No Socialist Regime Survives Without Murder.

[22lcidw]

Fascism is a rightwing phenomenon, that's why Tucker Carlson has been prepping his lemmings for it...

Tucker & Guest Suggest Right Will Go Full Fascist Because Hunter Biden

“So well put and absolutely right,” Carlson said. “We are moving toward actual extremism because they’re undermining the system that kept extremism at bay.”

www.thedailybeast.com

Idiot! How can someone be this dumb!?!?!

What Carlson is means nothing. He responds to the other side of Prog utopia. The promotion on TV of Prog views has hundreds and thousands from national, regional, local and city broadcasts. Lemmings have been programmed for decades. Women have been convinced they are men and equality is pure with no differences at all. The costs of Western Civilization have increased several folds and we need foreign trade deals to live of slaves to keep it going.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Why did America's premier rightwinger, Tucker Carlson, say that the right will go "full-fascist" then idiot?

I don't watch Fox, Tucker Carlson, but I read books.
Haven't put it on since they stabbed Trump in the back, election night.

Book: a written or printed work consisting of pages glued or sewn together along one side and bound in covers

Have you ever read a book?

Did you notice that I link, source and document everything I post?

And you realize that you are unable to do the same?



FDR took Fascsim and laid it on top of America....as the New Deal.

Still believe (I almost said 'think') it is Right wing?????



Right vs Left.

The Founders, classical liberals, conservatives
a. individualism, free markets, and limited constitutional government.
“free markets, free voices, free people”

,
Fascists, Nazis, Liberals, Progressives, Socialists, Communists, Democrats
b. the collective, command and control regulation of private industry, and overarching government that can order every aspect of the private citizen's life....right down to control of his thoughts and speech.



None of the totalitarian forms of political plague have the slightest concern for human life: not communism (gulags), not Nazism (concentration camps), not Liberalism (abortion), not Progressivism (eugenics), not socialism (theft), not fascism (murder).

The Democrats check every one of those boxes.



They only differ in the final outcome: slavery, serfdom, or death.

They all follow Trotsky: "We must rid ourselves once and for all of the Quaker-Papist babble about the sanctity of human life."

 

[PoliticalChic]

Why did America's premier rightwinger, Tucker Carlson, say that the right will go "full-fascist" then idiot?

So you are not interested in a reading course that would better enable you to compete on the board?

I'm certain that some nice adult will help you get a library card.

 

[Mikeoxenormous]

On that basis, that fact.....how can you vote for one????
Is it the hope that it will kill you last???



1.If you went through socialist government school, they hid that from you. If they had informed you of the truth, you would have put two and two together, and recognized that Bolsheviks, Nazis, Fascists, Maoists,……and Democrats…..are all socialist. And none of ‘em have the slightest compunction about murder.

2. Just to underscore the difference…..no government has to force anyone to be a capitalist. In the free market, every man, woman and child is scheming to find a better way to make a product or service that will make a fortune!
It is based on voluntary transactions.



3. “…Das Kapital is full of promises that could never be fulfilled because they are based on a false view of human nature. The central fallacy lies in the mechanistic concept of human nature: the notion that man’s ideas and values are totally governed by his economic circumstances. This in turn means that Marx’s philosophy ignores a basic reality of human nature: that man works best when he is driven by a sense of purpose: that is, by ‘the profit-motive’ in its broadest sense.

A man who badly wants anything, from the girl next door to a new car, will pour an enormous amount of concentrated effort into obtaining it. Place him in a commune and tell him he is working for ‘the common good’, and even if he is a good communist, some of his enthusiasm will evaporate. In communist countries, the result has been almost permanent economic crisis due to inefficiency. China and the Soviet bloc are the most powerful living argument against the doctrines of Das Kapital, a demostration that Marx’s blueprint for Utopia has no relation to actuality.


4. Then why did Kapital come to exercise such widespread influence? Because Marx possessed Savonarola’s talent for emotional invective. He himself told a correspondent ‘It is certainly the most terrible missile that has ever been aimed at the bourgeoisie.’ Marx could always marshal his ‘economic facts’, his starving Irish, his miners dying of silicosis, his foundrymen scalded to death with boiling metal, his seamstresses coughing away their lungs. And the tone of scientific precision proved irresistible to a new generation of socialists, from Bernard Shaw to Lenin and Trotsky. Marx, like Luther, had arrived at precisely the right moment in history.” Colin Wilson, “A Criminal History of Mankind”



5. “How do you tell a communist? Well, it's someone who reads Marx and Lenin. And how do you tell an anti-Communist? It's someone who understands Marx and Lenin.”
Ronald Reagan

 

[MarcATL]

So you are not interested in a reading course that would better enable you to compete on the board?

