Talk:Single-party state

From Communpedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Anti-socialist ???

XXXPowerMexico claims that I'm writing from an anti-Socialist perspective. This is strange, because I'm just as much Socialist as him, if not more. Because most communists are against Stalin and mean he's a capitalist and fascist, but XXXPowerMexico is 100 % Stalinist. Claiming that I'm writing from an "anti-Socialist perspective" is a very serious break of Communpedia:We are all leftists. And there's no doubt about that North Korea is a dictatorship. Isolating the country such as they have done itself make it a dictatorship. I wrote "authoritarian", and he/she removed it because he/she support the Korean regime. And about listing China, Vietnam and Laos here, there's no doubt about these are single-party state. I haven't criticized the governments in any of these three countries with ONE WORD. It's both a personal attack and a break on We are all leftists to call other users for anti-socialists. Like most other communists today, I'm against North Korea and other totalitarian regimes that have called themselves "socialist" or "communist". I follow the Leninist/Castroist version, and support freedom of speech, freedom of the press, freedom to travel, freedom of religion and more that doesn't exist in the countries that XXXPowerMexico like. If XXXPowerMexico is against freedom of speech, freedom of the press, freedom to travel, freedom of religion and other basic democratic rights, that's OK too for me, because I accept and prefer democracy. You have reverted most of the edits I've made and deleted nearly all the articles I've written because I don't write anti-Castro and anti-Lenin comments. In reality, I don't know why anyone support Kim Jong-il, Pol Pot, Ceausescu, Stalin and other dictators. After the war it was much more Stalinist than today, and it's a reason why most communists today prefer Leninism. Please read Communpedia:We are all leftists and I want that you shall say that you're sorry for your personal attacks against me and the violations of that rule. But greetings from, A young communist 07:38, 2 August 2011 (MSD)

This is not a forum, you should be mature enough to respect other people's opinions and theories, and I am not a Stalinist or even Stalinist-supporter, I haven't attacked you but calling me a Stalinist (and an idiot) is a clear personal attack, violation of CP:WAL and harassment. We don't trust Wikipedia here, if you think wikipedia is not biased, then you are free to edit there. Again, this is not a forum to make false claims or personal remarks. You cannot post propaganda here, and you need to respect other people's opinions, if you want to discuss, then do it on talk pages, not on articles, and give better arguments than "because Wikipedia says so". Please, use common sense and stop violating CP:WAL. Note that this is not a warning but a comment from your friend and comrade, —
Error creating thumbnail: File missing
xXPowerMexicoXx (Talk) 05:57, 3 August 2011 (MSD)
It's you that have violated what you call WAL in EVERY ARTICLE I'VE WRITTEN and EVERY EDIT I'VE DONE. And the constitution of these countries say that [...] is the only legal party in this country. And what do Syria have to do with WAL? WHAT? Are you from ISRAEL? In Israel, Socialism is a epitheth. And there, the whole population HATE both the Syrian government and, even worse, the Syrian people. And real leftism doesn't have anything to do with Syria. A young communist 22:33, 3 August 2011 (MSD)
perhaps we should be more specific when calling China a single-party state, even though everyone knows China is now capitalist, it doesn't have the same government as other single-party states, and in some cases even though there is only one legal party in a country there are other forms of democracy such as referendums, etc. —
Error creating thumbnail: File missing
xXPowerMexicoXx (Talk) 02:01, 13 September 2011 (MSD)
Single-party state and totalitarian dictatorship isn't the same. I don't think the word "single-party state is so bad. Fidel have had some funny quotes about this. "Do we need more parties" and "Elections, why?" are among these. For me, single-party state doesn't have to be negative. In some countries it may be necessary. --Nocomrade 02:09, 13 September 2011 (MSD)