Communist is the worst idea ever invented and yet it is believed in by millions

[Soupnazi630]

The basic idea is not about property calling it theft or not self made. The basic idea is " from each according to his ability and to each according to his need". This is the same basic idea behind slavery which is why it is no coincidence that every communist nation is a slave state.

They got it from the Bible.

That is not a defense of slavery, nor does it lend legitamacy to an evil idea.

But no they did not. There is no such scripture.

Slavery is not about free-market Capitalism.

Nobody takes right-wingers seriously about any "gospel Truth". Appeals to ignorance is all right-wingers are best at.

All who believed were together and had all things in common; 45 they would sell their possessions and goods and distribute the proceeds to all, as any had need. ... Now the whole group of those who believed were of one heart and soul, and no one claimed private ownership of any possessions, but everything they owned was held in common. ... There was not a needy person among them, for as many as owned lands or houses sold them and brought the proceeds of what was sold. They laid it at the apostles' feet, and it was distributed to each as any had need.[25]

— Acts 2:44–45, Acts 4:32–35

Christian communism - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Please point out where the Roman government mandated this sharing.

Again: Communism can work only in small communities and strictly voluntarily.

Read some history of the Roman Empire.

Only the Religious seem to be able to make it work. Not enough morals to go around among the secular laity?

Face it, kid. You fucked up. There is no Biblical justification for the tyranny you want.

If you had enough reading comprehension you would understand it take morals for that not right-wing fantasy.

Morals to steal from people?

You do know words have meanings, right? You don't get to make up new ones?

Only right-wingers allege that. The rest of us know that the social power to Tax is delegated to our representatives to Government.

"Social power".

No such thing.

But it's HILARIOUS you believe you get to make up definitions! How insanely intellectually bankrupt!

The ignorance of the right-wing is astounding.

The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;

It is accomplished via the social-ism of Government.

Government is not socialism.

Socialism is a form of government which always fails.

That is fact in your face which has been proven time again but being a dishonest and immature right winger you still cling to a proven fallacy

It doesn't always fail at all. There have been a few examples of Socialism and they have failed because they struggled to deal with some of the fundamentals. I'm not a Socialist, but the doesn't mean it can't work.

People would say Capitalism has always failed too. Look at 2008.

If it hasn't worked in the past, it's not going to work in the future.

And it's never worked in the past.

That's such an illogical position to take.

Literally, if you fail at first, give up and never try again.

The problem with political systems is there are many ways to flog a horse.

You can set up Socialism in a million different ways. You can be intelligent about it and use human psychology to get the best out of workers, or you can just demand they do what they're told and use fear, or you can simply let the workers be lazy.

Each will have different results.

China is doing things much differently to the way the USSR did things, or how Cuba do things. So you'll have different results.

So you are fine with trying naziism again? After it all it was only tried once and with a slight adjustment or two it deserves another chance.

 

[Soupnazi630]

The basic idea is not about property calling it theft or not self made. The basic idea is " from each according to his ability and to each according to his need". This is the same basic idea behind slavery which is why it is no coincidence that every communist nation is a slave state.

They got it from the Bible.

That is not a defense of slavery, nor does it lend legitamacy to an evil idea.

But no they did not. There is no such scripture.

Slavery is not about free-market Capitalism.

Nobody takes right-wingers seriously about any "gospel Truth". Appeals to ignorance is all right-wingers are best at.

All who believed were together and had all things in common; 45 they would sell their possessions and goods and distribute the proceeds to all, as any had need. ... Now the whole group of those who believed were of one heart and soul, and no one claimed private ownership of any possessions, but everything they owned was held in common. ... There was not a needy person among them, for as many as owned lands or houses sold them and brought the proceeds of what was sold. They laid it at the apostles' feet, and it was distributed to each as any had need.[25]

— Acts 2:44–45, Acts 4:32–35

Christian communism - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Please point out where the Roman government mandated this sharing.

Again: Communism can work only in small communities and strictly voluntarily.

Read some history of the Roman Empire.

Only the Religious seem to be able to make it work. Not enough morals to go around among the secular laity?

Face it, kid. You fucked up. There is no Biblical justification for the tyranny you want.

If you had enough reading comprehension you would understand it take morals for that not right-wing fantasy.

Morals to steal from people?

You do know words have meanings, right? You don't get to make up new ones?

Only right-wingers allege that. The rest of us know that the social power to Tax is delegated to our representatives to Government.

"Social power".

No such thing.

But it's HILARIOUS you believe you get to make up definitions! How insanely intellectually bankrupt!

The ignorance of the right-wing is astounding.

The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;

It is accomplished via the social-ism of Government.

Government is not socialism.

Socialism is a form of government which always fails.

That is fact in your face which has been proven time again but being a dishonest and immature right winger you still cling to a proven fallacy

It doesn't always fail at all. There have been a few examples of Socialism and they have failed because they struggled to deal with some of the fundamentals. I'm not a Socialist, but the doesn't mean it can't work.

People would say Capitalism has always failed too. Look at 2008.

Capiyalism is still going strong socialism always fails.

Such a silly statement to make. How many Socialist countries have there ever been?

China. Hasn't failed
Cuba. Hasn't failed
Laos. Hasn't failed
Vietnam. Hasn't failed

Venezuela has failed insanely badly. Unless you think people eating their pets is a success.

Yes, Venezuela is failing badly.

Venezuela is a country run by people. Does this mean that ALL countries run by people will fail?

Plenty of capitalist countries have also failed. Somalia, Zimbabwe. Does this mean we should immediately stop capitalism?

Somalia is anogther failed socialist state.

Zimbabwe was barely a state at all.

 

[Soupnazi630]

The basic idea is not about property calling it theft or not self made. The basic idea is " from each according to his ability and to each according to his need". This is the same basic idea behind slavery which is why it is no coincidence that every communist nation is a slave state.

They got it from the Bible.

That is not a defense of slavery, nor does it lend legitamacy to an evil idea.

But no they did not. There is no such scripture.

Slavery is not about free-market Capitalism.

Nobody takes right-wingers seriously about any "gospel Truth". Appeals to ignorance is all right-wingers are best at.

All who believed were together and had all things in common; 45 they would sell their possessions and goods and distribute the proceeds to all, as any had need. ... Now the whole group of those who believed were of one heart and soul, and no one claimed private ownership of any possessions, but everything they owned was held in common. ... There was not a needy person among them, for as many as owned lands or houses sold them and brought the proceeds of what was sold. They laid it at the apostles' feet, and it was distributed to each as any had need.[25]

— Acts 2:44–45, Acts 4:32–35

Christian communism - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Please point out where the Roman government mandated this sharing.

Again: Communism can work only in small communities and strictly voluntarily.

Read some history of the Roman Empire.

Only the Religious seem to be able to make it work. Not enough morals to go around among the secular laity?

Face it, kid. You fucked up. There is no Biblical justification for the tyranny you want.

If you had enough reading comprehension you would understand it take morals for that not right-wing fantasy.

Morals to steal from people?

You do know words have meanings, right? You don't get to make up new ones?

Only right-wingers allege that. The rest of us know that the social power to Tax is delegated to our representatives to Government.

"Social power".

No such thing.

But it's HILARIOUS you believe you get to make up definitions! How insanely intellectually bankrupt!

The ignorance of the right-wing is astounding.

The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;

It is accomplished via the social-ism of Government.

Government is not socialism.

Socialism is a form of government which always fails.

