HOME | DD | Gallery | Favourites | RSS
| namezong
namezong
[12044740]
[2009-11-04 05:52:24 +0000 UTC]
"jason"
(Lithuania)
# Statistics
Favourites: 107; Deviations: 470; Watchers: 32
Watching: 165; Pageviews: 15856; Comments Made: 1858; Friends: 165
# Comments
Comments: 48
π: 0 β©: 0
π: 0 β©: 0
Priv TavariΕ‘Δ! Please tell me, do you still log on sometime(s)?
In that case please check this and that , thanks π!
(I had a bit more, unfortunately lost it probs forever with an accidental format w/reinstall on my first laptop 
π: 0 β©: 1
Maan those anarchilddies sure are insufferable. I just had a short "exchange" with one, spoiled brats (π does this work means in Russian what it means hier?) and sons of rich borgissi faggits who take everything too fucking seriously and can't understand some people have to actually work so can't be on dA 13/y and not everyone is a fucking native speaker of their colonialist language β I mean just like those 99 Cents 
I hope there are more people like you on dA, this site was basically taken over by same shills gaymergate fought w/, which is why people like Slavros are eliminated. They dig too deep and abstained from "hackivism", discovering all that shit you'll call cultural "Marxism"/"SJ"Ws/"Progressive"-ism is basically paid by the Altantist governments, likely to harass REAL free world with. But honestly, is this any surprising for you? The left needs no identify politics, unless it's useful for the nation - Which lowering the Caucasoid man's birhtrate certainly isn't.
π: 0 β©: 1
Thanks for your kind words.
(re)gressives are totally reactionary, incapable of anything constructive, just corroding civilization that nurtures them ungrateful swines. although I would not call them left, as left in general is(was) concerned with class/wealth and SJW with some imaginary s**t like micro agressions and puppy play acceptance or what not.
Seriously, even rabid Maoists like Jason
hates them www.youtube.com/watch?v=-dD6ahβ¦
π: 0 β©: 0
Hey Jason, just wondering if you do any actual original artwork, or do you just play with action figures and comment on other actual original artwork?
Also, if you may want to work on your spelling if you are, in fact, going to type in English. I've had the worst time trying to decode the descriptions for your "converted" action figure (work?). Just as a friendly piece of advice.Β
All good things.
π: 0 β©: 1
Converting/painting wargames models is creative act (google what "converting a model" means if you are not familiar with the term).
Look around my profile, there is also scenery I crafted (from scratch). Some poetry also.
π: 0 β©: 0
Good saying:
War does not determine who is right, only who is left.
π: 0 β©: 0
What do you think of the Soviet leaders that preceded Gorbachev, if I may ask?
π: 0 β©: 1
You may.
Starting from Nikita Khrushchev, we had a line of gradually deteriorating technocrats, who could (and did) rule in the "move along" mode, without proper ideological drive (they did repeated the mantras, but it sounded increasingly insincere), which worked fine for some time but led to gradual detriment of metanation's ideological health. The main wrong there was, I think, the switch to the focus on material goodies, with led to increase of bourgeois values and thus envy to the wealthy classes of the west - including (especially importantly) among the ruling classes of USSR (who's wealth was limited under socialist system).
As for Stalin, he was a pinnacle of Russian statesmanship, saved our people from enslavement/extermination under nazi, and leading the country from post-civil war ruin to world superpower (and workers/peasants from abject poverty to decent standards of living and social perspectives too). As for repressions, the gazillion numbers you probably heard of are vastly exaggerated cold-war era propaganda crap (and sizable part of those that did took place were done without Stalin's approval, and the perpetrators were later executed when their abuses came to light). If you want to know more on this topic, I would recommend you this alexander-slavros.deviantart.cβ¦
π: 0 β©: 1
Well I don't think it's propaganda at all but is that why you hate Gorbachev? Because he ended communism in Russia? Is he a traitor to communism to you?
π: 0 β©: 1
The exageration of repressios is propoganda, not repressions themselves. thouse were sad fact, just not as mind-boggingly massive as russia's enemies would like to show it.
No the gorbachev is more like traitor of the country/people, because the country's power was greatly diminished and people were plunged into powerty, crime and in some satelite respublics - genocide, as result of gorbachev's actions. Would you say it's not enough to call one traitor?
π: 0 β©: 1
No. The people were sick and tired of communism and dictatorship so Gorbachev tried to make things easier for them and make things more democratic. Do you think the Berlin Wall was good?
π: 0 β©: 1
Dictatorship? Don't be silly. Current america is more a dictatorship than late USSR was. as is EU. so what?
As for people tired of communism, know you now that on a referendum that was made in 1991 during perestroika people voted for keeping USSR instead of dismantling it (the referendum that was promptly ignored, mind you).
