# Communist Indoctrination



## Billy_Kinetta (Aug 15, 2016)

The Democrats will deny it.

Oregon State to force ‘social justice’ training on freshmen - The College Fix


----------



## guno (Aug 15, 2016)

I thought you rightwing kooks said reagan defeated communism, the 50's are over time to come out of the basement


----------



## Billy_Kinetta (Aug 15, 2016)

guno said:


> I thought you rightwing kooks said reagan defeated communism, the 50's are over time to come out of the basement



It seems you are not well-read in the subject.


----------



## ScienceRocks (Aug 15, 2016)

I am laughing at your post. Name one *first world country* that doesn't invest in their own country or regulate their economy...Of the top 50. List of countries by GDP (PPP) per capita - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Every single one of the first world countries on this list responsibly invest and regulates their own economies. There must be a good reason why they do so??? Maybe it has to do with the difference between being a third world shit hole like the Congo, Somalia, or Haiti or not. Please take this to the goddamn flamezone as that is what it is.


----------



## ScienceRocks (Aug 15, 2016)

guno said:


> I thought you rightwing kooks said reagan defeated communism, the 50's are over time to come out of the basement



Well, by the time the early 1990's came around the dictators that hated personal advancement and capitalism like in the USSR and China were on there way out. What this jackass is saying is we're somehow the same if the government governs the way it should. I just have to laugh.


----------



## psikeyhackr (Aug 15, 2016)

Capitalist indoctrination is vastly superior.  That way the pawns are too drunk on the kool-said to recognize the wrecking of the planet.

We Need to Literally Declare War on Climate Change

psik


----------



## Weatherman2020 (Aug 15, 2016)

One reason no one hires college Pansy's.


----------



## Book of Jeremiah (Aug 16, 2016)

psikeyhackr said:


> Capitalist indoctrination is vastly superior.  That way the pawns are too drunk on the kool-said to recognize the wrecking of the planet.
> 
> We Need to Literally Declare War on Climate Change
> 
> psik


Capitolism produces wealth and prosperity in a society.  It is incompatible with Communism which depends on bringing a society down to a 3rd world status in order to crush it.


----------



## Ozone (Aug 16, 2016)

'social justice' training... it's all about convincing the kids that the sense of remorse they have for selling themselves into massive debt slavery isn't really their fault, but it's because the rest of the world outside the college hates them for their skin color or their genitals.


----------



## CrusaderFrank (Aug 16, 2016)

We need a businessman President to reform our failed educational system. How about a voucher system that would allow students a choice of being Communist puppets or having a chance at succeeding in life?


----------



## CrusaderFrank (Aug 16, 2016)

guno said:


> I thought you rightwing kooks said reagan defeated communism, the 50's are over time to come out of the basement



We said that Reagan beat Soviet Communism so badly he left them only one option: take up Ted Kennedy on his 1984 offer to take control of the Democrat Party


----------



## Book of Jeremiah (Aug 16, 2016)

CrusaderFrank said:


> We need a businessman President to reform our failed educational system. How about a voucher system that would allow students a choice of being Communist puppets or having a chance at succeeding in life?


David Horowitz reported that over 90% of the educators are Democrats.  So long as you have Marxist educators *indoctrinating* students and controlling the education system the outlook is not good.

Political Bias in the Administrations and Faculties of 32 Elite Colleges and Universities - Reports - News - Students For Academic Freedom

Moreover the terms "Republican" and "Democrat" can reasonably be said to reflect a predictable spectrum of assumptions, views and values that affect the outlooks of Americans who finance, attend, administer and teach at these educational institutions. This is why we chose them. It is not our intention to suggest that there should be quotas based on party affiliation in the hiring process at universities. Rather it is our purpose to discover whether there is a grossly unbalanced, politically shaped selection process in the hiring of college faculty. While recognizing the limitations imposed on our study, we believe the figures recorded in this report make a prima facie case that there is.


