09 Feb 07
Originally posted by RedmikeOf course, if you can import from another country with the same agenda as yourself, all the better.
That's not the way a socialist would see it.
It isn't practical for any country to be sef-sufficient in everything, so importing goods is perfectly reasonable.
Of course, if you can import from another country with the same agenda as yourself, all the better.
This is also a major reason why the idea of socialism in one country is a non-starter, IMO.
This would be the only way to get the imports at a competitive price. A failing economy could only afford imports from another failing economy. For a poor economy to import goods from a healthy economy would be cost prohibitive. Imports only make sense if the products are better or cheaper, hence a falling currency value helps exports and hinders imports.
09 Feb 07
Originally posted by techsouthThe poverty in 1921 wasn't mainly because of the Bolsheviks- more because of the ruinous WW1 and the Civil War.
It would probably have imports, in many cases in the form of foreign aid (i.e. relief). This happened in the Soviet Union in 1921.
09 Feb 07
Originally posted by MerkYes, they were. But they consistently oppposed the imperialist WW1, in direct oppoistionj to neraly all the other political parties in Russia. They took power in the October Revolution almost bloodlessly, as there was virtually no one willing to defend the Provisional Government.
Ahem, remind me. Were the Bolsheviks involved in the civil war? Ummm... October Revolution?
The facts that the Bolsheviks controlled very little of the countryside and that they had to inherit an economic system which had essentially collasped, and they were almost instantly attacked by foreign and pro-tsarist forces, makes it hard to put the 1921 famine on Bolshevism.
09 Feb 07
Originally posted by RedmikeParasites like Chavez and his cronies who've amassed great personal wealth at the expense of shareholders of industries that have been nationalized?
These aren't speculators - they are parasites.
They are hoarding food to drive the price up, hoping to make a fast buck from their fellow citizens.
09 Feb 07
Originally posted by wedgehead2Some of the same problems in 1921 Russia as 2007 Venezuela. Some peasants "hoarded" their own grain rather than sell at the government price. The government confiscated their grain and seed grain as punishment. American relief ended in 1923 when it was found that the Russians were exporting food for hard currency while simultaneously accepting free grain from America.
Yes, they were. But they consistently oppposed the imperialist WW1, in direct oppoistionj to neraly all the other political parties in Russia. They took power in the October Revolution almost bloodlessly, as there was virtually no one willing to defend the Provisional Government.
The facts that the Bolsheviks controlled very little of the countryside an ...[text shortened]... attacked by foreign and pro-tsarist forces, makes it hard to put the 1921 famine on Bolshevism.
Of course in the 1932 famine, Stalin chose to let 7 million people starve rather than seek famine relief.
09 Feb 07
Originally posted by techsouthThe peasants weren't hoarding- they didn't have any grain to eat for themselves. The government did try to get as much food as it could for it's troops- but so did the enemy white forces.
Some of the same problems in 1921 Russia as 2007 Venezuela. Some peasants "hoarded" their own grain rather than sell at the government price. The government confiscated their grain and seed grain as punishment. American relief ended in 1923 when it was found that the Russians were exporting food for hard currency while simultaneously accepting free grai ...[text shortened]... n the 1932 famine, Stalin chose to let 7 million people starve rather than seek famine relief.
The 1932 famine was the worst human man made famine in history. But Stalin was an evil guy.
I wasn't trying to defend Bolshevism as an ideology or Stalin or Lenin, but I felt that to blame the 1921 famine on Bolshevism was slightly harsh.
09 Feb 07
Originally posted by wedgehead2If Chavez keeps up his destruction of the free market, it's just a matter of time before the world will be called upon to provide relief.
The peasants weren't hoarding- they didn't have any grain to eat for themselves. The government did try to get as much food as it could for it's troops- but so did the enemy white forces.
The 1932 famine was the worst human man made famine in history. But Stalin was an evil guy.
I wasn't trying to defend Bolshevism as an ideology or Stalin or Lenin, but I felt that to blame the 1921 famine on Bolshevism was slightly harsh.
09 Feb 07
Originally posted by wedgehead2The 1932 famine was the worst human man made famine in history. But Stalin was an evil guy.
The peasants weren't hoarding- they didn't have any grain to eat for themselves. The government did try to get as much food as it could for it's troops- but so did the enemy white forces.
The 1932 famine was the worst human man made famine in history. But Stalin was an evil guy.
I wasn't trying to defend Bolshevism as an ideology or Stalin or Lenin, but I felt that to blame the 1921 famine on Bolshevism was slightly harsh.
We'll see if that's true when North Korea opens up. It's entirely possible that the stories that come from there will on par or worse than any from Russia.