I'm certain that some nice adult will help you get a library card.

Why do you think that America's premier rightwinger, Tucker Carlson, has been promoting the idea that the right will go "full-fascist?"

You say you read books, so think and give me an answer.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Why do you think that America's premier rightwinger, Tucker Carlson, has been promoting the idea that the right will go "full-fascist?"

You say you read books, so think and give me an answer.

I am America's premier Rightwinger.

So......what I say is all that counts.


Mussolini, Hitler, Stalin, and you......Leftists.
a. "Hitler often stated that he learned much from reading Marx, and the whole of National Socialism is doctrinally based on Marxism."
George Watson, Historian, Cambridge.



b. "Socialists in Germany were national socialists, communists were international socialists."
Vladimir Bukovsky.


When will you be graduating junior high????

 

[PoliticalChic]

7. Socialism, collectivism, statism is such a failure, they have to kill any who don’t share their ideology or their regimes will collapse.

Robert Owen was a socialist with the very best of intentions. Here, the best example of a wealthy individual who squanders his fortune in the interests of workers.
What happend when he couldn't murder any who didn't go with the program?



“In July 1799 Owen and his partners bought the New Lanark mill from David Dale, and Owen became the New Lanark mill's manager in January 1800.[11][12]Encouraged by his success in the management of cotton mills in Manchester, Owen hoped to conduct the New Lanark mill on higher principles than purely commercial ones. …. About 2,000 individuals were associations with the mill; 500 of them were children who were brought to the mill at the age of five or six from the poorhouses and charities of Edinburgh and Glasgow.” Robert Owen - Wikipedia



The experiment failed miserably, as has every other commune.





“Robert Owen (/ˈoʊən/; 14 May 1771 – 17 November 1858… philanthropic social reformer, and one of the founders of utopian socialism and the cooperative movement. Owen is best known for his efforts to improve the working conditions of his factory workers and his promotion of experimental socialistic communities. ….In 1824 Owen travelled to America, where he invested the bulk of his fortune in an experimental socialistic community at New Harmony, Indiana, the preliminary model for Owen's utopian society. The experiment was short-lived, lasting about two years. Other Owenite utopian communities met a similar fate.” Robert Owen - Wikipedia



A good man, sorely misguided. He wrote: we must “merge all individualism in the social.”



Democrat voters, largely, are uneducated, so have no understanding of the collapse, failure, and murder associated with every socialist endeavor.

 

[TroglocratsRdumb]

It takes force and oppression to make everyone equal.
The essence of socialism is that it is government servitude.
It crushes the middle class down.
It doesn't lift the poor.
It makes everyone equally poor.
The left wingers who shout the slogan "99% vs the 1%" do not understand that that is exactly what happens under socialism.
The ruling elite enslave the citizens.
People are turned into government owned slaves.

 

[PoliticalChic]

It takes force and oppression to make everyone equal.
The essence of socialism is that it is government servitude.
It crushes the middle class down.
It doesn't lift the poor.
It makes everyone equally poor.
The left wingers who shout the slogan "99% vs the 1%" do not understand that that is exactly what happens under socialism.
The ruling elite enslave the citizens.
People are turned into government owned slaves.

You probably read Vonnegut's satire of the equality thing....

Perhaps the best way to reveal the insanity of the Left's campaign for their view of equality is to revisit the satirical exposition of equality, written in 1961 by Kurt Vonnegut.
"Harrison Bergeron" is a satirical and dystopian science-fiction short story written by Kurt Vonnegut Jr. and first published in October 1961The satire raises a serious question concerning desirability of social equality and the extent to which society is prepared to go to achieve it.
Harrison Bergeron - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


a. "All men are not created equal. It is the purpose of the Government to make them so." This is the premise of the Showtime film adaption of Kurt Vonnegut's futuristic short story Harrison Bergeron. The film centers around a young man (Harrison) who is smarter than his peers, and is not affected by the usual "Handicapping" which is used to train all Americans so everyone is of equal intelligence.
Harrison Bergeron (TV 1995) - IMDb

