Kasparov Arrested

Originally posted by Northern Lad
Thanks for your support. You may be interested to know that Mr Adkins doesn't appear to have a particularly high opinion of your country judging by http://www.thecopydude.com/?p=379#comment-7877
Mark Adkins seems to be a regular commentator and contributor to Marxist websites and discussion groups.

More of your peculiar smear tactics. There is nothing in the comment critical of Latvia, or indeed, even ABOUT Latvia, as anyone reading it can see.

As for Marxist websites and discussion groups, that's news to me. Certainly "The Copydude" doesn't qualify. Would you care to name any?

Stay tuned. Northern Lad has a list of 57 (or 205 -- the number varies) Red Hot Pawn players who are members of the Communist Party. If you stop to think about it, isn't there something suspicious about the very name of the website: RED Hot Pawn?

Originally posted by diskamyl
Northern Lad, as a marxist, I'm nowhere near being an apologist for Putin -or any other --almost-- fascist leader for that matter-, but I think, criticising Gary Kasparov's political line -which I find very inconsistent- is something categorically different from justifying the politics of Putin and the capitalist relations of Russia.

One should be able ...[text shortened]... hose choices and the credibility of other choices he makes -like his political arguments-.

First of all, I never intended to suggest that being a Marxist automatically makes one an apologist for Putin. Indeed I know Marxists who are every bit as opposed to Putin as I am. Sorry if I gave the wrong impression there!

I agree entirely that Kasparov's political line is open to criticism. I've made that clear in previous posts. (He's somewhat right of centre, so I would expect leftwingers to criticise him.) My point is that people should be able to criticise him politically without necessarily doubting his sincerity (especially in the unpleasant sneering tones of Mark Adkins). For the reasons I have outlined in previous posts I believe that Kasparov is showing personal courage in his opposition to the Putin regime.

As for Putin resembling the Soviet regime, I think in terms of the increasing political repression and the role of the FSB (KGB) security services there are comparisons to be made, though I agree less so in economic matters.

Originally posted by Mark Adkins
More of your peculiar smear tactics. There is nothing in the comment critical of Latvia, or indeed, even ABOUT Latvia, as anyone reading it can see.

As for Marxist websites and discussion groups, that's news to me. Certainly "The Copydude" doesn't qualify. Would you care to name any?

I don't see how calling someone a Marxist is in itself a smear. I know plenty of intelligent people who are Marxists. I don't share their views, but there can be mutual respect between people of different political views. It's possible that the Mark Adkins who's active on Marxist websites (and I don't see anything wrong with that) is a different Mark Adkins from yourself, in which case I apologise for the mistaken identity.

Originally posted by Mark Adkins
The only thing egregious here is your unparalleled hubris and fatuity in accusing others of your own faults.

I don't mind agreeing with "Putin apologists" (i.e., those who refuse to jump to jump on the Western media's bandwagon of trendy but ill-considered conclusions) when their opinions happen to overlap with my own. You don't seem to grasp the e imir Putin is far worse doesn't change my opinion of Mr. Kasparov in this regard.

Interestingly enough, most of the people close to those who were murdered suspect official connivance (at the least), and they may be expected to know rather better than you or I. It should also be pointed out that there is compelling evidence that Russian security services were responsible for the murder of hundreds of Russian citizens in bomb explosions (mostly blocks of flats), which gave Putin the pretext to blame the Chechens and launch his brutal war there.

I doubt what you say about Kasparov in the late eighties is true. Certainly I read an interview three or four years before the end of the Soviet Union, in which he openly called for democracy and the overthrow of Communism. Typically, you have to impugn his motives, even though you can't possibly have known what they were.

Where have I ever said that Kasparov has "a pure soul"? He's known to be fairly arrogant, overbearing and egotistical (like most chess geniuses I suppose). I merely make the point that he is showing considerable personal courage in his commitment to oppose Putin. And I don't believe he's doing it for power, influence, or money. Although nominated by his grouping Other Russia as a presidential candidate, he won't be standing (he's barred), and even if he were, he wouldn't stand a chance; the same applies to anyone else from the opposition. He's made it clear he doesn't expect ever to achieve power personally in Russia, but thinks (maybe somewhat hubristically) that if he's not prepared to stand up to Putin, who will?

Originally posted by Mark Adkins
Stay tuned. Northern Lad has a list of 57 (or 205 -- the number varies) Red Hot Pawn players who are members of the Communist Party. If you stop to think about it, isn't there something suspicious about the very name of the website: RED Hot Pawn?

God you are childish sometimes.

