Maoist leader elected PM of Nepal

[© tweed]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/7563816.stm

Members of Nepal's parliament have overwhelmingly elected the Maoist leader Prachanda as the country's new prime minister.

The 53-year-old won 80% of votes to defeat his only rival, the Congress Party candidate, Sher Bahadur Deuba.

Maoists won a surprise victory in April elections, and two other key parties supported Prachanda in the vote.

Last month, Nepal swore in a mainly ceremonial president, Ram Baran Yadav, after the monarchy was scrapped in May.

[King]

Well, at least they did it by voting.

[War on Want]

Awesome, I would prefer the Social Democrats but what the hell this is better than a monarchy.

[dead0man]

Good for them.  It's always good to have more evidence it doesn't work.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

Yay!

[War on Want]

Good for them.  It's always good to have more evidence it doesn't work.

Meh it could work okay. The thing about Communism is that it can be very efficent and at times even better than capitalism and others corrup, populist and extremely damaging. I am going to lean towards the effiency side this time around.

[dead0man]

Can you point out one of those times it's been better than capitalism?

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

Please point out to me how capitalism has benefited poor as sh!t Nepal.

[dead0man]

Have they had it yet?

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

The communists just took power, so that's what they had up until now.

[War on Want]

Can you point out one of those times it's been better than capitalism?

The Soviet Union quite arguably was doing as well as we were until they had very corrupt and nutjob leadership during the 70's. They also industrialized at an extremely rapid rate that is very unheard of.
I never said better than capitalism, I did say on par.

[War on Want]

Have they had it yet?

Pretty much, yes. Feudalism and capitalism in countries like say Singapore is almost the same thing.

[Хahar 🤔]

I'd have preferred the Congress, but the Maoists can't be too bad.

[dead0man]

Can you point out one of those times it's been better than capitalism?

The Soviet Union quite arguably was doing as well as we were until they had very corrupt and nutjob leadership during the 70's. They also industrialized at an extremely rapid rate that is very unheard of.
I never said better than capitalism, I did say on par.

The thing about Communism is that it can be very efficent and at times even better than capitalism and others corrup, populist and extremely damaging. I am going to lean towards the effiency side this time around.

Dude, that was 8 minutes ago.  And if it takes one corrupt nutjob to kill your economy so much that your entire system collapses....I don't know if I'd say that system was on par with ours.

[War on Want]

Can you point out one of those times it's been better than capitalism?

The Soviet Union quite arguably was doing as well as we were until they had very corrupt and nutjob leadership during the 70's. They also industrialized at an extremely rapid rate that is very unheard of.
I never said better than capitalism, I did say on par.

The thing about Communism is that it can be very efficent and at times even better than capitalism and others corrup, populist and extremely damaging. I am going to lean towards the effiency side this time around.

Dude, that was 8 minutes ago.  And if it takes one corrupt nutjob to kill your economy so much that your entire system collapses....I don't know if I'd say that system was on par with ours.

It really isn't on par but the point is that successful capitalism in Asia that actually benefits the whole populace is very rare so it isn't fair to totally bash communism when capitalism in developing countries doesn't have a great track record either.

[dead0man]

Have they had it yet?

Pretty much, yes. Feudalism and capitalism in countries like say Singapore is almost the same thing.

Is there anything I can say here that would make you understand how silly your asnwer was or am I wasting my time?

[dead0man]

It really isn't on par but the point is that successful capitalism in Asia that actually benefits the whole populace is very rare so it isn't fair to totally bash communism when capitalism in developing countries doesn't have a great track record either.

Yeah, Hong Kong, Japan, Taiwan, etc are all horrible places that people risk their life to flee.  Wait, no that's communism as in China and N.Korea and recently in places like Vietnam, the Soviet Union, E. Germany, etc.  In places that have actually implemented capitalism and not just paid lip service to it they have had plenty of successes.  People drive cars.  People are happy.  People don't starve.  People don't get shot in the back trying to leave.  And if they want to, they can still have small socialist societies if they want to.  Or petition the govt to change.  You can't open a capitalist society inside a communist country.  You (generally) can't leave or move when you want to.  You can't (generally) petition the govt when you want.