b. Kurt Vonnegut begins Harrison Bergeron this way: The year was 2081, and everybody was finally equal. They weren't only equal before God and the law. They were equal in every which way. Nobody was smarter than anybody else. Nobody was better looking than anybody else. Nobody was quicker or stronger than anybody else. All this equality was due to the 211th, 212th, and 213th Amendments to the Constitution, and to the unceasing vigilance of agents of the United States Handicapper General.
Harrison Bergeron by Kurt Vonnegut


c. The government forced each individual to wear handicaps to offset any advantage they had, so that everyone could be truly and fully equal. Beautiful people had to wear ugly masks, the strong had to wear weights, the graceful had to wear bags of birdshot, and those with above-average intelligence had to wear government transmitters in their ears that would emit sharp noises every twenty seconds to keep them from taking unfair advantage of their brains.
Kurt Vonnegut, Harrison Bergeron.

 

[PoliticalChic]

8. As we have seen, collectivism, socialism, is doomed to failure wherever it is tried, as it runs counter to human nature. While communists of every variety, and that includes the Democrat Party, have promised to change human nature, it is simply one more of the lies the Left is infamous for.

In a society primarily based on communal property, it is equal to the absence of property rights for individuals.



“When the Pilgrims arrived in Massachusetts in 1620, they established a society with communal property- the Plymouth Colony.

"But, within three years they privatized their property….[they] experienced communalism’s great problem: it sets up a system of rewards and punishments that puts the welfare of the community on a collision course with human nature.” Tom Bethell, “The Noblest Triumph,” p.31



It’s called the ‘Free Loader Problem”

So what does the Left do with the critics, resisters, …….

….they kill ‘em.

 

[PoliticalChic]

9. Rousseau, the godfather of Leftist revolution, believed that property corrupted man’s nature good nature.

Leon Trotsky long ago pointed out that where there is no private ownership, individuals can be bent to the will of the state”
Bethell, “The Noblest Triumph,” p.9

And terror, murder, became the acceptable method of ending private property:

"For the first time in history terror became an official government policy, with the stated aim to use violence in order to achieve a higher political goal. Unlike the later meaning of 'terrorists' as people who use violence against a government, the terrorists of the French Revolution were the government. The Terror was legal, having been voted for by the Convention."

Robespierre and the Terror | History Today

www.historytoday.com

Perhaps the simplest description of the difference between the Left and the Right, is that the Left sees murder as an option.



Of course, the Democrats fit the description.

 

[PoliticalChic]

10. Bernie was runner-up for Democrat presidential candidate….cheated out of the nomination, actually.

But he is a reminder of who the Democrats are, and where they stand on murder.



“Yet instead of offering any criticisms of those countries, Sanders said, "But, ya know, you can take China as another example. China is an authoritarian country, becoming more and more authoritarian, but can anyone deny — I mean, the facts are clear — that they have taken more people out of extreme poverty than any country in history."

"Do I get criticized because I say that?" Sanders added. "That's the truth."

As far as China goes, the Epoch Times reported in 2018 that "the most murderous of several 20th century dictators was [communist] China's Mao Zedong according to most estimates. Mao's estimated death toll ranges from 60 million to 80 million, which surpasses the lives claimed by World War I (37 million) and possibly World War II (66 million.)"

According to Forbes, the major driver of China's economic success in recent years has been "the introduction of market mechanisms, modern technology and management from the West." Bernie triples down on his pro-Castro comments and adds praise for China



Obama honored Mao with an ornament on our Christmas Tree.

 

[Rigby5]

1.If you went through socialist government school, they hid that from you. If they had informed you of the truth, you would have put two and two together, and recognized that Bolsheviks, Nazis, Fascists, Maoists,……and Democrats…..are all socialist. And none of ‘em have the slightest compunction about murder.

2. Just to underscore the difference…..no government has to force anyone to be a capitalist. In the free market, every man, woman and child is scheming to find a better way to make a product or service that will make a fortune!
It is based on voluntary transactions.

Nonsense.
First of all, the Bolsheviks, Nazis, Fascists, Maoists, etc. were all capitalists and not at all remotely socialist in any way.
Socialism has to be communal, collective, and cooperative, while these groups you listed were all profit motivated, wealthy elite instead.

