South Ossetia, Russia, and Nicaragua

Can someone explain the connection between Russia and Nicaragua that results in Nicaragua being the only nation (aside from Russia itself) to recognize South Ossetia?

I can't recall all the specifics, but I'm pretty sure they swapped out—or maybe just offloaded at a massive discount—some missiles in exchange.

Michael Collins said:Even if Russia is closer to fascism than socialism these days...

But seriously, what is the actual, concrete difference between fascism and socialism??

Robin Ramos2 said:But seriously, what is the actual, concrete difference between fascism and socialism??

Look, under fascism, you’ve got the old-school elites, big landowners, and the Church all backing the state...

Socialism hasn't really worked in any meaningful way, so you get all kinds of mess—everything from Trotskyism and Leninism to Stalinism and Maoism. They're all just bad movements if you ask me...

Richard Wilson4 said:Look, under fascism, you’ve got the old-school elites, big landowners, and the Church all backing the state...

Socialism hasn't really worked in any meaningful way, so you get all kinds of mess—everything from Trotskyism and Leninism to Stalinism and Maoism. They're all just bad movements if you ask me...

What kind of nonsense are you spewing?☕Every day in Germany, priests were being sent off to concentration camps. Even Pope Pius XII wrote about accepting whatever fate came his way, including death. And once the regime seized power in 1944, the Arrow Cross began their reign of terror against the Canadian clergy...

0 points for MC, maybe give it another shot.

Fascism serves the masses' misery while delighting the elite, whereas socialism brings joy to the many and sorrow to those at the top.

The connection you're drawing between Russia and Nicaragua is about as meaningful as the link between Russia and Iceland, or the US and Albania, or even the US and Israel.
It’s the same old story, just a different face...

Kevin Smith82 said:What kind of nonsense are you spewing?☕Every day in Germany, priests were being sent off to concentration camps. Even Pope Pius XII wrote about accepting whatever fate came his way, including death. And once the regime seized power in 1944, the Arrow Cross began their reign of terror against the Canadian clergy...

That's Nazism I'm talking about. I'm talking about fascism—specifically the Spanish and Italian versions I used as examples...

They weren't, for instance, locking Jews up in camps...

I guess you have to look at how diplomats (?) and the Church backed fascism through the lens of the perceived communist threat. I mean, priests and diplomats—who were basically just big-time industrialists by then, since we weren't living under feudalism at the start of the last century!—are human beings. It’s hard to believe, but they’ll do whatever it takes to survive, which was an option the communists rarely offered. That’s why their "preference" leaned toward the fascists in Italy and the Nazis in Germany, simply because those groups stood against the communists. Though, honestly, that doesn't really mean there's much difference in the political-economic substance between communism, socialism, Nazism, and fascism. The Nazis were socialists. Fascists were essentially socialists too. Just look at Mussolini's platform—state corporations, unions sitting on industrial boards, worker resorts, free schools, state support for pregnant women. In my view, Mussolini was actually one of the milder left-wing dictators of the 20th century.

Anyway, getting back to the original post—they recently elected a guy in Nicaragua who was part of the Sandinista revolutionary government back in '79, when they were running with the help of Cuba and the Soviet Union. Mr. Ortega is basically a mini-Chavez, except he doesn't have the oil or gas reserves, so he has to blow harder on the Russian pipe just to scrape together some US dollars from his Russian buddies.

Robin Ramos2 said:I guess you have to look at how diplomats (?) and the Church backed fascism through the lens of the perceived communist threat. I mean, priests and diplomats—who were basically just big-time industrialists by then, since we weren't living under feudalism at the start of the last century!—are human beings. It’s hard to believe, but they’ll do whatever it takes to survive, which was an option the communists rarely offered. That’s why their "preference" leaned toward the fascists in Italy and the Nazis in Germany, simply because those groups stood against the communists. Though, honestly, that doesn't really mean there's much difference in the political-economic substance between communism, socialism, Nazism, and fascism. The Nazis were socialists. Fascists were essentially socialists too. Just look at Mussolini's platform—state corporations, unions sitting on industrial boards, worker resorts, free schools, state support for pregnant women. In my view, Mussolini was actually one of the milder left-wing dictators of the 20th century.

Anyway, getting back to the original post—they recently elected a guy in Nicaragua who was part of the Sandinista revolutionary government back in '79, when they were running with the help of Cuba and the Soviet Union. Mr. Ortega is basically a mini-Chavez, except he doesn't have the oil or gas reserves, so he has to blow harder on the Russian pipe just to scrape together some US dollars from his Russian buddies.

