FDR's Progressive Doctrine vs The Union of Soviet Socialist Republic's Constitution

[Wry Catcher]

Rather than looking at the two back to back, and letting the abject fear of the word "USSR" and "Communism" make your argument, Why don't you tell me what you disagree with in FDR's Progressive Doctrine, and why?

I guess if you do not disagree with communism then you would not be concerned with the words USSR and communism but what if FDR decided to put people in concentration camps (which he did) and we compared it to Hitler's program. Would you ask for an explanation why it is wrong?

Perhaps that does not scare you so try this:

"National Socialism us what Marxism could have been if it had freed itself from its absurd, artificial connection with the democratic system"

Adolf Hitler

He was saying that National Socialism was the fullfillment of marxism and that the social democrats belief in democratic means to achieve the socialist utopia was artificial which suggest the reality of socialism itself. The fact that the soviet union achieved a society of compete control just like in fascist countries suggest that the ends of all socialist thinking is the same.

Huh?

 

[ihopehefails]

Rather than looking at the two back to back, and letting the abject fear of the word "USSR" and "Communism" make your argument, Why don't you tell me what you disagree with in FDR's Progressive Doctrine, and why?

I guess if you do not disagree with communism then you would not be concerned with the words USSR and communism but what if FDR decided to put people in concentration camps (which he did) and we compared it to Hitler's program. Would you ask for an explanation why it is wrong?

Perhaps that does not scare you so try this:

"National Socialism us what Marxism could have been if it had freed itself from its absurd, artificial connection with the democratic system"

Adolf Hitler

He was saying that National Socialism was the fullfillment of marxism and that the social democrats belief in democratic means to achieve the socialist utopia was artificial which suggest the reality of socialism itself. The fact that the soviet union achieved a society of compete control just like in fascist countries suggest that the ends of all socialist thinking is the same.

Huh?

I'm saying that people who can't see the dangers don't feel threatened by the dangers that communism presents because no one really needs an explanation why something is wrong when we compare FDR's programs to National Socialism.

 

[ihopehefails]

The point is this, plymco: We the People elect the government to do what We the People want.

And We the People have made it very clear that We do not want the wingnut right of the GOP reactionary right telling us We the People what to do.

Go define "socialism" and "marxism" and "progressivism" objectively so that this discussion can continue on a logical basis, please.

I would like an explanation of how a philosophy of negative liberty where government essentially does nothing and is incapable of making people do things is capapable of telling 'Us We the People what to do'?

Like all you want, ihef, but until you figure out the contradiction in what you wrote above, you will want without fulfillment forever. (Notice the very clever double alliteration in the last sentence.)

There is no contradictions between the will of the people and the will of the individual who is free to conduct their lives as they see fit.

 

[JakeStarkey]

A person who will not voluntarily limit his liberty to the good of the community will never know freedom.

Do you know the differences between "liberty" and "freedom"? Some of the Founding Fathers did.

 

[theDoctorisIn]

Rather than looking at the two back to back, and letting the abject fear of the word "USSR" and "Communism" make your argument, Why don't you tell me what you disagree with in FDR's Progressive Doctrine, and why?

I guess if you do not disagree with communism then you would not be concerned with the words USSR and communism but what if FDR decided to put people in concentration camps (which he did) and we compared it to Hitler's program. Would you ask for an explanation why it is wrong?

Perhaps that does not scare you so try this:

"National Socialism us what Marxism could have been if it had freed itself from its absurd, artificial connection with the democratic system"

Adolf Hitler

He was saying that National Socialism was the fullfillment of marxism and that the social democrats belief in democratic means to achieve the socialist utopia was artificial which suggest the reality of socialism itself. The fact that the soviet union achieved a society of compete control just like in fascist countries suggest that the ends of all socialist thinking is the same.

Where did you get that I agreed with Communism?

And I think you missed the point of that Hitler quote. National Socialism is NOT the fulfillment of Marxism (which you'd know if you'd ever actually read Marx, instead of parroting radio hosts), being, at its root, a democratic system. Perhaps you should take a few history and economics classes, or at least buy a dictionary.

