Rude ENGLISH teacher on subject of Communism and Russia.

[Barbarossa]

Recently during an English class several fellow students and I were sharing a lively discussion about Communism, Facism and Capitalism when I pointed out to my classmates that there has never been a "True" Communist state and that Russia Really Existed in a Stalinist state for the most part of the century. my English teacher who happened to overhear the conversation said that Russia had existed in a real Communist state, when I argued against his posistion (Quite politely) and Re-stated my posistion the teacher exclaimed Quite loudly "SHUT UP!" and "I HAVE A MASTERS DEGREE IN ENGLISH whereas you are just a STUDENT!". I'm not positive, so I will allow you, the members of Fed2K to decide if he slightly mishandled the situation and what my response should be.

[nemafakei]

Assuming the conversation went the way it seems, you should certainly stick to your position, and, if the teacher is repeatedly rude in the future (and you cannot resolve the dispute personally), speak to other teachers, or their Head of Department. Teachers are there to promote thinking, and should not be trying to constrict your opinion.

[VigilVirus]

A Masters degree in English is supposed to make you knowledgeable in history? Bullshit. You should have told him that if he really thinks Russia existed as a real communist state he should go back to being a high school student.

[Edric O]

My response would have been something along the lines of: "I wasn't aware that a Master's degree in english gives you ultimate authority on matters of history and politics..."

I would then ask him/her to kindly define the word "communism" in order to enlighten us. (from experience, I know that most people who think the Soviet Union was communist don't really have much of a clue about the actual meaning of "communism"; asking them to define the term usually puts them in difficulty).

[GUNWOUNDS]

tell us how it goes barbarossa ... this should get interesting.

[Anathema]

I voted to stand ground on your opinion. My reaction though would be shrugging my shoulders and replying with "whatever". There's no point in trying to teach something to a stubborn idiot, especially if he happens to be your teacher.

[Digital Guerrilla]

Barbarossa tell him to sign up for a nice customized Fed2k member account and we will cleanse his soul.

[thomas]

sucka punch that moron, then take his wallet

[exatreide]

and his keys

[Digital Guerrilla]

You elementary vandals he is a school teacher he has no money in his wallet and he proably drives a 1990 Ford Taurus. If he was the principal, then you take his wallet and keys he has got money and probably drives a 5 or 7 series BMW which makes for a better ride any day.

[thomas]

hey hey, at 16 any car is gold and even threebucks is a jackpot

[Andrew]

Show respect for your teacher, and stand your ground.

A degree in english doesn't mean history and Politics, there are dozens of categories. (same as Edric said)

If he really did say shut-up and that other stuff, I am guessing that he is a new teacher. Also would not want to be corrected by a student in front of other students.

sucker punch him, lol, good option. I picked stand ground on opinion.

[SurlyPIG]

Well, many people believe that Russia was about as Communist as is possible to become because of the nature of Communism, but that's hardly the same thing.  Marx wrote lots about the revolution, the way to eliminate the Bourgeoisie as a class, and everything that preceeded the true Communist society, but very little about the actual functionings of that society save a few obvious generalizations.  Even marx conceded that in order to prevent a counterrevolution a "dictatorship of the Proletariat" would have to be established, at least temporarily, and it is on this point, because of the general ambiguity surrounding how the dictatorship would be dismantled into a classless society, that many believe Marx failed in his predictions.  So the only way that Russia was a true Communist society is if one believes that a true Communist society is a loosely-defined, unachievable fantasy and that the dictatorship of the Proletariat (which Russia certainly did achieve) is the closest thing to it.  It doesn't sound like your teacher said anything close to this, though, so it certainly does sound like he was out of line.

I say sucker-punch him Todd Bertuzzi-sytle.

[Andrew]

Could you say that since Russia came the closest to being a communist country (or at least what the propaganda said) that that is why people would have considered it a communist country. Simple because it was the "most" closely related to communistic country.

blah, I don't even know what I just said :P

[erjin999]

I did the one about the monkey.

Reason: No one should have the right to talk to another person like that, especailly considering you did nothing to aggitate the situation. Also, because I am feeling a little militant right now..(cant remember his name, just picked him up from some club  :D), might reconsider when I have calmed down.

[Digital Guerrilla]

All BS and joking aside on my part you have already stood your ground. I think you have already proven yourself the reason why your instructor responded to your statement with the answer about his degree which has nothing to do with a student expressing some form of intellect IMHO he had nothing to say about the statement that you made.

[nemafakei]

Perhaps the appropriate reply to the claim about an English degree is to ask why the teacher still couldn't put together a sentence defending his own views. Realistically, I would only do this to a teacher who had a sense of humour, though.

[Megashrap]

[Caid Ivik]

Teacher is not only a vessel carrying knowledge, he has a certain role in your personal development. It's his responsibility as well what you'll become, and as we want to live in a democratic and pluralistic society, he must ensure you will retain its ideas  ;)  If you angered him, apologize. Staying at your opinion isn't bad, but also try to get more facts and opinions from those who know about it more. Stalinism and communism are just words, main is what caused them and what they caused.

[Egeides]

Really... if it's truly what she said, here's my 2 cents:

1- The difference between "socialism" and "communism". Strictly theorically, Communism is a system without a government, following Socialism. Anyone saw a government in the Soviet Union :P (a university textbook on the history of poitical ideas can do)

If it's about "Marxism was never followed", well then it's not as easy. Anyway, no need to write a complete essay to whoever disagrees, and anyone would have the right to make errors anyway.

2- Since when are students inferior and supposed have the teacher's opinion? She's your ENGLISH teacher even... Personally, I wont just "think as the guru" except something he says makes some sense. Teachers are useful to show some knowledge formed through time, but it's not this that makes it infallible.

