Monday, 16 February 2009

Better dead than red.

Never one to lose his temper lightly TB has come to the conclusion that Tom Miller is a bit of a twat. When he's not
cosying up
with the bigger boys at LabourList, (he's almost a mini-Draper without the famous wife,) he pours drivel and preaches socialist state loving hate on his "Newer Labour"
blog.


This morning the world was greeted with the
sad news
that, in a referendum as straight as a nine bob note, Hugo Chavez is set to remain in power for the foreseeable future having poured millions of pounds into a state sponsored campaign to change the constitution.

As
other blogs
have picked up, this isn't good news for the people of Venezuela. Yet the little twerp Miller can
barely contain his joy
, or his communist sympathies.

If you like it so much Tom, why don't you put that silly hat of yours on and go live there.

12 comments:

Miller 2.0
said...

I think the term you're looking for is 'democratic socialist'.

As a critical supporter, that's what I'd call both Chavez and myself.

I would love to live there, but my Spanish is rubbish.

Editor
said...

There is nothing democratic about refusing to let opposistion supporters march, arresting opposition leaders and deporting them. We have seen all of this take place in the last 48 hours.

And when private property is forcably seized and redistributed that is where communism becomes socialism.

How can you apparently be so caring and progressive and yet support a leader who kills, and detains his own citizens in extreme cases, and point blank refuses basic human rights for the rest??

TB

Miller 2.0
said...

As for hate, if passionate disdain for the previous non-democracy, passionate disdain for rising, not falling hunger, passionate disdain for military coups against fairly elected leaders and passionate disdain for the previously insane levels of sickness and childhood illiteracy are hate, a hater then am I.

Long live The Evolution!

Miller 2.0
said...

"And when private property is forcably seized and redistributed that is where communism becomes socialism."

[like the poll tax then, presumably?]

Eh? No, it goes the other way round, surely? And the point at what Socialism becomes Communism.

According to Marx, who coined the second term, this is actually the point when the state dissolves due to its own redundancy.

Editor
said...

My lord, this is a worse case of red-delusion than TB orginally thought. Are you seriously suggesting that cause his corrupt government has a strange hold over the opposition and rigs teh democratic process by choking opponents of funds that the people really support Chavez?

46% of people in an election that was rigged didnt want him. Hell know how's many million more would have voted against him if it wasnt for fear.

So you therefore tacitly support Kim Jong and Robert Mugabe then?

A litle bit of oil money redistributed doesnt excuse being an evil dictator. You guys went to war with Saddam over that one!!

Editor
said...

that should of course be strangle hold.

TB

Editor
said...

Tom Tom Tom my dear chap, reading Marx is where you went wrong...

Editor
said...

and yes.. that was a typo. it is indeed the point of no return when you lefties get really evil.

Christian May
said...

Tom appears to be a poster boy for the consequences of not teaching politics effectively in schools: clinging to an absurd notion that socialism is somehow fashionable or 'just' - when in reality it is responsible for hundreds of millions of deaths across the world. Tom, you can't just put the word "democratic" in front of the word "socialist" and think that makes it OK. That would be like me calling you a "pleasant prat." It just doesn't work.

Miller 2.0
said...

Well, seeing as it was him who coined communism in the first place, it seems like a pretty sensible place to start on that particular topic!

Communism, in its intended sense of the word, at least, is pretty much like anarchism, but with more red stuff.

Of course, when you're talking about 'official communism', it looks more like a democratically deficient bureaucratic killing machine.

Hence my belief that people should be the collective masters of the state, rather than having things the other way round, or letting it be run by the small percentage who make the money.

Is there any evidence, particularly that backed up by neutral sources, that this referendum was in any way fixed? What do the observers say?

On the removal of opposition figures, I can't say that I agree with everything Chavez does, and this aspect in particular I would criticise, despite the fact that the media and oil companies organised one to actually abduct Chavez himself a couple of years back.

Of course I don't support Kim (hardly democratic) or Mugabe (much the same - plus the opposition are social democratic trade unionists, a fact you neglect to mention).

Totally fair point on Saddam, but I have a supplementary: Does someone being an evil dictator excuse us actually redistributing oil wealth from the people who live on the land and produce it to a small bunch of people in Europe and the US?

Human rights are for the protection of humans, not contracts of ownership; especially when such contracts amount to violations of other rights themselves. The right, for me, not to hunger trumps the right to run an oil company. IMHO, in this way neoliberal capitalism allocates rights inefficiently and immorally, and must therefore be managed from the bottom.

Final point: language like 'red-delusion' reads worryingly like mein kampf, in other words ridiculous. You might want to consider something a little less hyperbolic.

Draper's Dim said...

All this talk of democracy makes me think of Britain where we have an unelected fool running us into the ground. Mr Miller i bet you think he's great!

Dave Semple
said...

It's surely a bit pointless to engage with these guys Tom: when they begin blaming your 'delusion' on the education system, it's time to get out the anti-Melanie Phillips vaccines.

Post a Comment