User talk:Vif12vf

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Christian Social Party (Germany)[edit]

Why do you say it was not a socialist party, its not like it was not properly referenced. BernardZ (talk)

The party is described as a traditional conservative, antisemitic, monarchisic and right-wing political party, Socialism conflicts all of those. A person cannot be socialist if he/she supports monarchy. Yes, the party was anti-capitalist, and they did have progressive ideas on labour in order to catch the vote of disillusioned social democrats, but that does in no way make them socialist, i'd rather say it makes them more economically rhine-capitalist or social democratic. Furthermore, as the source does not redirect you to anywhere where one may read about the subject, and as the source name is about antisemitism, it may hardly be relevant. Also, ideologies do not belong in the position-section. Tiberius Jarsve (talk) 11:54, 5 June 2018 (UTC)
This does not make sense even accepting that they are Rhine-capitalist or social democratic these are both socialist ideologies.

BernardZ (talk)

Both rhine-capitalism and social democracy are by definition capitalist. Socialism is a mode of production in which the workers own the means of production and the state runs all the big companies. In capitalism it is the capitalist and bussinessman that own both. While rhine-capitalism opens up for more regulations, social welfare and a few state-owned bussinesses, it does not eradicate the bussiness-sector or the domination of capital. Thus no, this party goes nowhere near the definition of socialism. Tiberius Jarsve (talk) 13:19, 6 June 2018 (UTC)
Neither is capitalist, please check the history of both movements. Social democracy is a movement that communism split from as social democracy decided to continue on the democratic way.

BernardZ (talk)

Now is there any object to me putting socialist in

BernardZ (talk)

Yes. The party never wanted a socialist mode of production, no source says so. Furthermore, the party does have ideologies that would conflict socialism. Tiberius Jarsve (talk) 09:22, 12 June 2018 (UTC)
It can still be socialist and not have a socialist mode of production as both Rhine-capitalist or social democratic above show plus how does it conflict with socialism if it is preaching a socialistic idealogy?

BernardZ (talk)

Again, Social democracy and Rhine capitalism are not considered socialist by anyone except people who oppose it from the right. Scholars and political experts agree on this. The fact remains that while these ideologies include economically liberal and globalist tendencies they conflict socialism which conflicts both. Social democracy is capitalism with regulation, some state ownership and social welfare. Rhine capitalism is the same but more liberal. Socialism itself is neither of these. What origins they have does not matter. Both anarchism and fascism share sorelianism as their origin, but everyone who knows anything about either knows that they are two very different concepts. Social democracy might have socialism as its origin, but socialism itself cannot excist alongside capitalism as socialism itself is primarily an economic ideology. Rhine capitalism on the other hand is a welfare-liberal ideology, with it's co-official name being Ordoliberalism. But both are capitalist reactions to socialism and does not seek a socialist future. Tiberius Jarsve (talk) 09:32, 13 June 2018 (UTC)
Can you show some evidence that "Social democracy and Rhine capitalism are not considered socialist by anyone except people who oppose it from the right." It seems to be a preposterous statement.

BernardZ (talk)

Once again i say, social democracy and rhine capitalism have capitalist economies, which are not compatible with the general idea of socialism. Socialism is an economic ideology first and foremost. And the idea of market socialism did not excist at the time of the CSP. To add socialism to the infobox you would need a source that specifically says the party was socialist. Seeing SocDem and RhiCap tendencies in some source and jumping to the conclusion that the party was socialist is not acceptable. Tiberius Jarsve (talk) 17:58, 16 June 2018 (UTC)
Did that and you pulled it out but if look at the wiki pages on social democracy and Rhine capitalism, you will find they are clearly labelled as socialistic. The Wikipedia editors obviously do not agree with your definition of socialism. I will add too that many socialist leaders support private production and public distribution.

BernardZ (talk)

If i recall correctly, your source was a book that was not digital. You must remember that the whole point of sources is so that readers may verify information, they should by all means be accessible digitally. Furthermore, there are many social democratic parties labelling themselves as "Socialist parties", though most scholars agree that they are only socialist in name. As for rhine capitalism which is the german model, this system is a form of welfare-liberalism. Social welfare, some state-owned corporations and regulations on the economy do not automatically equal socialism. Tiberius Jarsve (talk) 10:00, 17 June 2018 (UTC)

Please, don't use more than one (user)name[edit]

On 15 April, a message was posted and signed as Tiberius Jarsve on talk page PDPA, but the revision history of the page tells that that posting came from user Vif12vf. Can you, Vif12vf, explain this situation to me? Is this user talk page being in use as 'user talk page' for one user (Vif12vf) or for two different users (Vif12vf and Tiberius Jarsve)? --Corriebertus (talk) 10:34, 20 April 2018 (UTC)

I understand your confusion. Vif12vf is my username, however i have almost completely phased it out among my internet profile. Tiberius is my current alias, when i press the "sign-button" wikipedia uses my alias. Tiberius Jarsve (talk) 10:52, 20 April 2018 (UTC)

Crazy disruptive hide-and-seek with multiple 'usernames' [title given to this section on 7 June]