That is fact in your face which has been proven time again but being a dishonest and immature right winger you still cling to a proven fallacy

It doesn't always fail at all. There have been a few examples of Socialism and they have failed because they struggled to deal with some of the fundamentals. I'm not a Socialist, but the doesn't mean it can't work.

People would say Capitalism has always failed too. Look at 2008.

Capiyalism is still going strong socialism always fails.

Such a silly statement to make. How many Socialist countries have there ever been?

China. Hasn't failed
Cuba. Hasn't failed
Laos. Hasn't failed
Vietnam. Hasn't failed

Venezuela has failed insanely badly. Unless you think people eating their pets is a success.

Yes, Venezuela is failing badly.

Venezuela is a country run by people. Does this mean that ALL countries run by people will fail?

Plenty of capitalist countries have also failed. Somalia, Zimbabwe. Does this mean we should immediately stop capitalism?

Countries are run by people?! Oh, no!

I bet you though you had a point, too.

The point being that if you take a parameter and then you say "well, this has failed, so it'll never work, we could start with "run by people", as many countries run by people have failed, therefore your argument would be, they'll all fail. Inevitable.

Perhaps. Yet as an economic system, capitalism has lifted the greatest number of people out of poverty.

Problem is, poverty is just statistics.

Oh, and China has lifted so many people out of "poverty". Vietnam too, while the US was trying to put them in poverty in the 1970s.

Yeah. Freedom's for suckers, right? Nobody needs it. Just do what you're told, and you get to keep your organs.

Not sure why you brought up freedom.

China may or may not harvest prisoners organs. You literally have the Fulan Gong's word for it that this happens. They don't like the CCP and the CCP doesn't like them. Hardly unbiased.

But the US executes people. The US locks up political prisoners, the US does all kinds of nasty shit too.

It doesn't make China good and it doesn't make the US good.

But BOTH SYSTEMS do bad shit.

What's your point?

The US has no political prisoners and no nation on earth compares to the genocide commited by MAO even Stalin did not come close and he murdered more thsan Hitler did.

 

[frigidweirdo]

Why do Progressives never have a bad word to say about Communism or mankind's most prolific mass murders, all Communists?

Because communism has never killed anyone.
Stalin was not a communist, but a capitalist bank robber, who infiltrated the Communists, Socialists, and Anarchists, killed them all, took over, and implemented state capitalism instead.

Look at the characteristics. Communism is collaborative, cooperative, communal, and the way humans normally treat each other in small social groups like families, clubs, tribes, etc.
Those who think communism implies a large centralized state, simply do not know anything about communism.
And what Stalin implemented was not at all collaborative, cooperative, communal, or voluntary.
It was forced, state, capitalism, with purely a profit motive for the ruling elite.

Communism has killed un toldf tens of millions.

Stalin was a communist. He was not a capitalist,

Communism is totalitarian and never cooperative or communial or cllobaorative,

It is you who grapss nothing about communism and is ignorant of it.

Stalin wasn't really a Communist. Do you think Stalin gave a damn about Communism at all? What did Stalin do that was either Communist or pushing for Communism?

He was a communist through and through. he etablished the comintern specifically for the purpose of spreading communism world wide just as Marx required communism to work. He forced the entire nation to work and live in accordance with his interpretation of Marx which is precisely what the dictatorship of the proletariate is meant to do.

Well, the Comintern was established in 1919 before Stalin was a major force. Stalin was on the delegate's list, but it's not known if he actually went.

Stalin was one of those guys who'd use the system he was in in order to gain the power he wanted. Nothing seems to suggest he was a Communist.

Even the early Communists in Russia thought he might be an agent provocateur.The proven worldwide railure of socialism

Everything proves he was a communist inclluding his own admission.

Yeah, only if you see things in simple.

You mean seeing things clearly without denial

The problem is you think you're seeing things clearly, but mostly this is because you don't actually bother looking at much.

I look at it all you selectively ignore what is inconvenient.

Such as?

The fact that Stalin was a communist

Ah, so, what we seem to be dealing with is this sort of "fact" that most people "know", but haven't actually thought about.

Why, exactly, was Stalin a Communist? Just because he was leader of the USSR?

Because he stated he was and enforced communism on people as envisioned by marx. He followed the play book as directed.

So, if North Korea says it's democracy, IT'S DEMOCRATIC?????

What you have to remember about people and politics is they'll say anything and pretend to be anything to get power.

Try the anti-gay politician caught having gay sex.

Anti-LGBT politician 'caught having sex with a man in his office' facing 30 accusations of sexual misconduct

Ohio state legislator resigns after witness reports extramarital affair to House Chief of Staff

www.independent.co.uk

"Wes Goodman: Anti-LGBT Republican politician 'caught having sex with man in his office' facing 30 sexual misconduct accusations"

Try Xi Jinping who was sent to the countryside under Mao and ran away. He literally ran away from Communism. But he wanted power, and in a one party state, if you want power, you go to the party.

The cave the Chinese president called home

The Chinese president spent his formative years living in a cave in a backwater village. Now, it is being transformed into a theme park-style tourist attraction, as the Chinese leader’s past is used to legitimise Communist Party rule

s.telegraph.co.uk

"Xi Jinping has said that he experienced his political awakening when he was “sent down” to Liangjiahe in Shaanxi province,"

"But the misery of life in the impoverished village of a few dozen houses was too much for the 15-year-old Xi. Longing for his home comforts, he escaped."

People will pretend to be anything. China still has Mao on its banknotes. You have to wonder why, when it was DengXiaoPing who set up the modern China, not Mao. Mao tried to destroy China.

But he didn't enforce Communism as Marx envisioned at all.

Marxism was a classless society.

The USSR clearly had some people more equal than others.

He did enforce communism as envisioned. Marxism calls for a classless society at the end which of course is never reached in reality. However Marxism calls for and demands a new arrangement of class in society before the end is reached. That is why it calls for a dictatorship of the proletariate. Marx clearly stated despotism would be necessary while striving to reach that end. Stalin merely provided the dictatorship while striving for thaty end exactly as Marx demanded.

Once again commubnism is not the end result it is the revolution and ideology to reach that result.

Any evidence that what Stalin was doing was moving towards Communism, rather than Stalin just being in power and doing whatever he liked?

 

[frigidweirdo]

The basic idea is not about property calling it theft or not self made. The basic idea is " from each according to his ability and to each according to his need". This is the same basic idea behind slavery which is why it is no coincidence that every communist nation is a slave state.

They got it from the Bible.

That is not a defense of slavery, nor does it lend legitamacy to an evil idea.

But no they did not. There is no such scripture.

Slavery is not about free-market Capitalism.

Nobody takes right-wingers seriously about any "gospel Truth". Appeals to ignorance is all right-wingers are best at.

All who believed were together and had all things in common; 45 they would sell their possessions and goods and distribute the proceeds to all, as any had need. ... Now the whole group of those who believed were of one heart and soul, and no one claimed private ownership of any possessions, but everything they owned was held in common. ... There was not a needy person among them, for as many as owned lands or houses sold them and brought the proceeds of what was sold. They laid it at the apostles' feet, and it was distributed to each as any had need.[25]

— Acts 2:44–45, Acts 4:32–35

Christian communism - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Please point out where the Roman government mandated this sharing.

Again: Communism can work only in small communities and strictly voluntarily.

Read some history of the Roman Empire.

Only the Religious seem to be able to make it work. Not enough morals to go around among the secular laity?

Face it, kid. You fucked up. There is no Biblical justification for the tyranny you want.