Summary of Results

In our examinations of over 150 departments and upper-level administrations at 32 elite colleges and universities, the Center found the following:


The overall ratio of Democrats to Republicans we were able to identify at the 32 schools was more than 10 to 1 (1397 Democrats, 134 Republicans).
Although in the nation at large registered Democrats and Republicans are roughly equal in number, not a single department at a single one of the 32 schools managed to achieve a reasonable parity between the two. The closest any school came to parity was Northwestern University where 80% of the faculty members we identified were registered Democrats who outnumbered registered Republicans by a ratio of 4-1.
At other schools we found these representations of registered faculty Democrats to Republicans:
Brown 30-1
Bowdoin, Wellesley 23-1
Swarthmore 21-1
Amherst, Bates 18-1
Columbia, Yale 14-1
Pennsylvania, Tufts, UCLA and Berkeley 12-1
Smith 11-1
At no less than four elite schools we could not identify a single Republican on the faculty:
Williams 51 Democrats, 0 Republicans
Oberlin 19 Democrats, 0 Republicans
MIT 17 Democrats, 0 Republicans
Haverford 15 Democrats, 0 Republicans
Faculty registration is just as unbalanced at major research universities as it is at small colleges. At Columbia University, the Center could identify only 6 faculty Republicans. The Center could not locate a single Republican in the history, political science, and sociology departments. Cornell University was just as left-leaning: the departments of English and history were entirely devoid of registered Republicans.
Administrators lean just as far to the left: at schools like the University of Pennsylvania, Carnegie Melon, and Cornell, we could not identify a single Republican administrator. In the entire Ivy League, we identified only 3 Republican administrators.
Conclusion

These figures suggest that most students probably graduate without ever having a class taught by a professor with a conservative viewpoint. The ratios themselves are impossible to understand in the absence of a political bias in the training and hiring of college instructors. They strongly suggest that the governance of American universities has fallen into the hands of a self-perpetuating political and cultural subset of the general population, which seems intent on perpetuating its control. This is an unhealthy development for the both the educational enterprise and the democracy itself.

______
It's part of the Communist agenda to defeat America
Communist Goals - 1963 Congressional Record

17. Get control of the schools. Use them as transmission belts for socialism and current Communist propaganda. Soften the curriculum. Get control of teachers' associations. Put the party line in textbooks.

18. Gain control of all student newspapers.

19. Use student riots to foment public protests against programs or organizations which are under Communist attack.

30. Discredit the American Founding Fathers. Present them as selfish aristocrats who had no concern for the "common man."

31. Belittle all forms of American culture and discourage the teaching of American history on the ground that it was only a minor part of the "big picture." Give more emphasis to Russian history since the Communists took over.

32. Support any socialist movement to give centralized control over any part of the culture--education, social agencies, welfare programs, mental health clinics, etc.


----------



## regent (Aug 16, 2016)

Perhaps it's simply being educated that turns true-Americans into liberals? As for the way US history is taught, it alone is probably the biggest changer of true-American into liberals.


----------



## psikeyhackr (Aug 16, 2016)

Jeremiah said:


> psikeyhackr said:
> 
> 
> > Capitalist indoctrination is vastly superior.  That way the pawns are too drunk on the kool-said to recognize the wrecking of the planet.
> ...



What is really funny is that the Communists are so stupid that they cannot tell the world that the Capitalists have been ignoring the Depreciation of the Durable Consumer Goods junk for the last 50 years.  With One Billion cars on the planet how much does the depreciation amount to each year?

Economic Wargames

psik


----------



## Wyatt earp (Aug 16, 2016)

guno said:


> I thought you rightwing kooks said reagan defeated communism, the 50's are over time to come out of the basement




He did, your messiah started it up again in 2008


----------



## Unkotare (Aug 19, 2016)

regent said:


> Perhaps it's simply being educated that turns true-Americans into liberals? As for the way US history is taught, it alone is probably the biggest changer of true-American into liberals.



Wrong again.


----------



## mgh80 (Aug 25, 2016)

Billy_Kinetta said:


> The Democrats will deny it.
> 
> Oregon State to force ‘social justice’ training on freshmen - The College Fix



Oregon State is a university-you are not mandated to attend university (if this was a high school it would be very different). For the record I think it's dumb that they're making new students take this class...but the rhetoric of the big bad liberals teaching Communism is schools is laughable (at least at my school).


