3 woman kept hostage for 30 years

[ivykaty44]

one being the whole of her life as she is 30 - how did this person not ever go to school? This is shocking

Twitter user James Heartfield has dug up more discovery.ucl.ac.uk/1349448/1/D32160.pdf PhD Thesis on Workers' Institute (p141 on) , who were raided by police in Brixton in 1978

and www.marxists.org/history/erol/uk.hightide/closure.htm

Communists. What a fucking surprise.

Anyone see the letter the 30-year-old sent to a 'neighbour'? Perfect spelling and grammar. Did she go to school? If not where did she learn to write so well? What's with this neighbour bloke who didn't go to the police? All seems very odd to me.

I knew someone who was in a sect for year, she was very secretive, I think she donated all her salary to the sect, when Tianamen Square (sorry can't remember how to spell it) happened, she morphed into a normal person. Bought clothes, passed her driving rest, contacted her parents, whom she hadn't seen or contacted for years, met a man, and you couldn't stop her living life from then on in. It was weird. I never questioned her about it, I just took the new her with gladness.

Sorry about the typos..

Well actually Flatpackhampster I , and most other people, would never have guessed 'communists'. So it is a fucking surprise. actually Maoists of this sort really have nothing to do with Communists as I know them, but I expect the subtleties pass you by.

telsa

Well actually Flatpackhampster I , and most other people, would never have guessed 'communists'. So it is a fucking surprise.

To you and your commie chums.

actually Maoists of this sort really have nothing to do with Communists as I know them, but I expect the subtleties pass you by.

Of course they don't. Your communists are different, just like communism really works and the failed communists states weren't really communist states because if they were, they'd have worked. Right?

Feel free to keep apologising for the world's most brutally efficient killing machine. It needs Useful Idiots.

So the far right political groups would never endorse slavery then? Capitalism was built on slavery, read a fucking book!
There are people affiliated with all political agendas capable of heinous acts. This is an unfortunate act (of which we are yet to have the full facts as the bailed have not stood trial yet) which could have been carried out by any group. Sadly non would have been more or less surprising to me, as it is not the ideology but the individuals who commit these atrocities. Remember andrea brevick?

And still is to all intents and purposes Mew.

I wish I was doing my O' level history again, Eastern Asia was intriguing. Sadly I've forgotten most of it, but Chairman Mao rings a bell. (no pun intended).

mewmeow

So the far right political groups would never endorse slavery then?

Perhaps you could point me to some good examples of 'far right' people kidnapping people for 30 years and brainwashing them to be servants?

Capitalism was built on slavery, read a fucking book!

Read plenty. No it wasn't.

What the fuck? Are you denying colonialism happened?
8 million africans estimated to have been murdered, the biggest genocide of all time, and you are denying it happened?

Yes monty, I agree it still is.
Sweatshops, minimum wages below the living wage. The context is different because it is legal for us to source materials and exist in these conditions, but there is a strong case for it being considered (informal) slavery as it is the wilful exploitation and oppression of one class of people against another, in which the lower has little to no choice but conformity if they want to survive.

mewmeow
What the fuck? Are you denying colonialism happened? hmm

No. But that isn't capitalism, is it. Capitalism is an economic system, a means of goods transfer. That's what you apologists for mass murder (aka socialists) seem to forget. Your disgusting, warped ideology is a political system. Capitalism is an economic one.

8 million africans estimated to have been murdered, the biggest genocide of all time, and you are denying it happened?

Let me stand back and allow you to race straight on to the hysteria boat.

A means of goods transfer that utilised people as commodities during colonisation. An economic system that requires a profit motive. I believe in a structured economy and shared ownership (socialism).
I am not an apologist for any kind of murder or slavery carried out by individuals or individual groups.
You can be as negative about communism as you like, you don't sound well educated on the topic.

A means of goods transfer that utilised people as commodities during colonisation. An economic system that requires a profit motive. I believe in a structured economy and shared ownership (socialism).
I am not an apologist for any kind of murder or slavery carried out by individuals or individual groups.
You can be as negative about communism as you like, you don't sound well educated on the topic.

This sounds like a cult. A cult masquerading under the guise of a political idiology. If papers are correct a select - higher few - were living off the wages of a couple of supporters.

mewmeow

A means of goods transfer that utilised people as commodities during colonisation.

Communism does that all the time. People are things - tools to be used by the state.

An economic system that requires a profit motive. I believe in a structured economy and shared ownership (socialism).

A functioning system doesn't require belief. Socialism doesn't work because it isn't built for humans.

I am not an apologist for any kind of murder or slavery carried out by individuals or individual groups.

But you are happy to accept death and poverty as a consequence of your evil beliefs.

You can be as negative about communism as you like, you don't sound well educated on the topic.

Really. You sound so well-informed about it. So well informed that you aren't capable of pointing me to a single successful socialist system that didn't leave a trail of dead and starving people behind it.

It is not worth arguing with the ignorance of Flatpackhamster, for he (?) fails to understand that the communism of the eastern Bloc was merely state capitalism, as full communism can only be international. He/she really should read the stunning work of Eric Williams (Capitalism and Slavery) and the various more recent works of Robin Blackburn (eg The Overthrow of Colonial Slavery, 1776-1848) to make a start on rectifying his/her failings.

Look, why are you even comparing socialism and capitalism anyway? One is a political system, the other economic. You might as well be saying 'weasels are better than cake'.

