesto in 1848, which included a chapter criticizing those earlier socialist models as utterly unrealistic utopian dreams.

Marx argued that all history was a history of class struggles, and that the working class (or proletariat) would inevitably triumph over the capital class (bourgeoisie) and win control over the means of production, forever erasing all classes.

Communism, sometimes referred to as revolutionary socialism, also originated as a reaction to the Industrial Revolution, and came to be defined by Marxs theoriestaken to their extreme end. In fact, Marxists often refer to socialism as the first, necessary phase on the way from capitalism to communism. Marx and Engels themselves didnt consistently or clearly differentiate communism from socialism, which helped ensure lasting confusion between the two terms.

Communist propaganda from China entitled 'Be Ready to Defend or Fight,' circa 1950s.

Buyenlarge/Getty Images

Under communism, there is no such thing as private property. All property is communally owned, and each person receives a portion based on what they need. A strong central governmentthe statecontrols all aspects of economic production, and provides citizens with their basic necessities, including food, housing, medical care and education.

By contrast, under socialism, individuals can still own property. But industrial production, or the chief means of generating wealth, is communally owned and managed by a democratically elected government.

Another key difference between socialism and communism is the means of achieving them. In communism, a violent revolution in which the workers rise up against the middle and upper classes is seen as an inevitable part of achieving a pure communist state. Socialism is a less rigid, more flexible ideology. Its adherents seek change and reform, but insist on making these changes through democratic processes within the existing social and political structure, not overthrowing that structure.

In his 1875 writing, Critique of the Gotha Program, Marx summarized the communist philosophy in this way: From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs. By contrast, socialism is based on the idea that people will be compensated based on their level of individual contribution to the economy.

Unlike in communism, a socialist economic system rewards individual effort and innovation. Social democracy, the most common form of modern socialism, focuses on achieving social reforms and redistribution of wealth through democratic processes, and can co-exist alongside a free-market capitalist economy.

Led by Vladimir Lenin, the Bolsheviks put Marxist theory into practice with the Russian Revolution of 1917, which led to the creation of the worlds first communist government. Communism existed in the Soviet Union until its fall in 1991.

Today, communism exists in China, Cuba, North Korea, Laos and Vietnamalthough in reality, a purely communist state has never existed. Such countries can be classified as communist because in all of them, the central government controls all aspects of the economic and political system. But none of them have achieved the elimination of personal property, money or class systems that the communist ideology requires.

Likewise, no country in history has achieved a state of pure socialism. Even countries that are considered by some people to be socialist states, like Norway, Sweden and Denmark, have successful capitalist sectors and follow policies that are largely aligned with social democracy. Many European and Latin American countries have adopted socialist programs (such as free college tuition, universal health care and subsidized child care) and even elected socialist leaders, with varying levels of success.

In the United States, socialism has not historically enjoyed as much success as a political movement. Its peak came in 1912, when Socialist Party presidential candidate Eugene V. Debs won 6 percent of the vote. But at the same time, U.S. programs once considered socialist, such as Medicare and Social Security, have been integrated into American life.

Democratic socialism, a growing U.S. political movement in recent years, lands somewhere in between social democracy and communism. Like communists, democratic socialists believe workers should control the bulk of the means of production, and not be subjected to the will of the free market and the capitalist classes. But they believe their vision of socialism must be achieved through democratic processes, rather than revolution.

Read the original here:
How Are Socialism and Communism Different? - HISTORY

Socialism is almost the same as communism; both are bad – Cowichan Valley Citizen

They want to punish and steal from the rich and successful.

Socialism is almost the same as communism; both are bad

Dont bring feelings to a fact fight. Once again thank you Mr. Rock for validating my points. Also, thanks for the insults and failing to counter any points.

Communism is often referred to as revolutionary socialism; the key difference is the need for a violent uprising of the lower class against the middle and upper classes. The killing fields of Cambodia are an example of such an uprising. One point five to two million dead, often with pick-axes and other farm tools to save bullets. Socialism is communism with less bloodshed to get there. Both lead to misery and destitution when other peoples money runs out.

I find it insulting that the workers once risen up would need the communist elite to rule them. It is reminiscent of helter skelter. Charles Manson planned a race war and once the blacks had won he would lead them. The contempt for the intelligence of the workers or the blacks is blatant in such ideologies.

Mixed economic systems are not state-owned economies, meaning the government doesnt own the means of production. By definition it is not a socialist system. The state owning the means of production is a definitive part of socialism. Mr. Rock may want to look at liberalism as an ideology. (The textbook definitions, not the modern day usage.) Even the libertarians believe in a limited government involvement in natural monopolies. Socially conscious government programs are not, and do not, make socialism.

Governments are institutions and are incapable of interpersonal relationships. If you want to be loved and cared for I would suggest a dating app.

The only socialists I have met do not want to help the common man. They want to punish and steal from the rich and successful. Free stuff is not free as it was taken by force from another.

S. Innis

Duncan

Letters

See the article here:
Socialism is almost the same as communism; both are bad - Cowichan Valley Citizen