If you had enough reading comprehension you would understand it take morals for that not right-wing fantasy.

Morals to steal from people?

You do know words have meanings, right? You don't get to make up new ones?

Only right-wingers allege that. The rest of us know that the social power to Tax is delegated to our representatives to Government.

"Social power".

No such thing.

But it's HILARIOUS you believe you get to make up definitions! How insanely intellectually bankrupt!

The ignorance of the right-wing is astounding.

The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;

It is accomplished via the social-ism of Government.

Government is not socialism.

Socialism is a form of government which always fails.

That is fact in your face which has been proven time again but being a dishonest and immature right winger you still cling to a proven fallacy

It doesn't always fail at all. There have been a few examples of Socialism and they have failed because they struggled to deal with some of the fundamentals. I'm not a Socialist, but the doesn't mean it can't work.

People would say Capitalism has always failed too. Look at 2008.

Capiyalism is still going strong socialism always fails.

Such a silly statement to make. How many Socialist countries have there ever been?

China. Hasn't failed
Cuba. Hasn't failed
Laos. Hasn't failed
Vietnam. Hasn't failed

and how many millions have been killed in those countries under commie rule ? and countries that practice capitalism have a much better standard of living .

What's your point? Capitalism doesn't kill?

Look at Vietnam. They had the Capitalist French turn up and try and kill them, then the US turned up and tried to kill them.

Yes, different countries have pounded on their people.

China is pounding on the Xinjiang and Tibetan peoples.
The US pounded on the blacks and Native Americans.

Difference is.... NOTHING>

Capitalism does not kill. Some capitalists do but they are simply criminals.

The basic idea is not about property calling it theft or not self made. The basic idea is " from each according to his ability and to each according to his need". This is the same basic idea behind slavery which is why it is no coincidence that every communist nation is a slave state.

They got it from the Bible.

That is not a defense of slavery, nor does it lend legitamacy to an evil idea.

But no they did not. There is no such scripture.

Slavery is not about free-market Capitalism.

Nobody takes right-wingers seriously about any "gospel Truth". Appeals to ignorance is all right-wingers are best at.

All who believed were together and had all things in common; 45 they would sell their possessions and goods and distribute the proceeds to all, as any had need. ... Now the whole group of those who believed were of one heart and soul, and no one claimed private ownership of any possessions, but everything they owned was held in common. ... There was not a needy person among them, for as many as owned lands or houses sold them and brought the proceeds of what was sold. They laid it at the apostles' feet, and it was distributed to each as any had need.[25]

— Acts 2:44–45, Acts 4:32–35

Christian communism - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Please point out where the Roman government mandated this sharing.

Again: Communism can work only in small communities and strictly voluntarily.

Read some history of the Roman Empire.

Only the Religious seem to be able to make it work. Not enough morals to go around among the secular laity?

Face it, kid. You fucked up. There is no Biblical justification for the tyranny you want.

If you had enough reading comprehension you would understand it take morals for that not right-wing fantasy.

Morals to steal from people?

You do know words have meanings, right? You don't get to make up new ones?

Only right-wingers allege that. The rest of us know that the social power to Tax is delegated to our representatives to Government.

"Social power".

No such thing.

But it's HILARIOUS you believe you get to make up definitions! How insanely intellectually bankrupt!

The ignorance of the right-wing is astounding.

The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;

It is accomplished via the social-ism of Government.

Government is not socialism.

Socialism is a form of government which always fails.

That is fact in your face which has been proven time again but being a dishonest and immature right winger you still cling to a proven fallacy

It doesn't always fail at all. There have been a few examples of Socialism and they have failed because they struggled to deal with some of the fundamentals. I'm not a Socialist, but the doesn't mean it can't work.

People would say Capitalism has always failed too. Look at 2008.

Capiyalism is still going strong socialism always fails.

Such a silly statement to make. How many Socialist countries have there ever been?

China. Hasn't failed
Cuba. Hasn't failed
Laos. Hasn't failed
Vietnam. Hasn't failed

They all have

What's the point of making such a comment?

It is accurate and correcting your comment

Ah, so "some capitalists" kill. But all Socialists do.

Huh?

So when the people elect someone like George W. Bush, and then he goes to Iraq and invades and kills or gets killed upwards of one million, he's just a criminal.

But when Socialist Vietnam invades Khmer Rouge controlled Cambodia and kicks out the US BACKED Khmer Rouge (think the Killing Fields), that's what? Just Socialism killing?


Your comment is pointless. I cannot reply to a comment that doesn't tell me anything. You might as well tell me that your dog aNo you lack comprehension.

No matter the system some criminals kill, Capitalists do not kill in the name of capitalism or to enforce or spread capitalism. Communists always kill to enforce or spread communism'

My comment is accurate.

te some chips. It's pointless. No matter how true you think it might be.

So, the US didn't go to Vietnam to spread Capitalism?

No. We were supporting an ally who we had a treaty with and which was being subjected to a war of aggression.

And why did the US have a treaty with south Vietnam?

Why did the US go to war in Korea?

It's all pretty obvious. It was all about the spread of Communism. It was literally a Capitalist country looking for an excuse for war.

 

[frigidweirdo]

The basic idea is not about property calling it theft or not self made. The basic idea is " from each according to his ability and to each according to his need". This is the same basic idea behind slavery which is why it is no coincidence that every communist nation is a slave state.

They got it from the Bible.

That is not a defense of slavery, nor does it lend legitamacy to an evil idea.

But no they did not. There is no such scripture.

Slavery is not about free-market Capitalism.

Nobody takes right-wingers seriously about any "gospel Truth". Appeals to ignorance is all right-wingers are best at.

All who believed were together and had all things in common; 45 they would sell their possessions and goods and distribute the proceeds to all, as any had need. ... Now the whole group of those who believed were of one heart and soul, and no one claimed private ownership of any possessions, but everything they owned was held in common. ... There was not a needy person among them, for as many as owned lands or houses sold them and brought the proceeds of what was sold. They laid it at the apostles' feet, and it was distributed to each as any had need.[25]

— Acts 2:44–45, Acts 4:32–35

Christian communism - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Please point out where the Roman government mandated this sharing.

Again: Communism can work only in small communities and strictly voluntarily.

Read some history of the Roman Empire.

Only the Religious seem to be able to make it work. Not enough morals to go around among the secular laity?

Face it, kid. You fucked up. There is no Biblical justification for the tyranny you want.

If you had enough reading comprehension you would understand it take morals for that not right-wing fantasy.

Morals to steal from people?

You do know words have meanings, right? You don't get to make up new ones?

Only right-wingers allege that. The rest of us know that the social power to Tax is delegated to our representatives to Government.

"Social power".

No such thing.

But it's HILARIOUS you believe you get to make up definitions! How insanely intellectually bankrupt!

The ignorance of the right-wing is astounding.

The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;

It is accomplished via the social-ism of Government.

Government is not socialism.

Socialism is a form of government which always fails.

That is fact in your face which has been proven time again but being a dishonest and immature right winger you still cling to a proven fallacy

It doesn't always fail at all. There have been a few examples of Socialism and they have failed because they struggled to deal with some of the fundamentals. I'm not a Socialist, but the doesn't mean it can't work.

People would say Capitalism has always failed too. Look at 2008.

Capiyalism is still going strong socialism always fails.

Such a silly statement to make. How many Socialist countries have there ever been?