----------



## Billy_Kinetta (Aug 25, 2016)

mgh80 said:


> Billy_Kinetta said:
> 
> 
> > The Democrats will deny it.
> ...



So what are they teaching?  Be specific.


----------



## mgh80 (Aug 26, 2016)

Billy_Kinetta said:


> mgh80 said:
> 
> 
> > Billy_Kinetta said:
> ...



I teach students grammar, how to write, how to improve their syntax, how to comprehend what they read. Why do you think I teach communism to my students? Hell I even have a lesson undo where my students have to read the bill of rights, select one, and then explain why that bill is vital to our nation.


----------



## Billy_Kinetta (Aug 26, 2016)

mgh80 said:


> Billy_Kinetta said:
> 
> 
> > mgh80 said:
> ...



That's great.

Does your school include multiculturalism and diversity studies/training?

How do your students explain the 1st, 2nd, and 10th amendments?


----------



## Unkotare (Aug 26, 2016)

Billy_Kinetta said:


> mgh80 said:
> 
> 
> > Billy_Kinetta said:
> ...


----------



## mgh80 (Aug 26, 2016)

Billy_Kinetta said:


> mgh80 said:
> 
> 
> > Billy_Kinetta said:
> ...



As far as I know we don't have classes like you mentioned. My students have different views on the amendments (most of them pick the 1st but I allow them to choose any of the first 10). I don't grade them for what their view of the amendment is, I grade them based on how well they set up the argument. I keep my views completely out of it because it's not a part of my job. I'm all for gun ownership and against gun control, but if a kid writes an argument and includes all of the required arguments (claim, refutation, etc) and the writing is of a high quality they'll receive an "A". Likewise if a kid writes the assignment and is against gun control but doesn't really create an argument-I won't give them a good grade.


----------



## Unkotare (Aug 26, 2016)

I once spent an entire unit having a class of 30 ELLs read, consider from multiple sources/points of view, discuss, research, and finally debate the 2nd Amendment. Most of these students had been in the US for less than two years, some less than six months.


----------



## Billy_Kinetta (Aug 26, 2016)

mgh80 said:


> Billy_Kinetta said:
> 
> 
> > mgh80 said:
> ...



So you care nothing for content, only structure.


----------



## Unkotare (Aug 26, 2016)

Billy_Kinetta said:


> ....
> 
> So you care nothing for content, only structure.




Where do you see that?


----------



## Billy_Kinetta (Aug 26, 2016)

Unkotare said:


> Billy_Kinetta said:
> 
> 
> > ....
> ...



Words have meaning.  The 2nd Amendment, for example, says something quite concrete, confirmed by other writings of the founders.  It is not mere opinion.  To structure an argument based upon a subjective opinion of absolute fact is no more than an academic exercise better applied in studies of the uses of propaganda to alter societies.


----------



## Uncensored2008 (Aug 26, 2016)

guno said:


> I thought you rightwing kooks said reagan defeated communism, the 50's are over time to come out of the basement



We defeated your beloved USSR. Sadly greed, your desire to get something for nothing, still exists.

Now you, you're just gutter filth, the refuse of society. You're an ISIS loving troll who seeks nothing but to cause a reaction.

But Communism is alive and well, and fully in charge of the Khmer Rouge democrats.


----------



## Uncensored2008 (Aug 26, 2016)

psikeyhackr said:


> Capitalist indoctrination is vastly superior.  That way the pawns are too drunk on the kool-said to recognize the wrecking of the planet.
> 
> We Need to Literally Declare War on Climate Change
> 
> psik



You literally need a brain.

You fucking cultists are easily as dangerous as ISIS.


----------



## Unkotare (Aug 26, 2016)

Billy_Kinetta said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> > Billy_Kinetta said:
> ...




Your attempts at appearing pedantic are just making you look like an ignorant block-head.


----------



## Billy_Kinetta (Aug 26, 2016)

Unkotare said:


> Billy_Kinetta said:
> 
> 
> > Unkotare said:
> ...



Funny, that's what they said about Galileo.