 

[theDoctorisIn]

I guess if you do not disagree with communism then you would not be concerned with the words USSR and communism but what if FDR decided to put people in concentration camps (which he did) and we compared it to Hitler's program. Would you ask for an explanation why it is wrong?

Perhaps that does not scare you so try this:

"National Socialism us what Marxism could have been if it had freed itself from its absurd, artificial connection with the democratic system"

Adolf Hitler

He was saying that National Socialism was the fullfillment of marxism and that the social democrats belief in democratic means to achieve the socialist utopia was artificial which suggest the reality of socialism itself. The fact that the soviet union achieved a society of compete control just like in fascist countries suggest that the ends of all socialist thinking is the same.

Huh?

I'm saying that people who can't see the dangers don't feel threatened by the dangers that communism presents because no one really needs an explanation why something is wrong when we compare FDR's programs to National Socialism.

I have no idea what you've said here. Maybe I need to make a few things clearer. I do not believe in Communism, I am not a Communist - but I'm also not Joe McCarthy - I don't see Communists hiding behind every rock. To equate FDR with Communism and National Socialism is completely unfounded, and quite an insulting way to make a poor attempt at a point.

 

[theDoctorisIn]

I would like an explanation of how a philosophy of negative liberty where government essentially does nothing and is incapable of making people do things is capapable of telling 'Us We the People what to do'?

Like all you want, ihef, but until you figure out the contradiction in what you wrote above, you will want without fulfillment forever. (Notice the very clever double alliteration in the last sentence.)

There is no contradictions between the will of the people and the will of the individual who is free to conduct their lives as they see fit.

What if the "Will of the people" is to lock you up in a cell? Do you not see the contradiction there?

 

[JakeStarkey]

ihopehefails is consistently inconsistent. He simply throws nonsense out hoping that someone will trip up. That has not happend yet, but who knows with time. However, ihhf is very easy to confound and confabulate. Have fun with him.

 

[theDoctorisIn]

ihopehefails is consistently inconsistent. He simply throws nonsense out hoping that someone will trip up. That has not happend yet, but who knows with time. However, ihhf is very easy to confound and confabulate. Have fun with him.

I'll do my best.

 

[ihopehefails]

A person who will not voluntarily limit his liberty to the good of the community will never know freedom.

Do you know the differences between "liberty" and "freedom"? Some of the Founding Fathers did.

Are you saying that in order to know what freedom is I must first remove it from myself and How do I posses any freedom at that point since I removed it from myself?

 

[ihopehefails]

Rather than looking at the two back to back, and letting the abject fear of the word "USSR" and "Communism" make your argument, Why don't you tell me what you disagree with in FDR's Progressive Doctrine, and why?

I guess if you do not disagree with communism then you would not be concerned with the words USSR and communism but what if FDR decided to put people in concentration camps (which he did) and we compared it to Hitler's program. Would you ask for an explanation why it is wrong?

Perhaps that does not scare you so try this:

"National Socialism us what Marxism could have been if it had freed itself from its absurd, artificial connection with the democratic system"

Adolf Hitler

He was saying that National Socialism was the fullfillment of marxism and that the social democrats belief in democratic means to achieve the socialist utopia was artificial which suggest the reality of socialism itself. The fact that the soviet union achieved a society of compete control just like in fascist countries suggest that the ends of all socialist thinking is the same.

Where did you get that I agreed with Communism?

And I think you missed the point of that Hitler quote. National Socialism is NOT the fulfillment of Marxism (which you'd know if you'd ever actually read Marx, instead of parroting radio hosts), being, at its root, a democratic system. Perhaps you should take a few history and economics classes, or at least buy a dictionary.

I assume that if you don't object to it then you must accept it in some way and the fact that you defend it shows you must affiliate yourself with it to some degree because people will always defend their home turf.

What was the point of Hitler's quote if it wasn't to say that it is the fullfillment of marxism?