China. Hasn't failed
Cuba. Hasn't failed
Laos. Hasn't failed
Vietnam. Hasn't failed

Venezuela has failed insanely badly. Unless you think people eating their pets is a success.

Yes, Venezuela is failing badly.

Venezuela is a country run by people. Does this mean that ALL countries run by people will fail?

Plenty of capitalist countries have also failed. Somalia, Zimbabwe. Does this mean we should immediately stop capitalism?

Somalia is anogther failed socialist state.

Zimbabwe was barely a state at all.

Well, it was Socialist from 1969 to 1989/1991.

So, in theory it was a failed Capitalist state until 1969.

Zimbabwe actually was a pretty strong state. It had economic problems, the worst seemingly because of Mugabe's new wife. Now the crocodile's in, he seems to be a less competent leader than Mugabe (oh dear).

But whenever I went to Zimbabwe it seemed a better place than Mozambique or South Africa, less crime at least.

The point is that capitalist states also fail, and why? Because of bad leadership.

Often Socialism has failed because those implementing it are dictators. Like Pinochet in Chile, the military Junta in Argentina etc, a lot of DICTATORS FAIL.

The Socialist and the Capitalist.

 

[frigidweirdo]

The basic idea is not about property calling it theft or not self made. The basic idea is " from each according to his ability and to each according to his need". This is the same basic idea behind slavery which is why it is no coincidence that every communist nation is a slave state.

They got it from the Bible.

That is not a defense of slavery, nor does it lend legitamacy to an evil idea.

But no they did not. There is no such scripture.

Slavery is not about free-market Capitalism.

Nobody takes right-wingers seriously about any "gospel Truth". Appeals to ignorance is all right-wingers are best at.

All who believed were together and had all things in common; 45 they would sell their possessions and goods and distribute the proceeds to all, as any had need. ... Now the whole group of those who believed were of one heart and soul, and no one claimed private ownership of any possessions, but everything they owned was held in common. ... There was not a needy person among them, for as many as owned lands or houses sold them and brought the proceeds of what was sold. They laid it at the apostles' feet, and it was distributed to each as any had need.[25]

— Acts 2:44–45, Acts 4:32–35

Christian communism - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Please point out where the Roman government mandated this sharing.

Again: Communism can work only in small communities and strictly voluntarily.

Read some history of the Roman Empire.

Only the Religious seem to be able to make it work. Not enough morals to go around among the secular laity?

Face it, kid. You fucked up. There is no Biblical justification for the tyranny you want.

If you had enough reading comprehension you would understand it take morals for that not right-wing fantasy.

Morals to steal from people?

You do know words have meanings, right? You don't get to make up new ones?

Only right-wingers allege that. The rest of us know that the social power to Tax is delegated to our representatives to Government.

"Social power".

No such thing.

But it's HILARIOUS you believe you get to make up definitions! How insanely intellectually bankrupt!

The ignorance of the right-wing is astounding.

The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;

It is accomplished via the social-ism of Government.

Government is not socialism.

Socialism is a form of government which always fails.

That is fact in your face which has been proven time again but being a dishonest and immature right winger you still cling to a proven fallacy

It doesn't always fail at all. There have been a few examples of Socialism and they have failed because they struggled to deal with some of the fundamentals. I'm not a Socialist, but the doesn't mean it can't work.

People would say Capitalism has always failed too. Look at 2008.

Capiyalism is still going strong socialism always fails.

Such a silly statement to make. How many Socialist countries have there ever been?

China. Hasn't failed
Cuba. Hasn't failed
Laos. Hasn't failed
Vietnam. Hasn't failed

Venezuela has failed insanely badly. Unless you think people eating their pets is a success.

Yes, Venezuela is failing badly.

Venezuela is a country run by people. Does this mean that ALL countries run by people will fail?

Plenty of capitalist countries have also failed. Somalia, Zimbabwe. Does this mean we should immediately stop capitalism?

Countries are run by people?! Oh, no!

I bet you though you had a point, too.

The point being that if you take a parameter and then you say "well, this has failed, so it'll never work, we could start with "run by people", as many countries run by people have failed, therefore your argument would be, they'll all fail. Inevitable.

Perhaps. Yet as an economic system, capitalism has lifted the greatest number of people out of poverty.

Problem is, poverty is just statistics.

Oh, and China has lifted so many people out of "poverty". Vietnam too, while the US was trying to put them in poverty in the 1970s.

Yeah. Freedom's for suckers, right? Nobody needs it. Just do what you're told, and you get to keep your organs.

Not sure why you brought up freedom.

China may or may not harvest prisoners organs. You literally have the Fulan Gong's word for it that this happens. They don't like the CCP and the CCP doesn't like them. Hardly unbiased.

But the US executes people. The US locks up political prisoners, the US does all kinds of nasty shit too.

It doesn't make China good and it doesn't make the US good.

But BOTH SYSTEMS do bad shit.

What's your point?

The US has no political prisoners and no nation on earth compares to the genocide commited by MAO even Stalin did not come close and he murdered more thsan Hitler did.

Actually it does.

Leonard Peltier is an example.

Mao's killing wasn't genocide. You could argue genocide, because he attempted to destroy the Chinese culture in place at the time. But he didn't try and kill the Chinese people. His incompetency led to massive starvation and he killed lots in a civil war, and through war, but he didn't kill to wipe cultures out.

The issue is that Mao was a lunatic. He wasn't particularly Communist, he just like wielding power.

 

[frigidweirdo]

The basic idea is not about property calling it theft or not self made. The basic idea is " from each according to his ability and to each according to his need". This is the same basic idea behind slavery which is why it is no coincidence that every communist nation is a slave state.

They got it from the Bible.

That is not a defense of slavery, nor does it lend legitamacy to an evil idea.

But no they did not. There is no such scripture.

Slavery is not about free-market Capitalism.

Nobody takes right-wingers seriously about any "gospel Truth". Appeals to ignorance is all right-wingers are best at.

All who believed were together and had all things in common; 45 they would sell their possessions and goods and distribute the proceeds to all, as any had need. ... Now the whole group of those who believed were of one heart and soul, and no one claimed private ownership of any possessions, but everything they owned was held in common. ... There was not a needy person among them, for as many as owned lands or houses sold them and brought the proceeds of what was sold. They laid it at the apostles' feet, and it was distributed to each as any had need.[25]

— Acts 2:44–45, Acts 4:32–35

Christian communism - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Please point out where the Roman government mandated this sharing.

Again: Communism can work only in small communities and strictly voluntarily.

Read some history of the Roman Empire.

Only the Religious seem to be able to make it work. Not enough morals to go around among the secular laity?

Face it, kid. You fucked up. There is no Biblical justification for the tyranny you want.

If you had enough reading comprehension you would understand it take morals for that not right-wing fantasy.

Morals to steal from people?

You do know words have meanings, right? You don't get to make up new ones?

Only right-wingers allege that. The rest of us know that the social power to Tax is delegated to our representatives to Government.

"Social power".

No such thing.

But it's HILARIOUS you believe you get to make up definitions! How insanely intellectually bankrupt!

The ignorance of the right-wing is astounding.

The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;

It is accomplished via the social-ism of Government.

Government is not socialism.

Socialism is a form of government which always fails.

That is fact in your face which has been proven time again but being a dishonest and immature right winger you still cling to a proven fallacy

It doesn't always fail at all. There have been a few examples of Socialism and they have failed because they struggled to deal with some of the fundamentals. I'm not a Socialist, but the doesn't mean it can't work.