----------



## mgh80 (Aug 26, 2016)

Billy_Kinetta said:


> mgh80 said:
> 
> 
> > Billy_Kinetta said:
> ...



No the content can be interpreted in multiple ways (that's the whole point of having the judicial branch of government in the first place). 

More importantly I make my students cite the content (aka the language of the amendments). Saying that the 2nd amendment didn't cover you from owning a rocket launcher is not a crazy notion.


----------



## Unkotare (Aug 26, 2016)

Billy_Kinetta said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> > Billy_Kinetta said:
> ...






No, it's not.


----------



## psikeyhackr (Aug 26, 2016)

Uncensored2008 said:


> You literally need a brain.
> 
> You fucking cultists are easily as dangerous as ISIS.



Is ISIS dangerous because of Global Warming?

What does the US military say about that?

All of us serious Cultists think that double-entry accounting should be mandatory in high school.  What would American life be like today if that had been done since the 1950s?  Did Milton Friedman ever suggest that?

psik


----------



## frigidweirdo (Aug 26, 2016)

Billy_Kinetta said:


> The Democrats will deny it.
> 
> Oregon State to force ‘social justice’ training on freshmen - The College Fix



It's not Communist, it's just social cohesion. The fact that the right demand that people are cohesive, ie if you're gay shut the fuck up and don't make a noise, if you're a woman be quiet and get back in the kitchen, if you're black go back to the plantation etc etc, it seems rather hypocritical to denounce people from trying the same thing, just in a different way.


----------



## Unkotare (Aug 26, 2016)

psikeyhackr said:


> Uncensored2008 said:
> 
> 
> > You literally need a brain.
> ...


----------



## frigidweirdo (Aug 26, 2016)

Billy_Kinetta said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> > Billy_Kinetta said:
> ...



The Second Amendment says you have the "right to bear arms", now the founding fathers said that "bear arms" was "render military service" and "militia duty", whereas the right say it mean "carry arms". Doesn't seem so concrete when the founding fathers disagree with you. Seeing as I've been telling people this FACT for years, and people on the right have been ignoring it for the whole time is rather telling.

Also, you have the "right to bear arms". How many arms? All arms? A limited amount of arms? One type of arms? 

Does it give you the right to use a handgun in the militia? Does it give you the right to use a nuclear bomb in the militia?


----------



## Unkotare (Aug 26, 2016)

Once again the left is the enemy of our rights.


----------



## kiwiman127 (Aug 26, 2016)

*Communist Indoctrination *

I don't know about Communist Indoctrination, but it sure covers a topic covered heavily by the Bible.  Maybe it's Christian Indoctrination instead?
Look how much the Bible talks about social justice.
What Does the Bible Say About Social Justice?


----------



## Billy_Kinetta (Aug 26, 2016)

frigidweirdo said:


> Billy_Kinetta said:
> 
> 
> > The Democrats will deny it.
> ...



It's nuevo-Communista, the current rendition of the same old shit the Left has been selling here since the 1920s.


----------



## Billy_Kinetta (Aug 26, 2016)

frigidweirdo said:


> The Second Amendment says you have the "right to bear arms", now the founding fathers said that "bear arms" was "render military service" and "militia duty", whereas the right say it mean "carry arms".



Documentation please.


----------



## frigidweirdo (Aug 26, 2016)

Billy_Kinetta said:


> frigidweirdo said:
> 
> 
> > Billy_Kinetta said:
> ...



I have no idea what you're talking about here. "nuevo-Communista" is what?


----------



## Billy_Kinetta (Aug 26, 2016)

frigidweirdo said:


> Billy_Kinetta said:
> 
> 
> > frigidweirdo said:
> ...



"New Communists" in Spanish.


----------



## frigidweirdo (Aug 26, 2016)

Billy_Kinetta said:


> frigidweirdo said:
> 
> 
> > The Second Amendment says you have the "right to bear arms", now the founding fathers said that "bear arms" was "render military service" and "militia duty", whereas the right say it mean "carry arms".
> ...



Amendment II: House of Representatives, Amendments to the Constitution

The amount of times I've posted this, and still people ignore it. It's from the debates in the House (Senate debates were kept secret). 

