Red Einstein!

Politics International Politics
#1

“Albert Einstein was a member, sponsor, or affiliated with thirty-four communist fronts between 1937 and 1954. He also served as honorary chairman for three communist organizations.” - Federal Bureau of Investigation

His 1,200 Page Long File of the FBI’s Report Against him can be found at foia.fbi.gov/foiaindex/einstein.htm

This is a fact few know - probally because they fear that people will see Communism gain a large footing and credibility as true if they see such a genius figure was so active in it.

I found this very interesting.

#2

Helen Keller was an ardent socialist too, who supported the Communist revolutions around the world. Another fact that many don’t know. Now, she is on the back of the US quarter.

#3

[quote=“king wu”]This is a fact few know - probally because they fear that people will see Communism gain a large footing and credibility as true if they see such a genius figure was so active in it.

I found this very interesting.[/quote]

  1. Genius and common sense don’t seem to be regular partners.

  2. Communism sucks. It just lets those with the heaviest jackboots rise to the top.

Read 'Mao, the untold story"

#4

[quote=“Ironman”]

Read 'Mao, the untold story"[/quote]

Book sucked. full of shit too :sunglasses:

#5

[quote=“king wu”][quote=“Ironman”]

Read 'Mao, the untold story"[/quote]

Book sucked. full of shit too :sunglasses:[/quote]

Like…?

#6

Evidently, she was blind to the excesses of the Revolution.

#7

Evidently, she was blind to the excesses of the Revolution.[/quote]

Blind and deaf, I would imagine. :wink:

#8

Hey, if you were smart enough you would root for Communism too

#9

You have to look at things from a historical context - Communism was relatively new back then, providing many ideas that were attractive in theory (e.g. classless society, freedom from oppression of workers by business owners and tenants by landowners, universal equality). There was the feeling that the Soviet Union was misusing Communism as an excuse to impose dictatorship, and that Communism would work for the benefit of all if it were done right - i.e., if it were the economic system of a free and democratic country. This is in vast contrast to today’s overwhelming view that Communism is necessarily synonymous with oppression, poverty and one-party rule.

The Americans championing Communism back then could in no way have predicted the disasters and suffering that the system would invaribly bring about. They were simply advocating what they perceived to be a noble cause, and Communism didn’t become a dirty word in the public consciousness until the mid 20th century, and didn’t conclusively prove itself an unmitigated disaster until well into the latter half of the century.

#10

[quote=“king wu”][quote=“Ironman”]

  1. Communism sucks. It just lets those with the heaviest jackboots rise to the top.

[/quote]

Hey, if you were smart enough you would root for Communism too [/quote]

Are you sure you don’t mean socialism? As Chris just pointed out, Communism has brought the world nothing but hundreds of millions of unnecessary deaths due to bad policy, mismanagement of resources and food supplies, war, and outright slaughter due to political, religious, and human rights persecution. Socialism, on the other hand, is a theory of equal distribution of wealth and shared public resources that under democratic leadership in some countries has brought about some benefits like social wealfare and universal health care.

#11

I guess that makes those who did see communism as an evil force rather brilliant. I mean, as late as the 1980s the lefty intelligentsia were laughing at Reagan for calling the Soviet Union an “Evil Empire”… and they were still even then claiming that the Soviet system was “sound” and that it would most likely “outlast the US system”…

I guess some folks are just better at judging things than some other folks.

#12

Socialism or communism Lite has the same problems. As Margaret Thatcher succinctly put it: “The problem with socialism is that eventually you run out of somebody else’s money.” Everyone wants things if someone else is paying for them but given the limited supply, competition and making hard choices are required to ensure that people get only what they are ready to pay for. Then, there should be enough for most but there will never be enough for all. AND under socialism, the weakest flourism and breed and increase eventually imposing an unsustainable burden on the economic system. We are finding this to our great dismay as well with pensions, medicare and medicaid. While we have reformed welfare, we will need to address these two as well so perhaps socialism is best understood as getting while the getting is good and mainly at the next generation’s expense?

#13

Quite a few countires have implemented socialist aspect to their democracies, most notably the nordic countries. While a pure socialist economy will inevitably fail, a pure capitalist economy, we have seen, does not bring about an adaquate quality of life for the majority. A need for Medicare and Medicaid reform (or at least a huge influx in funding) is testament to one of the failures of the US health care system and why certain aspects of socialism are often championed by democratic countries. Access to health care and education for all is considered a basic right by many and often a public (socialist type) program is the solution.

#14

Yes, and the nations traditionally had a very Puritan work ethic so people would not take advantage of public goods. How’s that working these days?

Exactly.

Have we seen that? East Asia was formerly pretty much capitalist and the standard of living soared lifting hundreds of millions out of poverty. Since then, the nations have felt rich enough to start implementing socialist policies. This has had a very strong effect on growth rates and competitivity. So while in a perfect world, such policies might seem desirable, one has to wonder whether they are sustainable in the long run. It is all well and good to talk about taking care of people but if the end result is even more people who need care in say 20 or 30 years, is it worth it?

as opposed to the successes in Canada or the other nations? Which is why their doctors and nurses are voting with their feet and moving to America, why they have lengthy waits for even basic surgery, etc. etc.