People would say Capitalism has always failed too. Look at 2008.

If it hasn't worked in the past, it's not going to work in the future.

And it's never worked in the past.

That's such an illogical position to take.

Literally, if you fail at first, give up and never try again.

The problem with political systems is there are many ways to flog a horse.

You can set up Socialism in a million different ways. You can be intelligent about it and use human psychology to get the best out of workers, or you can just demand they do what they're told and use fear, or you can simply let the workers be lazy.

Each will have different results.

China is doing things much differently to the way the USSR did things, or how Cuba do things. So you'll have different results.

So you are fine with trying naziism again? After it all it was only tried once and with a slight adjustment or two it deserves another chance.

No, I didn't say I supported Socialism or Communism.

That's not the point I'm making.

My point is your logic is lacking. If you want to have a discussion about Socialism, let's have one. But don't start making a fantasy world in which to have the argument. Let's have it in THE REAL WORLD.

 

[danielpalos]

The basic idea is not about property calling it theft or not self made. The basic idea is " from each according to his ability and to each according to his need". This is the same basic idea behind slavery which is why it is no coincidence that every communist nation is a slave state.

They got it from the Bible.

That is not a defense of slavery, nor does it lend legitamacy to an evil idea.

But no they did not. There is no such scripture.

Slavery is not about free-market Capitalism.

Nobody takes right-wingers seriously about any "gospel Truth". Appeals to ignorance is all right-wingers are best at.

All who believed were together and had all things in common; 45 they would sell their possessions and goods and distribute the proceeds to all, as any had need. ... Now the whole group of those who believed were of one heart and soul, and no one claimed private ownership of any possessions, but everything they owned was held in common. ... There was not a needy person among them, for as many as owned lands or houses sold them and brought the proceeds of what was sold. They laid it at the apostles' feet, and it was distributed to each as any had need.[25]

— Acts 2:44–45, Acts 4:32–35

Christian communism - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Please point out where the Roman government mandated this sharing.

Again: Communism can work only in small communities and strictly voluntarily.

Read some history of the Roman Empire.

Only the Religious seem to be able to make it work. Not enough morals to go around among the secular laity?

Face it, kid. You fucked up. There is no Biblical justification for the tyranny you want.

If you had enough reading comprehension you would understand it take morals for that not right-wing fantasy.

Morals to steal from people?

You do know words have meanings, right? You don't get to make up new ones?

Only right-wingers allege that. The rest of us know that the social power to Tax is delegated to our representatives to Government.

"Social power".

No such thing.

But it's HILARIOUS you believe you get to make up definitions! How insanely intellectually bankrupt!

The ignorance of the right-wing is astounding.

The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;

It is accomplished via the social-ism of Government.

Government is not socialism.

Socialism is a form of government which always fails.

That is fact in your face which has been proven time again but being a dishonest and immature right winger you still cling to a proven fallacy

It doesn't always fail at all. There have been a few examples of Socialism and they have failed because they struggled to deal with some of the fundamentals. I'm not a Socialist, but the doesn't mean it can't work.

People would say Capitalism has always failed too. Look at 2008.

If it hasn't worked in the past, it's not going to work in the future.

And it's never worked in the past.

That's such an illogical position to take.

Literally, if you fail at first, give up and never try again.

The problem with political systems is there are many ways to flog a horse.

You can set up Socialism in a million different ways. You can be intelligent about it and use human psychology to get the best out of workers, or you can just demand they do what they're told and use fear, or you can simply let the workers be lazy.

Each will have different results.

China is doing things much differently to the way the USSR did things, or how Cuba do things. So you'll have different results.

NO GUISE HONEST ITLL WORK THIS TIME PINKIE SWEAR

Yeah, I think I'll pass.

View attachment 504518

What? I didn't understand a single thing.

It's pretty simply. People who want to try failed ideologies always say "it'll work this time".

No, it won't.

And the image itself is simple, too. Those who fail to learn from history are doomed to vote Democrat.

That's why Democrats keep insisting "it'll work this time!"

The problem is there are many ways to run a country with the same ideology.

So, yeah, if you'd do the USSR again in the same way, it'd fail.

But China isn't doing Socialism in the same way as the USSR. So, you can't say "because the USSR failed, China will too."

Any government that finds it necessary to murder millions of people to stay in power is a failure.

That is why the South lost?

 

[GLASNOST]

Any evidence that what Stalin was doing was moving towards Communism, rather than Stalin just being in power and doing whatever he liked?

Nope.

 

[danielpalos]

Capitalism does not kill. Some capitalists do but they are simply criminals.

How many people died during our civil war when we had freer market based capitalism then than we do now?

That was not why the war was fought or what it was fought over. Communists kill directly FOR communism and because of it.

It was for the capitalism of private property by ignoring natural rights for a certain segment of our population.

How many people die of poverty and lack of adequate medical care under our form of Capitalism?

No it was not for capitalism at all. Capitalism succeeded where it was praciticed in states without slavery which produced well over 90 % of the nations GDP at that time.

Fewer die of poverty and inadequate medical care under capitalism than those who die of the same causes in any socialist nation.

lol. Private property is about capitalism.

 

[Soupnazi630]

Why do Progressives never have a bad word to say about Communism or mankind's most prolific mass murders, all Communists?

Because communism has never killed anyone.
Stalin was not a communist, but a capitalist bank robber, who infiltrated the Communists, Socialists, and Anarchists, killed them all, took over, and implemented state capitalism instead.

Look at the characteristics. Communism is collaborative, cooperative, communal, and the way humans normally treat each other in small social groups like families, clubs, tribes, etc.
Those who think communism implies a large centralized state, simply do not know anything about communism.
And what Stalin implemented was not at all collaborative, cooperative, communal, or voluntary.
It was forced, state, capitalism, with purely a profit motive for the ruling elite.

Communism has killed un toldf tens of millions.

Stalin was a communist. He was not a capitalist,

Communism is totalitarian and never cooperative or communial or cllobaorative,

It is you who grapss nothing about communism and is ignorant of it.

Stalin wasn't really a Communist. Do you think Stalin gave a damn about Communism at all? What did Stalin do that was either Communist or pushing for Communism?

He was a communist through and through. he etablished the comintern specifically for the purpose of spreading communism world wide just as Marx required communism to work. He forced the entire nation to work and live in accordance with his interpretation of Marx which is precisely what the dictatorship of the proletariate is meant to do.

Well, the Comintern was established in 1919 before Stalin was a major force. Stalin was on the delegate's list, but it's not known if he actually went.

Stalin was one of those guys who'd use the system he was in in order to gain the power he wanted. Nothing seems to suggest he was a Communist.

Even the early Communists in Russia thought he might be an agent provocateur.The proven worldwide railure of socialism

Everything proves he was a communist inclluding his own admission.

Yeah, only if you see things in simple.

You mean seeing things clearly without denial

The problem is you think you're seeing things clearly, but mostly this is because you don't actually bother looking at much.

I look at it all you selectively ignore what is inconvenient.

Such as?

The fact that Stalin was a communist

Ah, so, what we seem to be dealing with is this sort of "fact" that most people "know", but haven't actually thought about.

Why, exactly, was Stalin a Communist? Just because he was leader of the USSR?

Because he stated he was and enforced communism on people as envisioned by marx. He followed the play book as directed.

So, if North Korea says it's democracy, IT'S DEMOCRATIC?????

What you have to remember about people and politics is they'll say anything and pretend to be anything to get power.

Try the anti-gay politician caught having gay sex.