This was the clause they were looking at. If you look at the changes of the clause over the course of time they changed bear arms to "but no person religiously scrupulous shall be compelled to bear arms."

But it was also "but no person religiously scrupulous of bearing arms shall be compelled to render military service in person." (this from June 8th 1789) 

Mr Gerry said: "They can declare who are those religiously scrupulous, and prevent them from bearing arms."

and: "Now, if we give a discretionary power to exclude those from militia duty who have religious scruples, we may as well make no provision on this head."

Mr Jackson wanted: ""No one, religiously scrupulous of bearing arms, shall be compelled to render military service, in person, upon paying an equivalent.""

Mr Sherman stated: "Mr. Sherman conceived it difficult to modify the clause and make it better. It is well known that those who are religiously scrupulous of bearing arms, are equally scrupulous of getting substitutes or paying an equivalent." and further on "besides, it would not do to alter it so as to exclude the whole of any sect, because there are men amongst the Quakers who will turn out, notwithstanding the religious principles of the society, and defend the cause of their country."

and Mr Vining: "Mr. Vining hoped the clause would be suffered to remain as it stood, because he saw no use in it if it was amended so as to compel a man to find a substitute, which, with respect to the Government, was the same as if the person himself turned out to fight."

They all saw "bear arms" as turning out to fight, militia duty, render military service and the like. Not one of them thought this had anything to do with carrying arms for self defense.


----------



## frigidweirdo (Aug 26, 2016)

Billy_Kinetta said:


> frigidweirdo said:
> 
> 
> > Billy_Kinetta said:
> ...



I know what it means in Spanish. I just have no idea why you're using it and what you mean by this.


----------



## Billy_Kinetta (Aug 26, 2016)

frigidweirdo said:


> Billy_Kinetta said:
> 
> 
> > frigidweirdo said:
> ...



You can post all the early arguments you like.  What counts is what was voted in.


----------



## regent (Aug 26, 2016)

Can the government take away a criminals right to bear arms?


----------



## Billy_Kinetta (Aug 26, 2016)

regent said:


> Can the government take away a criminals right to bear arms?



State governments?  Yes.


----------



## Billy_Kinetta (Aug 26, 2016)

frigidweirdo said:


> Billy_Kinetta said:
> 
> 
> > frigidweirdo said:
> ...



I cannot help that.


----------



## Nosmo King (Aug 26, 2016)

guno said:


> I thought you rightwing kooks said reagan defeated communism, the 50's are over time to come out of the basement


Any boogeyman in a storm.


----------



## frigidweirdo (Aug 26, 2016)

Billy_Kinetta said:


> frigidweirdo said:
> 
> 
> > Billy_Kinetta said:
> ...



My point is that the term "bear arms" means "militia duty" or "render military service". What the founding fathers intended is clear. Those who want "bear arms" to mean "carry arms" will then suddenly decide to complete ignore what the Founding Fathers said. 

Here's the thing, you won't find a single Founding Father saying that "bear arms" was carry arms. But you'll find loads who say it means something similar to what I've said, including George Washington.


----------



## frigidweirdo (Aug 26, 2016)

Billy_Kinetta said:


> frigidweirdo said:
> 
> 
> > Billy_Kinetta said:
> ...



Do you know what the term "communicate" means? If you cannot communicate your ideas, then what's the point?


----------



## Billy_Kinetta (Aug 27, 2016)

frigidweirdo said:


> Billy_Kinetta said:
> 
> 
> > frigidweirdo said:
> ...


----------



## Billy_Kinetta (Aug 27, 2016)

frigidweirdo said:


> Billy_Kinetta said:
> 
> 
> > frigidweirdo said:
> ...



I could not have been more clear.


----------



## frigidweirdo (Aug 27, 2016)

Billy_Kinetta said:


> frigidweirdo said:
> 
> 
> > Billy_Kinetta said:
> ...



It's the same every time. You show clear evidence of something someone doesn't want to know, and they can't even use words to try and defend their own position. Yes, I get it, your position is so weak you have to resort to childish behavior. I'm just sad that you get the right to vote.