 

[JakeStarkey]

Your mistaking freedom and liberty as the same thing. Go do a little study. You may understand the difference.

 

[theDoctorisIn]

I guess if you do not disagree with communism then you would not be concerned with the words USSR and communism but what if FDR decided to put people in concentration camps (which he did) and we compared it to Hitler's program. Would you ask for an explanation why it is wrong?

Perhaps that does not scare you so try this:

"National Socialism us what Marxism could have been if it had freed itself from its absurd, artificial connection with the democratic system"

Adolf Hitler

He was saying that National Socialism was the fullfillment of marxism and that the social democrats belief in democratic means to achieve the socialist utopia was artificial which suggest the reality of socialism itself. The fact that the soviet union achieved a society of compete control just like in fascist countries suggest that the ends of all socialist thinking is the same.

Where did you get that I agreed with Communism?

And I think you missed the point of that Hitler quote. National Socialism is NOT the fulfillment of Marxism (which you'd know if you'd ever actually read Marx, instead of parroting radio hosts), being, at its root, a democratic system. Perhaps you should take a few history and economics classes, or at least buy a dictionary.

I assume that if you don't object to it then you must accept it in some way and the fact that you defend it shows you must affiliate yourself with it to some degree because people will always defend their home turf.

What was the point of Hitler's quote if it wasn't to say that it is the fullfillment of marxism?

Once again, where do you get that don't object to Communism?

I object to people using terms they don't understand to try and make a point. I can say that I do object to Communism, because I know what it means. Here's a little hint for you:

Communism is NOT the same thing as Socialism is NOT the same thing as Marxism.

Now, why don't you learn what each of those words means, and then we can get back to the topic at hand.

EDIT TO ADD:

The point that Hitler was trying to make was, in his opinion, what kept Marxism from being as great as National Socialism was the inherent democratic nature of Marxism.

 

[ihopehefails]

Like all you want, ihef, but until you figure out the contradiction in what you wrote above, you will want without fulfillment forever. (Notice the very clever double alliteration in the last sentence.)

There is no contradictions between the will of the people and the will of the individual who is free to conduct their lives as they see fit.

What if the "Will of the people" is to lock you up in a cell? Do you not see the contradiction there?

I'm trying to figure out what you mean by "will of the people" when the will of every person is capable of being executed without government involvement. I know I can turn on the TV and watch what I want without it becoming a government process. In fact, the will of every person to turn on the TV is fully executable without any kind of government action so what is the difference between the people willing themselves in this manor and the government enforcing a law that you claim is the "will of the people"?

 

[theDoctorisIn]

There is no contradictions between the will of the people and the will of the individual who is free to conduct their lives as they see fit.

What if the "Will of the people" is to lock you up in a cell? Do you not see the contradiction there?

I'm trying to figure out what you mean by "will of the people" when the will of every person is capable of being executed without government involvement. I know I can turn on the TV and watch what I want without it becoming a government process. In fact, the will of every person to turn on the TV is fully executable without any kind of government action so what is the difference between the people willing themselves in this manor and the government enforcing a law that you claim is the "will of the people"?

I still don't know what you're talking about. I said nothing about Governments.

What if 30 people came to your door, and dragged you off to prison? Not government agents, but a mob of people? Do you not see an inherent contradiction to your own will?

 

[ihopehefails]

Your mistaking freedom and liberty as the same thing. Go do a little study. You may understand the difference.

How are they different when the freedom to do something also assumes the liberty to do so and if that is not true then they oppose each other which makes liberty is the opposite of freedom and that can not be true.

 

[ihopehefails]

What if the "Will of the people" is to lock you up in a cell? Do you not see the contradiction there?

I'm trying to figure out what you mean by "will of the people" when the will of every person is capable of being executed without government involvement. I know I can turn on the TV and watch what I want without it becoming a government process. In fact, the will of every person to turn on the TV is fully executable without any kind of government action so what is the difference between the people willing themselves in this manor and the government enforcing a law that you claim is the "will of the people"?