Is Ortega surprisingly moderate because of life lessons, or is it due to what you're suggesting? We'll just have to wait and see.☕

People tend to mature as they age, I suppose. They get more conservative. You know the old saying—if you weren't a leftist when you were young, you didn't have a heart; but if you stay a leftist once you're old, you probably don't have a brain.

As far as Ortega is concerned, he’s playing it safe because he knows how much of a beating he could take from the USA, so he's being cautious. But honestly, this whole idea that he's some moderate? I find that highly questionable. South Ossetia is part of Georgia, which is currently looking to join NATO. Recognizing South Ossetia is probably the most radical foreign policy move someone could make—aside from, I guess, launching a direct attack on the USA.

Robin Ramos2 said:But seriously, what is the actual, concrete difference between fascism and socialism??

I honestly doubt you'll wrap your head around this, but if I were to paraphrase Zizek (who once noted the distinction between Stalinism and fascism): socialism remains rooted in the legacy of the Enlightenment.

Sarah Wilson9 said:I honestly doubt you'll wrap your head around this, but if I were to paraphrase Zizek (who once noted the distinction between Stalinism and fascism): socialism remains rooted in the legacy of the Enlightenment.

WOW. I honestly have no idea what that’s supposed to mean, but man, I am genuinely impressed by the depth of thought here. The universe is just... unfathomably vast, isn't it?

If I might add my two cents: it's pretty obvious that socialism remains rooted in Enlightenment ideals—mostly because the left has always been absolute masters of propaganda. That's how they managed to scrub away all the bloodthirsty regimes that followed it. Mao Zedong, Joseph Stalin, Adolf Hitler, Benito Mussolini—there really isn't a difference there. They were all following the exact same stars.

Robin Ramos2 said:WOW. I honestly have no idea what that’s supposed to mean, but man, I am genuinely impressed by the depth of thought here. The universe is just... unfathomably vast, isn't it?

If I might add my two cents: it's pretty obvious that socialism remains rooted in Enlightenment ideals—mostly because the left has always been absolute masters of propaganda. That's how they managed to scrub away all the bloodthirsty regimes that followed it. Mao Zedong, Joseph Stalin, Adolf Hitler, Benito Mussolini—there really isn't a difference there. They were all following the exact same stars.

🙂 Well, I figured you wouldn't get it. If I'm not mistaken, I pretty much called this exact response already.

Sarah Wilson9 said:🙂 Well, I figured you wouldn't get it. If I'm not mistaken, I pretty much called this exact response already.

When you look at the whole paradox regarding the metaphysical reality of socio-economic principles—especially considering how flawed general perception can be, particularly when you weigh the foundations of the Enlightenment against the pragmatic shifts within these various ideologies—it becomes pretty obvious. I mean, it’s clear as day that neither you nor that Slavoj Žižek guy have any clue what's actually going on here.

Robin Ramos2 said:When you look at the whole paradox regarding the metaphysical reality of socio-economic principles—especially considering how flawed general perception can be, particularly when you weigh the foundations of the Enlightenment against the pragmatic shifts within these various ideologies—it becomes pretty obvious. I mean, it’s clear as day that neither you nor that Slavoj Žižek guy have any clue what's actually going on here.

🙈🙂 What on earth was that supposed to be? That sounds like playground logic to me. Haven't you learned by now that simply throwing out big words is just a way to mask a total lack of actual argument? It’s a clear sign of a weak writing style and a superficial grasp of culture, really—just a symptom of someone lacking a proper education.

Sarah Wilson9 said:🙈🙂 What on earth was that supposed to be? That sounds like playground logic to me. Haven't you learned by now that simply throwing out big words is just a way to mask a total lack of actual argument? It’s a clear sign of a weak writing style and a superficial grasp of culture, really—just a symptom of someone lacking a proper education.

I figured you wouldn't get it. I honestly saw this coming.

Robin Ramos2 said:I figured you wouldn't get it. I honestly saw this coming.

I’m genuinely impressed by how deep your plagiarism goes—and just as impressed by the depth of the original thought you're actually ripping off.

Richard Wilson4 said:That's Nazism I'm talking about. I'm talking about fascism—specifically the Spanish and Italian versions I used as examples...

They weren't, for instance, locking Jews up in camps...

Nazism is basically just fascism and socialism mashed together.