----------



## frigidweirdo (Aug 27, 2016)

Billy_Kinetta said:


> frigidweirdo said:
> 
> 
> > Billy_Kinetta said:
> ...



Well that's pretty bad, if you couldn't have been more clear than that, then maybe you need to try and understand that it wasn't actually clear at all and you should perhaps try a little harder. 

You know, when learning languages you often see that what you're thinking might be clear to yourself, but to others it makes no sense. I'm telling you it makes no sense, and you have two options, make yourself clear or fuck around trying to save face. The latter, which you chose, is ridiculous.


----------



## Billy_Kinetta (Aug 27, 2016)

frigidweirdo said:


> Billy_Kinetta said:
> 
> 
> > frigidweirdo said:
> ...



Not at all.  There is simply no sense in reasoning with crazy people.

To "bear arms", both at the time of the Founders and today meant and means to *carry upon your person*.  There are endless historical and language sources that will confirm this for you.

Now run along.


----------



## Billy_Kinetta (Aug 27, 2016)

frigidweirdo said:


> Billy_Kinetta said:
> 
> 
> > frigidweirdo said:
> ...



It makes no sense to you, who makes no sense.  Ask me again if I care.

Actually, don't.  You're on suspension over your idiotic "bear arms" blather.


----------



## Uncensored2008 (Aug 29, 2016)

psikeyhackr said:


> Is ISIS dangerous because of Global Warming?
> 
> What does the US military say about that?
> 
> ...



Have you ever posted while you were sober?


----------



## Uncensored2008 (Aug 29, 2016)

frigidweirdo said:


> [
> The Second Amendment says you have the "right to bear arms", *now the founding fathers said that "bear arms" was "render military service" and "militia duty",* whereas the right say it mean "carry arms".



Well now, that is what is known as a "direct lie."



> Doesn't seem so concrete when the founding fathers disagree with you. Seeing as I've been telling people this FACT for years, and people on the right have been ignoring it for the whole time is rather telling.



They don't, you're just lying.



> Also, you have the "right to bear arms". How many arms? All arms? A limited amount of arms? One type of arms?
> 
> Does it give you the right to use a handgun in the militia? Does it give you the right to use a nuclear bomb in the militia?



Sigh, the anti-liberty left are such lying sacks of shit...


----------



## Uncensored2008 (Aug 29, 2016)

frigidweirdo said:


> [Q
> 
> 
> Amendment II: House of Representatives, Amendments to the Constitution
> ...



Your story does not support your lies. The above deals with conscientious objection, not the right of the people to bear arms.


"I ask, Sir, what is the militia? It is the whole people. To disarm the people is the best and most effectual way to enslave them."
_George Mason_
Co-author of the Second Amendment
during Virginia's Convention to Ratify the Constitution, 1788

"A militia, when properly formed, are in fact the people themselves …"
_Richard Henry Lee_
writing in _Letters from the Federal Farmer to the Republic_, Letter XVIII, May, 1788.

"The people are not to be disarmed of their weapons. They are left in full posession of them."
_Zachariah Johnson_
Elliot's Debates, vol. 3 "The Debates in the Several State Conventions on the Adoption of the Federal Constitution."

"… the people are confirmed by the next article in their right to keep and bear their private arms"
_Philadelphia Federal Gazette_
June 18, 1789, Pg. 2, Col. 2
Article on the Bill of Rights

"And that the said Constitution be never construed to authorize Congress to infringe the just liberty of the Press, or the rights of Conscience; or to prevent the people of the United States, who are peaceable citizens, from keeping their own arms; …"
_Samuel Adams_
quoted in the Philadelphia Independent Gazetteer, August 20, 1789, "Propositions submitted to the Convention of this State"


----------



## Sbiker (Aug 29, 2016)

Uncensored2008 said:


> guno said:
> 
> 
> > I thought you rightwing kooks said reagan defeated communism, the 50's are over time to come out of the basement
> ...



Not defeated - just deceived  And haven't kept from eating dead meet from it... Now it seems, US transforming to late USSR more and more - and no communism trace in this


----------