I still don't know what you're talking about. I said nothing about Governments.

What if 30 people came to your door, and dragged you off to prison? Not government agents, but a mob of people? Do you not see an inherent contradiction to your own will?

I don't see a contradiction between my own will, the will of others (including the 30 people), and the will of every person in a society being any different than the will of the people since the will of people simply encompasses the will of every individual.

 

[ihopehefails]

Where did you get that I agreed with Communism?

And I think you missed the point of that Hitler quote. National Socialism is NOT the fulfillment of Marxism (which you'd know if you'd ever actually read Marx, instead of parroting radio hosts), being, at its root, a democratic system. Perhaps you should take a few history and economics classes, or at least buy a dictionary.

I assume that if you don't object to it then you must accept it in some way and the fact that you defend it shows you must affiliate yourself with it to some degree because people will always defend their home turf.

What was the point of Hitler's quote if it wasn't to say that it is the fullfillment of marxism?

Once again, where do you get that don't object to Communism?

I object to people using terms they don't understand to try and make a point. I can say that I do object to Communism, because I know what it means. Here's a little hint for you:

Communism is NOT the same thing as Socialism is NOT the same thing as Marxism.

Now, why don't you learn what each of those words means, and then we can get back to the topic at hand.

EDIT TO ADD:

The point that Hitler was trying to make was, in his opinion, what kept Marxism from being as great as National Socialism was the inherent democratic nature of Marxism.

United Soviet Socialist Repubics
National Socialist

He wasn't talking about Marxist but Social Democrats and he was saying National Socialism is what social democrats could have been if it gave up its peaceful ways of achieving its goals. The goals were the same but the two differed in methods.

 

[theDoctorisIn]

I'm trying to figure out what you mean by "will of the people" when the will of every person is capable of being executed without government involvement. I know I can turn on the TV and watch what I want without it becoming a government process. In fact, the will of every person to turn on the TV is fully executable without any kind of government action so what is the difference between the people willing themselves in this manor and the government enforcing a law that you claim is the "will of the people"?

I still don't know what you're talking about. I said nothing about Governments.

What if 30 people came to your door, and dragged you off to prison? Not government agents, but a mob of people? Do you not see an inherent contradiction to your own will?

I don't see a contradiction between my own will, the will of others (including the 30 people), and the will of every person in a society being any different than the will of the people since the will of people simply encompasses the will of every individual.

My point is, what if everyone else's will (aside from your own) contradicts your will?

 

[theDoctorisIn]

I assume that if you don't object to it then you must accept it in some way and the fact that you defend it shows you must affiliate yourself with it to some degree because people will always defend their home turf.

What was the point of Hitler's quote if it wasn't to say that it is the fullfillment of marxism?

Once again, where do you get that don't object to Communism?

I object to people using terms they don't understand to try and make a point. I can say that I do object to Communism, because I know what it means. Here's a little hint for you:

Communism is NOT the same thing as Socialism is NOT the same thing as Marxism.

Now, why don't you learn what each of those words means, and then we can get back to the topic at hand.

EDIT TO ADD:

The point that Hitler was trying to make was, in his opinion, what kept Marxism from being as great as National Socialism was the inherent democratic nature of Marxism.

United Soviet Socialist Repubics
National Socialist

He wasn't talking about Marxist but Social Democrats and he was saying National Socialism is what social democrats could have been if it gave up its peaceful ways of achieving its goals. The goals were the same but the two differed in methods.

National Socialism us what Marxism could have been if it had freed itself from its absurd, artificial connection with the democratic system

Then why would he say Marxism? I'm sure he, unlike you, knew the difference.

And once again, you miss the point. The point is, if you actually knew any of the tenets of Marxism, you know that the ideal Marxist state is not a totalitarian dictatorship, rather a self-governing group of free individuals. Communism, on the other hand, is a form of government, one that almost always ends up being a centralized power structure. None of that is true of Marxism. Basically, what Hitler was saying is that if those pesky Marxists had stopped letting people be free, then they would have achieved the greatness that was National Socialism.