Originally posted by Northern Lad
I agree entirely that Kasparov's political line is open to criticism. I've made that clear in previous posts. (He's somewhat right of centre, so I would expect leftwingers to criticise him.) My point is that people should be able to criticise him politically without necessarily doubting his sincerity (especially in the unpleasant sneering tones of Mark Adkins).

I am NOT sneering at Kasparov's current political views. I have, of course, heard his sound-bites about democracy (or its lack) in Russia, but such rhetoric has been used by opponents of the current Russian government regardless of their affiliations and across the political spectrum. No doubt it is justified.

I AM sneering at his politically motivated deceit and (to a lesser degree) his willingness to form political alliances of convenience with extremist parties (of both the far right and far left) while spouting democratic rhetoric -- something rejected by centrist opposition political parties like Yabloko and The Union of Right Forces (whom Kasparov has baselessly accused of being Kremlin puppets).

Originally posted by Northern Lad
I don't see how calling someone a Marxist is in itself a smear. I know plenty of intelligent people who are Marxists. I don't share their views, but there can be mutual respect between people of different political views. It's possible that the Mark Adkins who's active on Marxist websites (and I don't see anything wrong with that) is a different Mark Adkins from yourself, in which case I apologise for the mistaken identity.

The smear was twofold. First, you attempted to alienate me from other participants (specifically Korch) by falsely accusing me, without even a superficial basis, of thinking poorly of his country of origin (Latvia). No doubt this was part of your attempt to play on national sentiment since you have accused me (again falsely) of being some sort of apologist for the Russian government, and Latvians have a long history of grievances against Russia.

Second, if *you* did not think that calling someone a Marxist is a smear, then why did you go out of your way to publically (and again, falsely) assert that I am a "regular contributor to Marxist websites and discussion groups" in the context of the current discussion? Did you not make this false "revelation" with the purpose of creating an adverse impression of me among some of the participants?

Originally posted by Northern Lad
Interestingly enough, most of the people close to those who were murdered suspect official connivance (at the least), and they may be expected to know rather better than you or I. . . . [Also] I doubt what you say about Kasparov in the late eighties is true.

By "those closest" I suppose you mean the friends and relatives of the murdered and dead. Anyone in their position might well SUSPECT official connivance. Not to mention other things! There is no shortage of speculation. Why do you suppose that, merely by virtue of blood ties or friendship, these individuals "know better than you or I" what happened? Would any western court accept such "evidence"? Would any western journalist? No. I do not either. You do, because it suits your predilections and political agenda.

If you don't believe what I said regarding Kasparov's political history in the Soviet Union, take it up with Wikipedia. If the information is inaccurate, it should be corrected. (The article, however, seems entirely sympathetic to Kasparov, and there is no disclaimer stating that any of the information is controversial, as there is in some of their articles.)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kasparov#Politics

Originally posted by Mark Adkins
I am NOT sneering at Kasparov's current political views. I have, of course, heard his sound-bites about democracy (or its lack) in Russia, but such rhetoric has been used by opponents of the current Russian government regardless of their affiliations and across the political spectrum. No doubt it is justified.

I AM sneering at his politically moti ...[text shortened]... and The Union of Right Forces (whom Kasparov has baselessly accused of being Kremlin puppets).

Strangely enough, I have to agree with most of what you say here. Have I not made clear (God knows how many times) that Kasparov is indeed open to criticism in the way he has conducted opposition politics in Russia? I only joined this debate because of your unreasonably abusive calumny of Kasparov in your first post in this thread. I normally only discuss chess on this site, never politics or other non-chess issues.

It is true that his Other Russia coalition contains factions from the far right and far left. In Kasparov's defence one could say that he is not a natural politiican and has maybe been somewhat naive. His argument is that he will have any grouping inside Other Russia that believes in democracy, free speech etc.

I have to say that in the extremely unlikely event that I ever became active in Russian politics I would probably feel more comfortable with Yabloko and the Union of Right Forces than with Kasparov, but I still admire Kasparov's personal courage in what he is doing. It is also interesting to note that, from what I've read in the last few days, the above groupings (including Grigory Yavlinski from Yabloko) are, despite the misgivings you mention in your post, considering getting together with Kasparov and Other Russia in their opposition to Putin.

WILL YOU GUYS SHUT UP ABOUT THIS BS!!!!

neither you nor Kasparov has any influence.

Originally posted by chessisvanity
WILL YOU GUYS SHUT UP ABOUT THIS BS!!!!

neither you nor Kasparov has any influence.

Why don't you shut up and get lost? If you're not interested, don't read this thread.

go to the general forum for this loser talk.

Originally posted by Northern Lad
Why don't you shut up and get lost? If you're not interested, don't read this thread.

I don't mind it but he might just be annoyed that this has nothing to do with chess and probably belongs in the debate forum.

talk about anything but politics....