Anti-LGBT politician 'caught having sex with a man in his office' facing 30 accusations of sexual misconduct

Ohio state legislator resigns after witness reports extramarital affair to House Chief of Staff

www.independent.co.uk

"Wes Goodman: Anti-LGBT Republican politician 'caught having sex with man in his office' facing 30 sexual misconduct accusations"

Try Xi Jinping who was sent to the countryside under Mao and ran away. He literally ran away from Communism. But he wanted power, and in a one party state, if you want power, you go to the party.

The cave the Chinese president called home

The Chinese president spent his formative years living in a cave in a backwater village. Now, it is being transformed into a theme park-style tourist attraction, as the Chinese leader’s past is used to legitimise Communist Party rule

s.telegraph.co.uk

"Xi Jinping has said that he experienced his political awakening when he was “sent down” to Liangjiahe in Shaanxi province,"

"But the misery of life in the impoverished village of a few dozen houses was too much for the 15-year-old Xi. Longing for his home comforts, he escaped."

People will pretend to be anything. China still has Mao on its banknotes. You have to wonder why, when it was DengXiaoPing who set up the modern China, not Mao. Mao tried to destroy China.

But he didn't enforce Communism as Marx envisioned at all.

Marxism was a classless society.

The USSR clearly had some people more equal than others.

He did enforce communism as envisioned. Marxism calls for a classless society at the end which of course is never reached in reality. However Marxism calls for and demands a new arrangement of class in society before the end is reached. That is why it calls for a dictatorship of the proletariate. Marx clearly stated despotism would be necessary while striving to reach that end. Stalin merely provided the dictatorship while striving for thaty end exactly as Marx demanded.

Once again commubnism is not the end result it is the revolution and ideology to reach that result.

Any evidence that what Stalin was doing was moving towards Communism, rather than Stalin just being in power and doing whatever he liked?

The two are the same so yes

 

[Soupnazi630]

The basic idea is not about property calling it theft or not self made. The basic idea is " from each according to his ability and to each according to his need". This is the same basic idea behind slavery which is why it is no coincidence that every communist nation is a slave state.

They got it from the Bible.

That is not a defense of slavery, nor does it lend legitamacy to an evil idea.

But no they did not. There is no such scripture.

Slavery is not about free-market Capitalism.

Nobody takes right-wingers seriously about any "gospel Truth". Appeals to ignorance is all right-wingers are best at.

All who believed were together and had all things in common; 45 they would sell their possessions and goods and distribute the proceeds to all, as any had need. ... Now the whole group of those who believed were of one heart and soul, and no one claimed private ownership of any possessions, but everything they owned was held in common. ... There was not a needy person among them, for as many as owned lands or houses sold them and brought the proceeds of what was sold. They laid it at the apostles' feet, and it was distributed to each as any had need.[25]

— Acts 2:44–45, Acts 4:32–35

Christian communism - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Please point out where the Roman government mandated this sharing.

Again: Communism can work only in small communities and strictly voluntarily.

Read some history of the Roman Empire.

Only the Religious seem to be able to make it work. Not enough morals to go around among the secular laity?

Face it, kid. You fucked up. There is no Biblical justification for the tyranny you want.

If you had enough reading comprehension you would understand it take morals for that not right-wing fantasy.

Morals to steal from people?

You do know words have meanings, right? You don't get to make up new ones?

Only right-wingers allege that. The rest of us know that the social power to Tax is delegated to our representatives to Government.

"Social power".

No such thing.

But it's HILARIOUS you believe you get to make up definitions! How insanely intellectually bankrupt!

The ignorance of the right-wing is astounding.

The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;

It is accomplished via the social-ism of Government.

Government is not socialism.

Socialism is a form of government which always fails.

That is fact in your face which has been proven time again but being a dishonest and immature right winger you still cling to a proven fallacy

It doesn't always fail at all. There have been a few examples of Socialism and they have failed because they struggled to deal with some of the fundamentals. I'm not a Socialist, but the doesn't mean it can't work.

People would say Capitalism has always failed too. Look at 2008.

If it hasn't worked in the past, it's not going to work in the future.

And it's never worked in the past.

That's such an illogical position to take.

Literally, if you fail at first, give up and never try again.

The problem with political systems is there are many ways to flog a horse.

You can set up Socialism in a million different ways. You can be intelligent about it and use human psychology to get the best out of workers, or you can just demand they do what they're told and use fear, or you can simply let the workers be lazy.

Each will have different results.

China is doing things much differently to the way the USSR did things, or how Cuba do things. So you'll have different results.

NO GUISE HONEST ITLL WORK THIS TIME PINKIE SWEAR

Yeah, I think I'll pass.

View attachment 504518

What? I didn't understand a single thing.

It's pretty simply. People who want to try failed ideologies always say "it'll work this time".

No, it won't.

And the image itself is simple, too. Those who fail to learn from history are doomed to vote Democrat.

That's why Democrats keep insisting "it'll work this time!"

The problem is there are many ways to run a country with the same ideology.

So, yeah, if you'd do the USSR again in the same way, it'd fail.

But China isn't doing Socialism in the same way as the USSR. So, you can't say "because the USSR failed, China will too."

Any government that finds it necessary to murder millions of people to stay in power is a failure.

That is why the South lost?

The basic idea is not about property calling it theft or not self made. The basic idea is " from each according to his ability and to each according to his need". This is the same basic idea behind slavery which is why it is no coincidence that every communist nation is a slave state.

They got it from the Bible.

That is not a defense of slavery, nor does it lend legitamacy to an evil idea.

But no they did not. There is no such scripture.

Slavery is not about free-market Capitalism.

Nobody takes right-wingers seriously about any "gospel Truth". Appeals to ignorance is all right-wingers are best at.

All who believed were together and had all things in common; 45 they would sell their possessions and goods and distribute the proceeds to all, as any had need. ... Now the whole group of those who believed were of one heart and soul, and no one claimed private ownership of any possessions, but everything they owned was held in common. ... There was not a needy person among them, for as many as owned lands or houses sold them and brought the proceeds of what was sold. They laid it at the apostles' feet, and it was distributed to each as any had need.[25]

— Acts 2:44–45, Acts 4:32–35

Christian communism - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Please point out where the Roman government mandated this sharing.

Again: Communism can work only in small communities and strictly voluntarily.

Read some history of the Roman Empire.

Only the Religious seem to be able to make it work. Not enough morals to go around among the secular laity?

Face it, kid. You fucked up. There is no Biblical justification for the tyranny you want.

If you had enough reading comprehension you would understand it take morals for that not right-wing fantasy.

Morals to steal from people?

You do know words have meanings, right? You don't get to make up new ones?

Only right-wingers allege that. The rest of us know that the social power to Tax is delegated to our representatives to Government.

"Social power".

No such thing.

But it's HILARIOUS you believe you get to make up definitions! How insanely intellectually bankrupt!

The ignorance of the right-wing is astounding.

The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;

It is accomplished via the social-ism of Government.

Government is not socialism.

Socialism is a form of government which always fails.

That is fact in your face which has been proven time again but being a dishonest and immature right winger you still cling to a proven fallacy

It doesn't always fail at all. There have been a few examples of Socialism and they have failed because they struggled to deal with some of the fundamentals. I'm not a Socialist, but the doesn't mean it can't work.

People would say Capitalism has always failed too. Look at 2008.

Capiyalism is still going strong socialism always fails.

Such a silly statement to make. How many Socialist countries have there ever been?