I'm shocked and a little saddened that people still think communism can work at the nation state level.

[War on Want]

It really isn't on par but the point is that successful capitalism in Asia that actually benefits the whole populace is very rare so it isn't fair to totally bash communism when capitalism in developing countries doesn't have a great track record either.

Yeah, Hong Kong, Japan, Taiwan, etc are all horrible places that people risk their life to flee.  Wait, no that's communism as in China and N.Korea and recently in places like Vietnam, the Soviet Union, E. Germany, etc.  In places that have actually implemented capitalism and not just paid lip service to it they have had plenty of successes.  People drive cars.  People are happy.  People don't starve.  People don't get shot in the back trying to leave.  And if they want to, they can still have small socialist societies if they want to.  Or petition the govt to change.  You can't open a capitalist society inside a communist country.  You (generally) can't leave or move when you want to.  You can't (generally) petition the govt when you want.

I'm shocked and a little saddened that people still think communism can work at the nation state level.

Terrible examples. Yes Taiwan, Japan and Hong Kong all have relativley successful capitalism because they have employed state services to improve the liveliehoods of the people. I was talking about lassiez faire capitalism in Singapore. I agree I like capitalism of America and Japan much more than any other economic system besides Social Democracy but you can not deny that communism works at the nation-state level in some casesm or else it wouldn't be considered a threat.

I think you are mistaking my defintion of Communism anyways. In China it is doing fine, same with Vietnam, same with Cuba, sure I would prefer capitalism and in reality I dislike all of those countries government's with a passion but to deny their systems do not work at all is just ignorant.

Also deadman please do not think that I actually support communism in any way, shape or form unless it is non-authoritarian and supports democracy. Even then I disagree with it whole heartedley.

[dead0man]

Hong Kong was pretty open for most of the last 100 years.  Much more so than Singapore (or Hong Kong for that matter) is today.

Communism was only a threat because they were threatening us militarily.  Other than early in the last century, communism was never a threat to our political system.  Now that it's repeatedly proved itself to be a horrible system of govt, it's not really threat any place that has a halfway decent and open education system.  It will always pop up in backwaters though.  It's an easy system to sell to the poor/ignorant.

[War on Want]

Hong Kong was pretty open for most of the last 100 years.  Much more so than Singapore (or Hong Kong for that matter) is today.

Communism was only a threat because they were threatening us militarily.  Other than early in the last century, communism was never a threat to our political system.  Now that it's repeatedly proved itself to be a horrible system of govt, it's not really threat any place that has a halfway decent and open education system.  It will always pop up in backwaters though.  It's an easy system to sell to the poor/ignorant.

Fair enough as long as you admit that Socialist economies do work decently and are not all economic backwaters.

[dead0man]

Correct.  If they are tied to liberal democracy's they can work if some additional conditions are met.
A.homogeneous population
B.resources
C.no/few extreme population bumps/dips

[War on Want]

Correct.  If they are tied to liberal democracy's they can work if some additional conditions are met.
A.homogeneous population
B.resources
C.no/few extreme population bumps/dips

I disagree but whatever. We can agree to disagree, I really dislike neverending arguments.

[12th Doctor]

Good for them.  It's always good to have more evidence it doesn't work.

Meh it could work okay. The thing about Communism is that it can be very efficent and at times even better than capitalism and others corrup, populist and extremely damaging. I am going to lean towards the effiency side this time around.

I agree, communism can be very efficient.

Communisms Body Count

[Sensei]

I'd have preferred the Congress, but the Maoists can't be too bad.

How the hell can't the Maoists be too bad?

If they plan to implement Maoesque changes in Nepal, they're in for a world of trouble.

[minionofmidas]

Maoists won a surprise victory in April elections, and two other key parties supported Prachanda in the vote.

...surprising in how narrow it was.