Please get off that cloud, come back to planet Wikipedia. What the hell is "phased out", what business do we have with your "internet profile" apart from your identity/profile/username in Wikipedia? Or with alleged 'aliases' except your Wiki user name? You have possibly an identity and name in real life, for example George Baker, male, 40 years old, citizen of Australia. On planet Wikipedia we all work under an alias, also called user name. The purpose of a name, in general, is to have a means to directly and unequivocally address one individual(in a specific environment, for example Wikipedia), that individual directly knowing he is being addressed, and the rest of the community directly witnessing who is being addressed by whom. So, the natural persons working on Wikipedia under a username(=alias) must always be directly and unequivocally approachable and addressable under their one user name: that's the whole principle of user names in Wiki. But that whole concept of 'name' loses its usefulness if people ignore that basic idea of it, and start 'living' under different names in the same environment (like environment Wikipedia). You--I mean the natural person behind Vif12vf-- have started to float, have started to make yourself unattainable, unaddressable in Wikipedia, by denying the generally accepted concept of 'name', and ignoring your own chosen user name, at times when that suits you. This seems totally disruptive. Please stop that bullshit, stop deliberately confusing/deluding/tiring your (good-willing) colleagues, or you're gonna have real problems here. --Corriebertus (talk) 09:29, 7 June 2018 (UTC)
First of all, there is no need to sound threatening. Second, wikipedia is a web-page, referring to it as "planet wikipedia" is dumb and completely unnecessary. Third and last, the settings-page does not allow me to change my acctual username. Tiberius Jarsve (talk) 11:52, 7 June 2018 (UTC)
I disagree with you on one point, here. Though I grant you that Wiki is not literally a ‘planet’, I think on the other hand it is also not ‘a web-page’. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia (according to many people a large, very good, influential encyclopedia), which makes usage of the medium Internet, as encyclopediae 30 years ago made use of the medium of books. --Corriebertus (talk) 20:43, 12 June 2018 (UTC)

I’m sorry for my rather angry tone on June 7th. It was not meant as a threat, merely as prediction (of further problems). If that feels threatening, maybe it was meant as a warning not to run into such further problems. Also apologies for comparing Wiki to a ‘planet’—which ofcourse was metaphorical language. The metaphore was perhaps not so bad, but my stupidity was the dumb idea to incorporate metaphors into an angry speech. So I’ll summarize my speech now without unnecessary bits—but also improved here and there:
You have possibly an identity and name in real life, for example George Baker, male, 40 years old, citizen of Australia. On Wikipedia we all work under an alias, also called user name. The purpose of a name, in general, is to have a means to directly and unequivocally address one individual(in a specific environment, for example Wikipedia), that individual directly knowing he is being addressed, and the rest of the community directly witnessing who is being addressed by whom.
So, the natural persons working on Wikipedia under a username(=alias) must always be directly and unequivocally approachable and addressable under their one user name: that's the whole principle of a name in any community/environment, and in this case the purpose of user names in Wiki. Therefore, that whole concept of 'name' loses its usefulness if people ignore that basic idea of it, and start 'living' under different names in the same environment (like environment Wikipedia).
You—I mean the natural person behind Vif12vf—have started to ‘float’, have started to make yourself unattainable, unaddressable in Wikipedia, by denying the generally accepted concept of 'name', in this case ignoring your own chosen Wikipedia user name, at times when that suits you. This seems disruptive participation on Wikipedia. Please stop this (deliberately confusing/deluding/tiring your good-willing colleagues). --Corriebertus (talk) 19:07, 12 June 2018 (UTC)

About this[edit]

Indonesian here, the logo doesn't have a proper source, while mine was taken from a real video fro the Indonesian Communist Party. I am requesting a proper version of this logo to be made in SVG. I am ok with the statement saying that the logo is low res, but please, respect facts rather than pixels.--Jeromi Mikhael (talk) 13:49, 7 June 2018 (UTC)

How is it you have a video of a party that was banned in 1965? Furthermore, the logo in the article is the one used in all documents relating to the party, and the logo has been used in the article for so long that you will need to seek concensus in order to change it now. Tiberius Jarsve (talk) 13:55, 7 June 2018 (UTC)
Well, I haven't found any documents yet relating to the party. And, if you're wondering why there was this video in 1965, the incident happened so quick, and in 1965, the PKI was one of the most powerful party in Indonesia. I have visited the "Museum of PKI Treason", and didn't found any kind of logos like that.--Jeromi Mikhael (talk) 14:05, 7 June 2018 (UTC)
Have a look at this picture i found. [1] This is an acctual picture of the logo being used! Tiberius Jarsve (talk) 10:18, 8 June 2018 (UTC)

Please help deal with some disruptive edits[edit]

Hi, Vif12vf! I know that recently you made two edits to Progress Promotion Union and Union for Development where you fixed obvious factual mistakes. I do appreciate it. Nevertheless, similar situations also happen in New Macau Association where Macau is described as a state which is clearly wrong. So, please help fix it. Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 221.13.92.178 (talk) 13:26, 18 June 2018 (UTC)

Done, i corrected it and put surveillance on the article. Tiberius Jarsve (talk) 13:44, 18 June 2018 (UTC)
Thanks again. Please also keep an eye on other articles within {{Macanese political parties}} which were all basically disrupted in this identical way. --221.13.92.178 (talk) 13:53, 18 June 2018 (UTC)