Wikipedia and dark side editing

[Forogil]

Where did I say it was?

You implied that it was relevant.

I suspect you see what you want to see.

And you claim it is biased when it isn't what you to see. You still seem unable to understand this.

Genocide is conunter-productive for ANY political system, unless you count those that base their legitimacy on keeping "the race pure".

Or religion - or something else.

That doesn't mean that BOTH communism and capitalism hasn't racked up some pretty impressive death tolls over the last century. To present one but ban the other is nothing short of censorship, and a good indicator that Wikipedia has a lot of editors that doesn't give a crap about objective truth if it clashes with their political views.

No, it means that communism has racked up impressive death tolls - but we don't see the evidence for the death tolls of capitalism.

That difference obviously clashes with your political views - and thus you are unable to see that it could be true; and instead you claim that editors are not objective - without even investigating the facts. Clearly objectivity lies in the eyes of the beholder.

[Zecora]

You implied that it was relevant.

No, I replied to a question whether one seemed to have less sources than the other.

And you claim it is biased when it isn't what you to see. You still seem unable to understand this.

No, I claim it is biased because it only tells one side of the story, while ignoring another.

Or religion - or something else.

Possibly religion, but in that case, it is religion (mis)used to legitimate a rule.

No, it means that communism has racked up impressive death tolls - but we don't see the evidence for the death tolls of capitalism.

Like I said, you see what you want to see.

That difference obviously clashes with your political views - and thus you are unable to see that it could be true; and instead you claim that editors are not objective - without even investigating the facts. Clearly objectivity lies in the eyes of the beholder.

My political views? Hardly. I know communism to be simply unworkable (at least at current), but nice of you to project unto me. The facts are simple: Communism and Capitalism are econo-political systems that have stood in opposition to eachother for over a century. Both have caused untold misery and millions of death, yet while the death toll of Communism (which is high) is presented on Wikipedia, the death toll of Capitalism (which is also high) is removed.

[Forogil]

Possibly religion, but in that case, it is religion (mis)used to legitimate a rule.

You must be new to this thing called 'religion'.

My political views? Hardly. I know communism to be simply unworkable (at least at current), but nice of you to project unto me.

Exactly your political views:
You have a anti-TTIP signature, that indicates that you dislike free trade and capitalism.
And you claim that communism to be unworkable (at the moment) - indicating that you don't view it as inherently bad.

The facts are simple: Communism and Capitalism are econo-political systems that have stood in opposition to eachother for over a century. Both have caused untold misery and millions of death, yet while the death toll of Communism (which is high) is presented on Wikipedia, the death toll of Capitalism (which is also high) is removed.

The facts are:
Communism and Capitalism are econo-political systems that have stood in opposition to eachother for over a century.
Communism have caused untold misery and millions of death, the death toll of Capitalism has not been shown to be significant.

You have yet to present a shred of evidence supporting your claim about 'high death toll for capitalism'.

[Zecora]

You must be new to this thing called 'religion'.

No, I'm willing to bet that I have more experience with it than you do, including knowledge on how it is frequently misused to legitimate various acts of violence and abuse.

Exactly your political views:
You have a anti-TTIP signature, that indicates that you dislike free trade and capitalism.
And you claim that communism to be unworkable (at the moment) - indicating that you don't view it as inherently bad.

As for the first, that indicates that I have looked into what TTIP and TISA entails, and exactly who benefits from them, and that I have the brains to oppose something that is neither in the interest of me, or the majority of the European population (as for the American side, well I don't really give a shit. They can fuck up their country as much as they want for all I care).
As for the second, no, I don't view communism as inherently bad. That comes from actually knowing something about it. I don't view capitalism as inherently bad either, but i do view it as equally badly suited to humans at present, as communism is.

The facts are:
Communism and Capitalism are econo-political systems that have stood in opposition to eachother for over a century.
Communism have caused untold misery and millions of death, the death toll of Capitalism has not been shown to be significant.

You have yet to present a shred of evidence supporting your claim about 'high death toll for capitalism'.

Well, if it was relevant to the discussion, I'd direct you to the relevant wiki article with all the quotes and links, except I can't anymore. Which is what we are discussing, however much you pretend otherwise.

In fact, we aren't really debating that either anymore, are we? Your last posts have been nothing more than inane attempts to paint me as a communist, and pretending that I am somehow biased for criticising that an article got pulled from wikipedia based on what seems like pretty clear political bias on the part of the editors. And as I have previously said, you'd have a point if I wanted the communism's death toll article pulled, except I do not. At no point have I pretended that the attempts at communism in the last century hasn't caused a great deal of misery and death, so the conclusion I am left with, is that you are arguing for the sake of arguing.

And I can't be bothered with the kind of poster that does that. If you got something intelligent to say, by all means, do. If not, go bother someone else with your crusade to defend capitalism and free trade.

- - - Updated - - -

Didn't think so. I have better things to do than this. Cheerio!

[Forogil]

As for the first, that indicates that I have looked into what TTIP and TISA entails, and exactly who benefits from them, and that I have the brains to oppose something that is neither in the interest of me, or the majority of the European population (as for the American side, well I don't really give a shit. They can fuck up their country as much as they want for all I care).
As for the second, no, I don't view communism as inherently bad. That comes from actually knowing something about it.

No, that comes from not knowing communism.

Well, if it was relevant to the discussion, I'd direct you to the relevant wiki article with all the quotes and links, except I can't anymore. Which is what we are discussing, however much you pretend otherwise.

If the Wikipedia article on 'Mass deaths by communism' was removed I could redirect you to the books about the subject (not just for the death tolls, but also the inhumanity of the Gulag-archipelago).
E.g. https://www.hawaii.edu/powerkills/POWER.ART.HTM the homepage of Professor Rummel who have worked on death by government (not only communist ones - they are just over-represented in the statistics; the leaders are USSR, PRC China, Nazi Germany, KMT China - which hardly could be called capitalistic). I'm fully aware that some claim the numbers are a bit inflated (not ridiculously; just abit).

That is possible since Wikipedia isn't supposed to contain original research - and thus one can find the secondary and primary sources containing the original material.
That you have been unable to do that for the alleged deaths by capitalism indicate that those sources are missing - and thus the article shouldn't be in Wikipedia.

In fact, we aren't really debating that either anymore, are we? Your last posts have been nothing more than inane attempts to paint me as a communist, and pretending that I am somehow biased for criticising that an article got pulled from wikipedia based on what seems like pretty clear political bias on the part of the editors. And as I have previously said, you'd have a point if I wanted the communism's death toll article pulled, except I do not. At no point have I pretended that the attempts at communism in the last century hasn't caused a great deal of misery and death, so the conclusion I am left with, is that you are arguing for the sake of arguing.

No, I have clearly stated that instead of considering the possibility that Wikipedia was right you rejected that, since it clashed with your world-view.

And I can't be bothered with the kind of poster that does that. If you got something intelligent to say, by all means, do. If not, go bother someone else with your crusade to defend capitalism and free trade.

All I have done is expose your double-standard of rejecting Wikipedia for rejecting things contrary to their world-view, when an equally good explanation is that you rejected it due to your world-view.