π: 0 β©: 1
Have you lived during the time of the Soviet Union (and by that I mean before Glasnost), and have you spent a decent amount of time here in America to justify what you're saying?
And I know these days there are still a lot of communists in Russia who want the USSR to come back, including Putin, but DURING the time of the Soviet Union, the entire population didn't want it and didn't like it except for the leaders. The people who want the Soviet Union back in Russia, that third that likes Stalin, clearly have not lived during that time to see it.
π: 0 β©: 1
Bullshit!
My parents and family members lived in Soviet era. IΒ keep in touch with relatives living in usa. And my grandparents, still alive and well, lived under Stalin (one fought for him), thank you very much.
So I'm somewhat informed.
Unlike you, it seems 
And claiming Putin is communist shows clearly that you have no clue whatsowever in russia's politics today.
So come back after studying some real history.
π: 0 β©: 1
Firstly, I know my history and that's precisely why we're having this debate, so don't act like I don't. Putin grew up with the Soviet Union, as a KGB officer. I only say he's a communist in that he still has it beating in his veins, but that's just a theory, and I said it to CONFIRM your previous point, and your attack it like it disagrees with what you said, which suggests your also not sincere about your point. Secondly, even if that was true about inteligentsia, if so many people didn't wanna destroy communism but wanted just to change it, what does that tell you about the leaders that have ruled it prior to Gorbachev! What does that tell you about Stalin and Khruschev and Breshnev's leadership?
π: 0 β©: 2
Perhaps you misunderstand my point then. Or tried to confirm it in some weird way I didnβt detected. Please explain.
Growing up in USSR or working in KGB doesn't make one a communist (sadly).
On pre-Gorbachev leaders I kinda agree with you, we had steady decline in quality of our leadership after the pinnacle of statesmanship that was Stalin. (I think I have mentioned that previously).
π: 0 β©: 1
True. Putin is not a communist in that he's Russia's dictator, and I'm not sure if he still has the mindset of a communist because it is not proven, but it is very possible because he did grow up as a KGB troop and it's not like he chose the new, democratic Russia. We won the Cold War, and the Russians were liberated, but it wasn't by Putin's will or even Gorbachev's. It was thanks to great leaders like Reagan and Thatcher and Lech Walesa and Pope John Paul II.
This is where we disagree. The post-Stalin leaders weren't great, but at least they didn't
1. Kill 20 million people
2. Physically and verbally abuse their wives
3. Not give a shit about his Nazi-kidnapped son
4. Murder Trotsky and any other communist who opposed him
5. Be so aggressive of a communist to even lose Lenin's trust
π: 0 β©: 1
You evidently have very cartoonish understanding of communism.
Putin is not communist not because he's a dictator, but because he does nothing communistic, like making means of production/mineral wealth state/publicly owned, limiting power of capitalists/oligarchs, supporting workers or the like. That shows he is not communist.
As for Stalin, value of a leader is not measured by how nice he is to his wife, but by what his country achieves under his rule, and winning WW2 and becoming world superpower are as Β great achievements as you can get (short of taking over the world, of course).
About mass repression thing, it's exaggerated (strange u didnβt write 100milions lol), I already linked u to the materials about it;
On his captured son, it is actually a sign of his sincerity and lawfulness, that he applied to his family member the same rules that were applied to any other captured military personnel at the time.
Trotsky was enemy of the state, because of his plan was to use Russia as "fuel for world revolution" (and fuel is destroyed in process, u know) and because his defamation of ussr in immigration. Also, Trotsky showed no revolutionary activity outside Russia, so no big loss there.
As for Leninβs letters where he says he doesn't like/trust Stalin, in the same letter he says he doesnβt like/trust other party heads too, to the point Stalin actually looked less denounced than many others.
π: 0 β©: 1
Putin's not a dictator. He can't do much in Russia thanks to democracy, and Stalin was a dictator just as well, so from your argument, Stalin wouldn't be a communist either
Winning World War II was a combined effort of the Soviet Union and the Allied Powers, so you can't just say Stalin won the war. As for the world power thing, it became so only in a military way, so the fact that you credit Stalin for his military accomplishments is something I would expect from a fascist, not a communist.
And the deathcount thing, what are the numbers then in your mind, and what does it really matter, considering the ridiculous reasons he had for causing said deaths.
π: 0 β©: 1
Few posts back you said Putin was a dictator. Make up your mind.
Soviet union became world power not just in military, but in moral and ideological ways as well. half the world looked up to it.
Also, Explain your notion of fascism, you seem to have some peculiar understanding of it that would be entertaining to hear.
π: 0 β©: 1
Well I did think that, before I learned more about the guy and that he can't do jack (thank god)
No I do. Fascism is a nationalistic militaristic ideology and it involves dictatorship. So the quote "We only need victory" sounds just like something the nazis would say and I knew that would get your goat as a communist, I decided to tease you a little bit in that instance while at the same time demonstrating how Fascists and communist historically had everything in common, despite their opposite views.