Sure "no government has to force anyone to be a capitalist", but that is not how it works.
Capitalist want profits, so use their capital in order to buy weapons and hire mercenaries, so that they can become government. Like the East India Trade company, which was owned by the British aristocracy. They invaded and took over the government of countries like India, China, etc.
All dictatorship are always capitalist.
Stalin was a dictator, so then obviously he was a capitalist, motivated by the un-communist profits he was able to force from others.

If not prevented by a communal government, all capitalists would just extort and steal instead of sell for only marginal profits. All dictatorships are capitalists, and all democracies have socialist restrictions on capitalism.

 

[Rigby5]

9. Rousseau, the godfather of Leftist revolution, believed that property corrupted man’s nature good nature.

Leon Trotsky long ago pointed out that where there is no private ownership, individuals can be bent to the will of the state”
Bethell, “The Noblest Triumph,” p.9

And terror, murder, became the acceptable method of ending private property:

"For the first time in history terror became an official government policy, with the stated aim to use violence in order to achieve a higher political goal. Unlike the later meaning of 'terrorists' as people who use violence against a government, the terrorists of the French Revolution were the government. The Terror was legal, having been voted for by the Convention."

Robespierre and the Terror | History Today

www.historytoday.com

Perhaps the simplest description of the difference between the Left and the Right, is that the Left sees murder as an option.



Of course, the Democrats fit the description.

NO ONE has ever suggested ending private property.
Communism is ONLY about the means of production that are essential to society as a whole.

 

[Rigby5]

None of the totalitarian forms of political plague have the slightest concern for human life: not communism (gulags), not Nazism (concentration camps), not Liberalism (abortion), not Progressivism (eugenics), not socialism (theft), not fascism (murder).

You still have no even yet been able to separate economic systems from political or government systems.
For example, communism or capitalism under a democratic government is entirely different from communism of capitalism under a dictatorship.
That is because communism and capitalism are economic systems and do not at all require or impose a particular system of government.
Until you can separate those 2 concepts, you will continue to be confused.

 

[Moonglow]

On that basis, that fact.....how can you vote for one????
Is it the hope that it will kill you last???



1.If you went through socialist government school, they hid that from you. If they had informed you of the truth, you would have put two and two together, and recognized that Bolsheviks, Nazis, Fascists, Maoists,……and Democrats…..are all socialist. And none of ‘em have the slightest compunction about murder.

2. Just to underscore the difference…..no government has to force anyone to be a capitalist. In the free market, every man, woman and child is scheming to find a better way to make a product or service that will make a fortune!
It is based on voluntary transactions.



3. “…Das Kapital is full of promises that could never be fulfilled because they are based on a false view of human nature. The central fallacy lies in the mechanistic concept of human nature: the notion that man’s ideas and values are totally governed by his economic circumstances. This in turn means that Marx’s philosophy ignores a basic reality of human nature: that man works best when he is driven by a sense of purpose: that is, by ‘the profit-motive’ in its broadest sense.

A man who badly wants anything, from the girl next door to a new car, will pour an enormous amount of concentrated effort into obtaining it. Place him in a commune and tell him he is working for ‘the common good’, and even if he is a good communist, some of his enthusiasm will evaporate. In communist countries, the result has been almost permanent economic crisis due to inefficiency. China and the Soviet bloc are the most powerful living argument against the doctrines of Das Kapital, a demostration that Marx’s blueprint for Utopia has no relation to actuality.


4. Then why did Kapital come to exercise such widespread influence? Because Marx possessed Savonarola’s talent for emotional invective. He himself told a correspondent ‘It is certainly the most terrible missile that has ever been aimed at the bourgeoisie.’ Marx could always marshal his ‘economic facts’, his starving Irish, his miners dying of silicosis, his foundrymen scalded to death with boiling metal, his seamstresses coughing away their lungs. And the tone of scientific precision proved irresistible to a new generation of socialists, from Bernard Shaw to Lenin and Trotsky. Marx, like Luther, had arrived at precisely the right moment in history.” Colin Wilson, “A Criminal History of Mankind”



5. “How do you tell a communist? Well, it's someone who reads Marx and Lenin. And how do you tell an anti-Communist? It's someone who understands Marx and Lenin.”
Ronald Reagan

No regime in the world or in the history of humans has existed without murder, even the USA.