China. Hasn't failed
Cuba. Hasn't failed
Laos. Hasn't failed
Vietnam. Hasn't failed

Venezuela has failed insanely badly. Unless you think people eating their pets is a success.

Yes, Venezuela is failing badly.

Venezuela is a country run by people. Does this mean that ALL countries run by people will fail?

Plenty of capitalist countries have also failed. Somalia, Zimbabwe. Does this mean we should immediately stop capitalism?

Countries are run by people?! Oh, no!

I bet you though you had a point, too.

The point being that if you take a parameter and then you say "well, this has failed, so it'll never work, we could start with "run by people", as many countries run by people have failed, therefore your argument would be, they'll all fail. Inevitable.

Perhaps. Yet as an economic system, capitalism has lifted the greatest number of people out of poverty.

Problem is, poverty is just statistics.

Oh, and China has lifted so many people out of "poverty". Vietnam too, while the US was trying to put them in poverty in the 1970s.

Yeah. Freedom's for suckers, right? Nobody needs it. Just do what you're told, and you get to keep your organs.

Not sure why you brought up freedom.

China may or may not harvest prisoners organs. You literally have the Fulan Gong's word for it that this happens. They don't like the CCP and the CCP doesn't like them. Hardly unbiased.

But the US executes people. The US locks up political prisoners, the US does all kinds of nasty shit too.

It doesn't make China good and it doesn't make the US good.

But BOTH SYSTEMS do bad shit.

What's your point?

The US has no political prisoners and no nation on earth compares to the genocide commited by MAO even Stalin did not come close and he murdered more thsan Hitler did.

Actually it does.

Leonard Peltier is an example.

Mao's killing wasn't genocide. You could argue genocide, because he attempted to destroy the Chinese culture in place at the time. But he didn't try and kill the Chinese people. His incompetency led to massive starvation and he killed lots in a civil war, and through war, but he didn't kill to wipe cultures out.

The issue is that Mao was a lunatic. He wasn't particularly Communist, he just like wielding power.

Actusally it does not and Leonard Peltier is not a politiucal prisoner he is a murder who was righteously comvicted based on evidence.

MAO willfully and intentionally slaughtered tyens of millions THAT is genocide.

 

[Soupnazi630]

The basic idea is not about property calling it theft or not self made. The basic idea is " from each according to his ability and to each according to his need". This is the same basic idea behind slavery which is why it is no coincidence that every communist nation is a slave state.

They got it from the Bible.

That is not a defense of slavery, nor does it lend legitamacy to an evil idea.

But no they did not. There is no such scripture.

Slavery is not about free-market Capitalism.

Nobody takes right-wingers seriously about any "gospel Truth". Appeals to ignorance is all right-wingers are best at.

All who believed were together and had all things in common; 45 they would sell their possessions and goods and distribute the proceeds to all, as any had need. ... Now the whole group of those who believed were of one heart and soul, and no one claimed private ownership of any possessions, but everything they owned was held in common. ... There was not a needy person among them, for as many as owned lands or houses sold them and brought the proceeds of what was sold. They laid it at the apostles' feet, and it was distributed to each as any had need.[25]

— Acts 2:44–45, Acts 4:32–35

Christian communism - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Please point out where the Roman government mandated this sharing.

Again: Communism can work only in small communities and strictly voluntarily.

Read some history of the Roman Empire.

Only the Religious seem to be able to make it work. Not enough morals to go around among the secular laity?

Face it, kid. You fucked up. There is no Biblical justification for the tyranny you want.

If you had enough reading comprehension you would understand it take morals for that not right-wing fantasy.

Morals to steal from people?

You do know words have meanings, right? You don't get to make up new ones?

Only right-wingers allege that. The rest of us know that the social power to Tax is delegated to our representatives to Government.

"Social power".

No such thing.

But it's HILARIOUS you believe you get to make up definitions! How insanely intellectually bankrupt!

The ignorance of the right-wing is astounding.

The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;

It is accomplished via the social-ism of Government.

Government is not socialism.

Socialism is a form of government which always fails.

That is fact in your face which has been proven time again but being a dishonest and immature right winger you still cling to a proven fallacy

It doesn't always fail at all. There have been a few examples of Socialism and they have failed because they struggled to deal with some of the fundamentals. I'm not a Socialist, but the doesn't mean it can't work.

People would say Capitalism has always failed too. Look at 2008.

Capiyalism is still going strong socialism always fails.

Such a silly statement to make. How many Socialist countries have there ever been?

China. Hasn't failed
Cuba. Hasn't failed
Laos. Hasn't failed
Vietnam. Hasn't failed

Venezuela has failed insanely badly. Unless you think people eating their pets is a success.

Yes, Venezuela is failing badly.

Venezuela is a country run by people. Does this mean that ALL countries run by people will fail?

Plenty of capitalist countries have also failed. Somalia, Zimbabwe. Does this mean we should immediately stop capitalism?

Somalia is anogther failed socialist state.

Zimbabwe was barely a state at all.

Well, it was Socialist from 1969 to 1989/1991.

So, in theory it was a failed Capitalist state until 1969.

Zimbabwe actually was a pretty strong state. It had economic problems, the worst seemingly because of Mugabe's new wife. Now the crocodile's in, he seems to be a less competent leader than Mugabe (oh dear).

But whenever I went to Zimbabwe it seemed a better place than Mozambique or South Africa, less crime at least.

The point is that capitalist states also fail, and why? Because of bad leadership.

Often Socialism has failed because those implementing it are dictators. Like Pinochet in Chile, the military Junta in Argentina etc, a lot of DICTATORS FAIL.

The Socialist and the Capitalist.

Socialism does not fail because of bad leadership it fails to to inherent stupidity of the idea.

 

[danielpalos]

Socialism does not fail because of bad leadership it fails to to inherent stupidity of the idea.

Our Constitution is over two hundred years old and it is not an inherently stupid idea.

 

[Soupnazi630]

Socialism does not fail because of bad leadership it fails to to inherent stupidity of the idea.

Our Constitution is over two hundred years old and it is not an inherently stupid idea.

It is a brilliant idea which works better than any other.

 

[dudmuck]

The basic idea is not about property calling it theft or not self made. The basic idea is " from each according to his ability and to each according to his need". This is the same basic idea behind slavery which is why it is no coincidence that every communist nation is a slave state.

They got it from the Bible.

That is not a defense of slavery, nor does it lend legitamacy to an evil idea.

But no they did not. There is no such scripture.

Slavery is not about free-market Capitalism.

Nobody takes right-wingers seriously about any "gospel Truth". Appeals to ignorance is all right-wingers are best at.

All who believed were together and had all things in common; 45 they would sell their possessions and goods and distribute the proceeds to all, as any had need. ... Now the whole group of those who believed were of one heart and soul, and no one claimed private ownership of any possessions, but everything they owned was held in common. ... There was not a needy person among them, for as many as owned lands or houses sold them and brought the proceeds of what was sold. They laid it at the apostles' feet, and it was distributed to each as any had need.[25]

— Acts 2:44–45, Acts 4:32–35

Christian communism - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Please point out where the Roman government mandated this sharing.

Again: Communism can work only in small communities and strictly voluntarily.

Read some history of the Roman Empire.

Only the Religious seem to be able to make it work. Not enough morals to go around among the secular laity?

Face it, kid. You fucked up. There is no Biblical justification for the tyranny you want.

If you had enough reading comprehension you would understand it take morals for that not right-wing fantasy.