Moral and ideological ideas? Yeah ok. Watch this documentary and tell me that Stalin was a moral and just man www.youtube.com/watch?v=3_UDdiβ¦
π: 0 β©: 2
As i answered u elswere, WW2 was war for survival for my people, so "We only need victory" is rather justified. Imagine your country being invaded by Chinese, and put the same slogan in that contesxt.
As fot the link, it's LOL teen play piece says "This is a short fake trailer about Stalin's life" in description; so it's hardly very view-changing. bud good try. did you expected me not to follow the link and counter-argument blindly or what?
π: 0 β©: 1
We would definitely need to defend ourselves. I'm not saying they shouldn't have. I just said that to mess with you a little bit because I know communists and fascists hate each other despite the fact they historically have had everything in common. I can't believe you took that comment even remotely seriously.
And as for the link, the History Channel is well known for being unbiased at all, so if you still rejected the documentary, than there's nothing I can do. I did expect you to watch it as a matter of fact, that's why I sent it to you, but I suppose it would be asking for too much to expect youΒ to be open and intelligent and actually grab something from people who know a bit more than you about history. Sorry. I won't make that mistake again.
π: 0 β©: 1
Since you abandoned any honest discussion and continue only to "mess with me";
GTFO from my profile.
π: 0 β©: 1
We didn't abandon any honest discussion because there wasn't any honest discussion to abandon. You completely rejected the Stalin documentary, so that's done, and now you're making it sound like I meant anything by that comment other than to show that communists and fascists have everything in common.
π: 0 β©: 1
There was no documentary in the link you smart-panties.
Your argument is invalid.
π: 0 β©: 0
OOPS! Sorry wrong link. This is the one www.youtube.com/watch?v=OfhjV5β¦
π: 0 β©: 0
And I would also like to know whether or not your family members were farmers or worked for the communist party in the soviet union. I know one of your grandparents worked for the party because you said he fought for Stalin but what about the others?
π: 0 β©: 1
And one more thing, before you jump right into defending Stalin, I suggest you watch this video www.youtube.com/watch?v=OfhjV5β¦ and watch the whole thing. There are many people from the Soviet Union who tell their story about Stalin, so, no, it's not western propaganda.
π: 0 β©: 0
Maybe the 'Tories' and the Tea party' lot are all from the same batch of clones.
π: 0 β©: 1
I'm not sure what tories are you referring to?
π: 0 β©: 1
'Tories' are a 'nickname' for the Conservative Party (ever so slightly' to the right of mainstream politics in the UK). Allegedly, the name Torie/Tory can also mean 'Brigand' or robber in 'old vernacular Irish. If so, they haven't changed much,as they definitely are the party of the wealthy who get tax cuts while, the National Health Service and other departments get their budgets slashed. Public Service employees wage increase are either frozen or below inflation. Welfare Benefits for disabled citizens are cut. Assessments for Disablity Living Allowance (DLA) are conducted by a French private Company named ATOS. Despite a horrendous record, ( over 40% of appeals are upheld. Even terminally ill people, with cancer etc, are deemed fit for work, people have committed suicide after losing their DLA), The company's contract, which is up for renewal, is likely to be granted, as it is managing to cut Welfare Benefits by Billions, despite causing hardship and poverty for millions. This was one of many such pledged by the 'Tories'. They give out constant propaganda about 'Welfare Scroungers' who are living off the backs of hardworking people. While there are, admittedly many who are 'milking the Welfare System (Drug Addicts especially). There policies are causing intense hardship for many, in the name of 'Austerity'.
Their Financial/Economic Recovery plan is clearly not working, yet they still proceed with 'Plan A'. if the do back track/change on it, this is denied and claimed that it is working, but will only take longer than expected. At present, having failed to win a majority, they are in a Coalition with the Liberal Democrats (who get the blame for a lot of the failed policies and face a hammering at the 2015 Election).
As such, the Tories are desperate to get a majority at the next General Election. They even tried to change the Electoral Boundaries in their favour. Fortunately this was defeated. They are likely to come up with packages to try to 'bribe' the more naΓ―ve members of the public before 2015.
Sorry to rant on, but I hope this describes who and what the Tories are and what they stand for.
π: 0 β©: 1
It's ok, I guess you needed it;
I'm not very good on current English politics, except that both(or 3?) old parties are both pro-eurointegration and further diluting of native population with immigrants, and that UKIP looks rally good in comparison.
π: 0 β©: 0
Your works desrved it!
π: 0 β©: 0
Priwetstvuju i tebia!
π: 0 β©: 0
Nice start
deep red with purple
π: 0 β©: 1