 

[Rigby5]

As far as China goes, the Epoch Times reported in 2018 that "the most murderous of several 20th century dictators was [communist] China's Mao Zedong according to most estimates. Mao's estimated death toll ranges from 60 million to 80 million, which surpasses the lives claimed by World War I (37 million) and possibly World War II (66 million.)"

Totally wrong.
The death toll in China was from the war with the US backed dictatorship of Khang Kia Shek.
There was massive starvation, and the losing US backed fascists absconded with all the wealth they could steal from the treasury of China.
You are implying Mao murdered people in order to extort, and that is not the case.
He was always very popular in China, even though I would not support him myself.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Nonsense.
First of all, the Bolsheviks, Nazis, Fascists, Maoists, etc. were all capitalists and not at all remotely socialist in any way.
Socialism has to be communal, collective, and cooperative, while these groups you listed were all profit motivated, wealthy elite instead.

Sure "no government has to force anyone to be a capitalist", but that is not how it works.
Capitalist want profits, so use their capital in order to buy weapons and hire mercenaries, so that they can become government. Like the East India Trade company, which was owned by the British aristocracy. They invaded and took over the government of countries like India, China, etc.
All dictatorship are always capitalist.
Stalin was a dictator, so then obviously he was a capitalist, motivated by the un-communist profits he was able to force from others.

If not prevented by a communal government, all capitalists would just extort and steal instead of sell for only marginal profits. All dictatorships are capitalists, and all democracies have socialist restrictions on capitalism.

You are either the sickest or most inveterate liars on the board.

Every post of your is the sort one expects from a psychotic locked in a mental instituton.

Please stop addressing posts to me.

 

[The Duke]

On that basis, that fact.....how can you vote for one????
Is it the hope that it will kill you last???



1.If you went through socialist government school, they hid that from you. If they had informed you of the truth, you would have put two and two together, and recognized that Bolsheviks, Nazis, Fascists, Maoists,……and Democrats…..are all socialist. And none of ‘em have the slightest compunction about murder.

2. Just to underscore the difference…..no government has to force anyone to be a capitalist. In the free market, every man, woman and child is scheming to find a better way to make a product or service that will make a fortune!
It is based on voluntary transactions.



3. “…Das Kapital is full of promises that could never be fulfilled because they are based on a false view of human nature. The central fallacy lies in the mechanistic concept of human nature: the notion that man’s ideas and values are totally governed by his economic circumstances. This in turn means that Marx’s philosophy ignores a basic reality of human nature: that man works best when he is driven by a sense of purpose: that is, by ‘the profit-motive’ in its broadest sense.

A man who badly wants anything, from the girl next door to a new car, will pour an enormous amount of concentrated effort into obtaining it. Place him in a commune and tell him he is working for ‘the common good’, and even if he is a good communist, some of his enthusiasm will evaporate. In communist countries, the result has been almost permanent economic crisis due to inefficiency. China and the Soviet bloc are the most powerful living argument against the doctrines of Das Kapital, a demostration that Marx’s blueprint for Utopia has no relation to actuality.


4. Then why did Kapital come to exercise such widespread influence? Because Marx possessed Savonarola’s talent for emotional invective. He himself told a correspondent ‘It is certainly the most terrible missile that has ever been aimed at the bourgeoisie.’ Marx could always marshal his ‘economic facts’, his starving Irish, his miners dying of silicosis, his foundrymen scalded to death with boiling metal, his seamstresses coughing away their lungs. And the tone of scientific precision proved irresistible to a new generation of socialists, from Bernard Shaw to Lenin and Trotsky. Marx, like Luther, had arrived at precisely the right moment in history.” Colin Wilson, “A Criminal History of Mankind”



5. “How do you tell a communist? Well, it's someone who reads Marx and Lenin. And how do you tell an anti-Communist? It's someone who understands Marx and Lenin.”
Ronald Reagan

But they got a tiger by the tail this time!

More colloquial would be a Bobcat, Panther, or Mountain Lion, but you get the Idea.

 

[PoliticalChic]

But they got a tiger by the tail this time!

I love that phrase.

After the Democrats authorized and directd over 12 THOUSAND riots, arsons, murder, and acts of domestic terrorism, all designed to destabilize the nation and set the scene for the stolen election, they didn't anticipate getting that tiger back in the cage.


And.....they haven't been able to.