Are you talking about a socialist command economy where the state owns everything and rations it and comparing that to a capitalist economy? Or are you talking about a socialist government and comparing that to a democratic one?

telsa

It is not worth arguing with the ignorance of Flatpackhamster, for he (?) fails to understand that the communism of the eastern Bloc was merely state capitalism, as full communism can only be international.

Ahh, the old 'it wasn't REAL communism because it didn't work and REAL communism would have worked'...

He/she really should read the stunning work of Eric Williams (Capitalism and Slavery) and the various more recent works of Robin Blackburn (eg The Overthrow of Colonial Slavery, 1776-1848) to make a start on rectifying his/her failings.

I may not have consumed as much looney left literature as you, but at least I don't hold the human race in total contempt as you clearly do. Only someone who hated the human race could possibly advocate a system of government as vile and oppressive as communism.

Are you a mail reader per chance flat pack?
If you (by your own admission) haven't read much literature on the subject, then presumably your only information is from second hand sources, how then do you feel qualified to make the ridiculous statements you have about 'hating the world', 'serving the state' and 'evil'.
I think you really do need to get a bit more educated if you wish to enter into political debates like this because you are making yourself look like a complete idiot.

mewmeow

Are you a mail reader per chance flat pack? grin

Lazy and inevitable, I suppose.

If you (by your own admission) haven't read much literature on the subject, then presumably your only information is from second hand sources, how then do you feel qualified to make the ridiculous statements you have about 'hating the world', 'serving the state' and 'evil'.

I haven't read books by communists about how brilliant communism is, no. But I do have an entire library of history books. The history of communism is one of butchery far in excess of Nazism. If you'd spent less time reading books telling you how brilliant communism was and a bit more mooching through some history books, perhaps you wouldn't be so blissfully ignorant of reality.

I think you really do need to get a bit more educated if you wish to enter into political debates like this because you are making yourself look like a complete idiot.

Well so far, you've hardly covered yourself in intellectual glory. You've insulted me about 15 times and told me how clever you are because of all the books about communism you've read and how stupid I must be for not having read whatever you've read. That in my book adds up to the square root of fuck-all when it comes to actual persuasion.

So why don't you tell me, in your own words, what's so great about Communism and its associated ideologies. Not 'in theory', but in actual practice with real-world examples, tell me why a socialist command economy is superior to a capitalist free-market economy. Or give me some examples of the liberty enjoyed by people living under a Communist government.

You've got a library of History books yet can't think of a time when far-right groups endorsed slavery and cant see the link between capitalism and colonisation? Sorry Flat I'm not buying it.
I'm not here to convince you how great communism is. You've already made your mind up on that (without having read any literature it seems!). Im merely pointing out the flaws in your argument and your obvious narrow minded mess.

mewmeow

You've got a library of History books yet can't think of a time when far-right groups endorsed slavery and cant see the link between capitalism and colonisation? hmm Sorry Flat I'm not buying it.

You claimed 'capitalism was built on slavery'. That's a very specific claim which is nonsense. Capitalism is an economic process. Private ownership of means of production was not reliant on slavery. Nor was it 'built upon it'.

Oh, and weren't you supposed to be giving me examples of times when 'far right groups' locked women in basements in servitude?

I'm not here to convince you how great communism is.

Because you can't. You are incapable of advancing a single argument in favour of it.

You've already made your mind up on that (without having read any literature it seems!).

I wonder how useful reading a book about how great communism is would be in terms of making my mind up about communism.

Im merely pointing out the flaws in your argument and your obvious narrow minded mess.

Another insult, and still no actual arguments. All you can do is carp and nitpick and imagine that you're somehow demonstrating your intellectual superiority.

Come on. You've told me I'm wrong but put up not one argument. Why can't you do that?

Capitalism is fundamentally flawed as it exist's on the basis of a profit motive which by its nature requires workers (the majority) to be constantly exploited, ie not be paid what their labour is worth. This creates a division where by all profit is skimmed to the core from the periphery.
Trickle down policy has been proven time and time again to be a fallacy, in actuality money is continuely sucked out away from the periphery to the core (elite).
It may appear that inequality has lessened due to the progression afforded to the masses of western countries in terms of technological and material advancements (under a capitalism system), however not only is this not the case in terms of capital, there is a huge amount of exploited (mainly in developing countries but also here) paying the price for these luxuries.
You may ask why inequality is an issue if you are of the neo-liberal persuasion, it is an issue because countries with high levels of inequality have proved time and time again to have the biggest social problems, this includes high crime rates, high mortality and morbidity rates, high suicide rates, low employment rates etc. Problems which affect both rich and poor.
On the other hand socio-democratic countries such as Sweden & Scandinavia have proved the benefits of state ownership and a peaceful and democratic move away from the constraints and fundamental flaws of capitalism. They consistently do well both economically and socially in terms of gdp's and things like employment and education.
I believe Marx was right when he said capitalism would lurch from crisis to crisis, papering over the cracks, before eventually destroying itself. This is evident by the unstable nature of the economy and the predominance of recessions. Really how stable can an economy which relies on solely both on people spending ubove their needs and earning less than their worth really be? Not very! The only people benefiting in the long run are the bourgeois (and for a limited time only the petty-bourgeois). You say that socialism is evil because of the stark visibility of those who have done evil things whilst also in some way attempting to follow some variation of socialist principals, but what about the core root of capitalism which exists on, and only because, of constant exploitation and greed?!