Morals to steal from people?

You do know words have meanings, right? You don't get to make up new ones?

Only right-wingers allege that. The rest of us know that the social power to Tax is delegated to our representatives to Government.

"Social power".

No such thing.

But it's HILARIOUS you believe you get to make up definitions! How insanely intellectually bankrupt!

The ignorance of the right-wing is astounding.

The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;

It is accomplished via the social-ism of Government.

Government is not socialism.

Socialism is a form of government which always fails.

That is fact in your face which has been proven time again but being a dishonest and immature right winger you still cling to a proven fallacy

It doesn't always fail at all. There have been a few examples of Socialism and they have failed because they struggled to deal with some of the fundamentals. I'm not a Socialist, but the doesn't mean it can't work.

People would say Capitalism has always failed too. Look at 2008.

Capiyalism is still going strong socialism always fails.

Such a silly statement to make. How many Socialist countries have there ever been?

China. Hasn't failed
Cuba. Hasn't failed
Laos. Hasn't failed
Vietnam. Hasn't failed

Venezuela has failed insanely badly. Unless you think people eating their pets is a success.

Yes, Venezuela is failing badly.

Venezuela is a country run by people. Does this mean that ALL countries run by people will fail?

Plenty of capitalist countries have also failed. Somalia, Zimbabwe. Does this mean we should immediately stop capitalism?

Somalia is anogther failed socialist state.

Zimbabwe was barely a state at all.

Well, it was Socialist from 1969 to 1989/1991.

So, in theory it was a failed Capitalist state until 1969.

Zimbabwe actually was a pretty strong state. It had economic problems, the worst seemingly because of Mugabe's new wife. Now the crocodile's in, he seems to be a less competent leader than Mugabe (oh dear).

But whenever I went to Zimbabwe it seemed a better place than Mozambique or South Africa, less crime at least.

The point is that capitalist states also fail, and why? Because of bad leadership.

Often Socialism has failed because those implementing it are dictators. Like Pinochet in Chile, the military Junta in Argentina etc, a lot of DICTATORS FAIL.

The Socialist and the Capitalist.

Socialism does not fail because of bad leadership it fails to to inherent stupidity of the idea.

It fails due to corruption. The majority of failed socialist states are in eastern europe, which also indicates influence of bad ideas from former soviet union.

Once example of successful results from socialist policies is Bolivia, resulting in the best GDP growth in south america with reduction in poverty.

Other countries successful with some sort of socialist policies (or ideas) implemented in some way: Norway, Finland, Sweden, Denmark, Great Britain, Canada, the Netherlands, Spain, Ireland, Belgium, Switzerland, Australia, Japan, and New Zealand.

 

[Staidhup]

Those that subscribe communism as an end all have never lived, visited, or spoken with a refugee from a communist run country. Pure communism does not and never has existed in this world, it was an intellectual theory, experiment, that can not nor will not exist due to power corrupts, each attempt quickly evolves into a fascist oligarchy run for the benefit of the select few. So who are these select few? those that seize power through force, corruption, and murder. Communism is as some have said the “new modern form of feudalism” with a different wrapper.
More people starve and succumb due to a lack of medical care in communist run countries than any other form of government.

 

[Staidhup]

The basic idea is not about property calling it theft or not self made. The basic idea is " from each according to his ability and to each according to his need". This is the same basic idea behind slavery which is why it is no coincidence that every communist nation is a slave state.

They got it from the Bible.

That is not a defense of slavery, nor does it lend legitamacy to an evil idea.

But no they did not. There is no such scripture.

Slavery is not about free-market Capitalism.

Nobody takes right-wingers seriously about any "gospel Truth". Appeals to ignorance is all right-wingers are best at.

All who believed were together and had all things in common; 45 they would sell their possessions and goods and distribute the proceeds to all, as any had need. ... Now the whole group of those who believed were of one heart and soul, and no one claimed private ownership of any possessions, but everything they owned was held in common. ... There was not a needy person among them, for as many as owned lands or houses sold them and brought the proceeds of what was sold. They laid it at the apostles' feet, and it was distributed to each as any had need.[25]

— Acts 2:44–45, Acts 4:32–35

Christian communism - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Please point out where the Roman government mandated this sharing.

Again: Communism can work only in small communities and strictly voluntarily.

Read some history of the Roman Empire.

Only the Religious seem to be able to make it work. Not enough morals to go around among the secular laity?

Face it, kid. You fucked up. There is no Biblical justification for the tyranny you want.

If you had enough reading comprehension you would understand it take morals for that not right-wing fantasy.

Morals to steal from people?

You do know words have meanings, right? You don't get to make up new ones?

Only right-wingers allege that. The rest of us know that the social power to Tax is delegated to our representatives to Government.

"Social power".

No such thing.

But it's HILARIOUS you believe you get to make up definitions! How insanely intellectually bankrupt!

The ignorance of the right-wing is astounding.

The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;

It is accomplished via the social-ism of Government.

Government is not socialism.

Socialism is a form of government which always fails.

That is fact in your face which has been proven time again but being a dishonest and immature right winger you still cling to a proven fallacy

It doesn't always fail at all. There have been a few examples of Socialism and they have failed because they struggled to deal with some of the fundamentals. I'm not a Socialist, but the doesn't mean it can't work.

People would say Capitalism has always failed too. Look at 2008.

Capiyalism is still going strong socialism always fails.

Such a silly statement to make. How many Socialist countries have there ever been?

China. Hasn't failed
Cuba. Hasn't failed
Laos. Hasn't failed
Vietnam. Hasn't failed

Venezuela has failed insanely badly. Unless you think people eating their pets is a success.

Yes, Venezuela is failing badly.

Venezuela is a country run by people. Does this mean that ALL countries run by people will fail?

Plenty of capitalist countries have also failed. Somalia, Zimbabwe. Does this mean we should immediately stop capitalism?

Somalia is anogther failed socialist state.

Zimbabwe was barely a state at all.

Well, it was Socialist from 1969 to 1989/1991.

So, in theory it was a failed Capitalist state until 1969.

Zimbabwe actually was a pretty strong state. It had economic problems, the worst seemingly because of Mugabe's new wife. Now the crocodile's in, he seems to be a less competent leader than Mugabe (oh dear).

But whenever I went to Zimbabwe it seemed a better place than Mozambique or South Africa, less crime at least.

The point is that capitalist states also fail, and why? Because of bad leadership.

Often Socialism has failed because those implementing it are dictators. Like Pinochet in Chile, the military Junta in Argentina etc, a lot of DICTATORS FAIL.

The Socialist and the Capitalist.

Socialism does not fail because of bad leadership it fails to to inherent stupidity of the idea.

It fails due to corruption. The majority of failed socialist states are in eastern europe, which also indicates influence of bad ideas from former soviet union.

Once example of successful results from socialist policies is Bolivia, resulting in the best GDP growth in south america with reduction in poverty.

Other countries successful with some sort of socialist policies (or ideas) implemented in some way: Norway, Finland, Sweden, Denmark, Great Britain, Canada, the Netherlands, Spain, Ireland, Belgium, Switzerland, Australia, Japan, and New Zealand.

You forgot the include America!

 

[GLASNOST]

Socialism does not fail because of bad leadership it fails to to inherent stupidity of the idea.

Our Constitution is over two hundred years old and it is not an inherently stupid idea.

Wow! A whole two hundred years, huh? There is a fountain in the centre of my town that has been providing drinkable water since before "America" was discovered.