Not necessarily a correlation to socialism and democracy.

Okay. I can accept that, but what is the degree of implementation and how much money is spent for how much benefit. I think it is fair to examine that with a realistic not “sensitive” eye.

I sense another debate ala the one on education. Perhaps, time to open up the health care sector to a rigorous examination? I truthfully have not spent much time or effort researching it but I would be curious as to the strengths and weaknesses of the socialist model. I am guessing that the strengths of the socialist model are overplayed while the weaknesses are as well.

#15

I agree with you there. I’m not much up to speed on the issue myself, but all I know is that affordable healthcare in the US is impossible for many without programs like Medicaid and Medicare. I would know, I have been there. My wife and I were both between jobs when we got pregnant with our daughter. Without Medicare we would have been in debt up to our ears by now. I know there are drawbacks to universal health care systems, look at Taiwan. Cheap and affordable hospital and doctor’s visits leaves little incentive to stay home and tough it out when you have a cold. Thus the lines in the hospitals and doctors offices for every little minor irritation. Canada, I know nothing about what’s going on there. Nonetheless, affordable health care is something that the richest nation in the world should be able to provide for all of its citizens. In the end, I’m confident, a compromise will be reached bringing a little bit of socialism in with a little bit of capitalism. How we get there, I don’t know.

#16

The problem with this thread is that the basic premise is nonsensical crap- Einstein was a mildly leftist pacifist: J Edgar thought anybody to the left of Genghis Khan was a tool of Moscow, especially those evil homosexuals- in between deciding to wear the taffeta or go all out for that slinky lace, and denying the existence of the Mafia

“Communist Front Groups” were whatever left/liberal organisations Hoover didn’t like.
Undoubtedly many groups were subject to infiltration by Communists, some successfully, most not- the fact of, for example, opposing the Nazis in Spain was enough to get one labelled a Commie-lover.

#17

[quote=“MikeN”]The problem with this thread is that the basic premise is nonsensical crap- Einstein was a mildly leftist pacifist: J Edgar thought anybody to the left of Genghis Khan was a tool of Moscow, especially those evil homosexuals- in between deciding to wear the taffeta or go all out for that slinky lace, and denying the existence of the Mafia

“Communist Front Groups” were whatever left/liberal organisations Hoover didn’t like.
Undoubtedly many groups were subject to infiltration by Communists, some successfully, most not- the fact of, for example, opposing the Nazis in Spain was enough to get one labelled a Commie-lover.[/quote]

Agree 100%, MikeN. I don’t think anyone has taken king wu’s comments seriously.

#18

Kinda like opposing the Communists in Spain made one a fascist. I don’t recall that many American, British, Canadian volunteer brigades (ala the Abraham Lincoln Brigade) going to fight the Communists in Spain.

alba-valb.org/
writing.upenn.edu/~afilreis/ … igade.html

#19

Einstein while not working publicly with any Communist party enlisted in numerous Communist inspired and funded organizations using his media inflated public image to draw in more “useful idiots” to Bolshevik causes. Here is a large sampling of Einstein’s affiliations:

  1. The World Congress Against Imperialist War - The Communist International (Comintern) organized this congress which was attended by over 800 Communist delegates from around Europe with Albert Einstein serving on the “International Organizing Committee.”
  2. American League Against War and Fascism - Einstein is on record of endorsing their convention in Pittsburgh, November of 1937, called the “People’s Congress for Democracy and Peace.” Earl Browder, vice president of the League and General Secretary of the Communist Party, addressed this convention.
  3. Friends of the Abraham Lincoln Brigade - An organization dedicated to bring back members from Spain of the “Abraham Lincoln Brigade” which recruited American volunteers into a Anarcho-Communist partisan army to fight in the Spanish Civil War. Einstein was a member of the National Campaign Committee of this organization.
  4. National Committee for American-Soviet Friendship - Originally founded in 1920 as the “Friends of the Soviet Union.” Einstein affiliated.
    [color=#FF0000] 14. American Friends of the Chinese People - Front group for aid of Chinese Communists. Einstein affiliated.[/color] :bravo:
  5. National Federation for Constitutional Liberties* - Einstein was a supporter of this Communist front formed to protect Communists from questioning by government agencies and to abolish the Un-American Committee which was unearthing Communists in entertainment and government positions.

edit: one more source jesus-is-savior.com/Evils%20 … munist.htm

overthrow.com/lsn/news.asp?articleID=254

huppi.com/kangaroo/Einstein.htm

800×600

:notworthy:

#20

I imagine the person who also said the following would have been a big hit during the Cultural Revolution:

“Never do anything against conscience, even if the state demands it.”

“Everyone should be respected as an individual, but no one idolized.”