3- Someone cannot use his autority to be irrespectuous and impose his opinion, espescially on another field of knowledge. Not more than it could be done by the opposite side.

It's my opinion, but I wouldn't insist too much, with such a teacher... I'd just calmly (and privately) make my point to say that I did not liked her way of using her autority like this... And not speak about it again if she's close  ::)

[emprworm]

wow, what a cowardly teacher.

One single response:

"I will ignore your Appeal to Authority Fallacy.  Is your position so weak, that it cannot withstand debate?"

[emprworm]

I will take the position of your teacher, but a bit more rational.

If a true communist state is something that could actually exist, and is something to be sought after as ideal and wonderful for its populace, so too can I argue there exists a true capitalist state that could also actually exist that is ideal and wonderful for its populace. 

The question becomes, which of those two should we strive for?  I will grant you the premise that an ideal communist state could exist in its pure form, and people are free and happy and content.  But what makes that something to strive for, over the ideal capitalist state that also could exist?

Given that every single instance of communism that has been tried has resulted in widespread domestic oppression, I see no evidence that such an ideal should be attempted by any already existing functioning capitalist republic society except where the majority of people desire such a thing.  Since I can objectively observe instances of capitalism that have moderate success in generating a large percentage of content or just below content people, and cannot observe similar instances of communism, I have no good reason to assume that the ideal true state of communism is something to sought after.  Instead, take the existing forms of capitalism and continue to strive towards ITS ideal form.

[Dante]

This isn't a politics debate, it's a stupid teacher poll.

(That's a stupid teacher, not a stupid poll  :))

Stand ground, katana some kidneys, and let us know how it goes.

[Edric O]

If a true communist state is something that could actually exist...

A "communist state" is something that could never exist, for the simple reason that a "communist state" is an oxymoron. Keep in mind that communism is a system with no state. Therefore, saying "communist state" is like saying "capitalism without private property".

The phrase you're looking for is either "socialist state", or "communist society". Socialism, unlike communism, does involve the existence of a state.

If a true communist state is something that could actually exist, and is something to be sought after as ideal and wonderful for its populace, so too can I argue there exists a true capitalist state that could also actually exist that is ideal and wonderful for its populace.

No one can simply postulate that "my system is ideal and wonderful for its populace, because I say so". You have to start by describing your system, and then give arguments to support the claim that it's "ideal and wonderful for its populace". That's what we communists do: First we describe socialism and communism, then we argue that systems who fit those descriptions would be great and wonderful for the populace.

The Soviet Union was not communist and not socialist because it simply didn't fit the descriptions of socialism and communism, not because it was bad.

The question becomes, which of those two should we strive for?  I will grant you the premise that an ideal communist state could exist in its pure form, and people are free and happy and content.  But what makes that something to strive for, over the ideal capitalist state that also could exist?

The fact that in the ideal capitalist state (as described by those who support such a state, namely libertarians like Ayn Rand, Milton Friedman, Fredrich von Hayek, etc.), poverty and suffering would be commonplace. An ideal capitalist state means something very close to the kind of capitalism we had before we started adding socialist elements to it - in other words, the capitalism of the 19th century. No state intervention in the economy whatsoever, no aid for the poor, no kind of protections for working people (your boss could fire you for any reason - such as joining a union, being black, having a certain religion, or just looking at him in a funny way), no laws against monopolies, no legal limits on working hours (12 hour working days would be the norm), no laws against child labour, no minimum wages, etc.

That is the description of the ideal capitalist state. I'll let you be the judge of whether it's a good or bad system - but I think the answer is pretty obvious.

Of course, your ideal system isn't like that. Because your ideal system isn't pure capitalism. So I suggest finding another name for it.

Given that every single instance of communism that has been tried has resulted in widespread domestic oppression...

That might sound impressive, until you realize that "every single instance" means all 5 of them - because there were only five independent attempts at reaching communism (Russia, Yugoslavia, China, Vietnam, Cuba). Keep in mind that the countries of Eastern Europe, North Korea, and a few others, never attempted to reach communism - they had ready-made stalinism imposed on them from outside. Also, keep in mind that all the 5 independent attempts followed exactly the same model - the model of the Russian Revolution - so OF COURSE they all reached the same result.

Only one method of reaching communism was ever tried, and it didn't work. The only thing that proves is that we have to use a different method next time.

Since I can objectively observe instances of capitalism that have moderate success in generating a large percentage of content or just below content people, and cannot observe similar instances of communism...

There are no instances of capitalism having even moderate success in generating a large percentage of content or just below content people - only mixed economies (capitalism with socialist elements) have ever achieved that. Even the United States, the most capitalist of these mixed economies, has significant elements of socialism in its system. Countries that have no socialist elements in their economies (or that have much fewer such elements than the USA) are all in the third world (Mexico, for example, is more capitalist than the United States).

Instead, take the existing forms of capitalism and continue to strive towards ITS ideal form.

Since 1918 until about 1980, the world was getting LESS and LESS capitalist - and people's lives have seen a greater improvement in that time period than in any other historical period. Since around 1980, the trend has more or less reversed, and now there is no longer any general trend towards improvement: Some people's lives are getting better, while others' are getting worse. Exactly what you'd expect from increased capitalism - a growing gap between rich and poor.

[Barbarossa]

tell us how it goes barbarossa ... this should get interesting.

Well I see this teacher in question every day in the school library and it seems he's nothing but glares. and yesterday he gave two of my friends and myself In School Suspensions (all day) for being loud in the hallway which is grounds for punishment except it was AFTER school started!