Stalin, Communism and the left wing

[CrusaderFrank]

Keep this handy, show it to a Progressive

Right Wing = minimum government, maximum individual Liberty

Left Wing = Maximum Government, minimum individual liberty

Maximum liberty = no abortions, no alcohol, no drugs, no jay-walking, no sex, no decent education, however there are lots of wars to scare you into accepting draconian measures with lots of spying, lots of controls on what you can and can't do.

Yeah right.

how does "Maximum liberty = no abortions, no alcohol, no drugs, no jay-walking, no sex, no decent education"?????????

 

[frigidweirdo]

Keep this handy, show it to a Progressive

Right Wing = minimum government, maximum individual Liberty

Left Wing = Maximum Government, minimum individual liberty

Maximum liberty = no abortions, no alcohol, no drugs, no jay-walking, no sex, no decent education, however there are lots of wars to scare you into accepting draconian measures with lots of spying, lots of controls on what you can and can't do.

Yeah right.

how does "Maximum liberty = no abortions, no alcohol, no drugs, no jay-walking, no sex, no decent education"?????????

It doesn't, that's the point. The point is the right wing, which is actually very good at taking away liberty for it's own profit and gain, tells people that they're all about liberty and suckers believe them.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Keep this handy, show it to a Progressive

Right Wing = minimum government, maximum individual Liberty

Left Wing = Maximum Government, minimum individual liberty

Maximum liberty = no abortions, no alcohol, no drugs, no jay-walking, no sex, no decent education, however there are lots of wars to scare you into accepting draconian measures with lots of spying, lots of controls on what you can and can't do.

Yeah right.

how does "Maximum liberty = no abortions, no alcohol, no drugs, no jay-walking, no sex, no decent education"?????????

It doesn't, that's the point. The point is the right wing, which is actually very good at taking away liberty for it's own profit and gain, tells people that they're all about liberty and suckers believe them.

You're confused. No surprise because you're a lib and that comes with the territory.

Government control is leftwing

Sent from smartphone using my wits and Taptalk

 

[westwall]

The fact that they had "voting" is cute but immaterial. When there is only one choice is it really voting?

Well they probably had more than one choice, though everyone would have been from the same party but might have been from different factions.

However in the US how much choice is there? Everyone votes for two parties, who appear almost the same but spend their whole time making themselves look really different with issues that are of a lower level than the bread and butter of daily life.

I'm finding more similarities than I would like between the voting in the USSR and the USA.

There is more than a smidgen of truth to this statement. Slowly but surely the US is becoming a progressive nightmare. They have been working on dismantling this country for decades now. There is no doubt of that.

Problem is you seem to be blaming the wrong people.

You're actually supporting the people who are causing all the problems by playing the partisan game.

No, I'm not. Progressives are the problem. Corrupt capitalists are merely one symptom of an overall illness. That illness is progressivism.

 

[westwall]

Keep this handy, show it to a Progressive

Right Wing = minimum government, maximum individual Liberty

Left Wing = Maximum Government, minimum individual liberty

Maximum liberty = no abortions, no alcohol, no drugs, no jay-walking, no sex, no decent education, however there are lots of wars to scare you into accepting draconian measures with lots of spying, lots of controls on what you can and can't do.

Yeah right.

how does "Maximum liberty = no abortions, no alcohol, no drugs, no jay-walking, no sex, no decent education"?????????

It doesn't, that's the point. The point is the right wing, which is actually very good at taking away liberty for it's own profit and gain, tells people that they're all about liberty and suckers believe them.

Actually that is the problem with the Democrat Party right now. Since Obummer has been in power the net worth of the average American has dropped. All while the rich get richer. The people have figured out that the Dems are worse than the Repubs in this issue. Far worse.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

Keep this handy, show it to a Progressive

Right Wing = minimum government, maximum individual Liberty

Left Wing = Maximum Government, minimum individual liberty

Maximum liberty = no abortions, no alcohol, no drugs, no jay-walking, no sex, no decent education, however there are lots of wars to scare you into accepting draconian measures with lots of spying, lots of controls on what you can and can't do.

Yeah right.

how does "Maximum liberty = no abortions, no alcohol, no drugs, no jay-walking, no sex, no decent education"?????????

It doesn't, that's the point. The point is the right wing, which is actually very good at taking away liberty for it's own profit and gain, tells people that they're all about liberty and suckers believe them.

Actually that is the problem with the Democrat Party right now. Since Obummer has been in power the net worth of the average American has dropped. All while the rich get richer. The people have figured out that the Dems are worse than the Repubs in this issue. Far worse.

That would take work, and this is just the tilted market at work. The Middle Class is not a product of capitalism, it has to be created.

 

[westwall]

Keep this handy, show it to a Progressive

Right Wing = minimum government, maximum individual Liberty

Left Wing = Maximum Government, minimum individual liberty

Maximum liberty = no abortions, no alcohol, no drugs, no jay-walking, no sex, no decent education, however there are lots of wars to scare you into accepting draconian measures with lots of spying, lots of controls on what you can and can't do.

Yeah right.

how does "Maximum liberty = no abortions, no alcohol, no drugs, no jay-walking, no sex, no decent education"?????????

It doesn't, that's the point. The point is the right wing, which is actually very good at taking away liberty for it's own profit and gain, tells people that they're all about liberty and suckers believe them.

Actually that is the problem with the Democrat Party right now. Since Obummer has been in power the net worth of the average American has dropped. All while the rich get richer. The people have figured out that the Dems are worse than the Repubs in this issue. Far worse.

That would take work, and this is just the tilted market at work. The Middle Class is not a product of capitalism, it has to be created.

Actually you are completely wrong. The middle class exists purely because of the capitalist system. In a socialist system the eventual outcome is rich and poor with no middle class. Soviet Russia had virtually no middle class till it was broken up and capitalism ran rampant which allowed the middle class to flourish.

I used to travel in Russia frequently and the number of cars were very few indeed before the collapse. Now they are everywhere.

 

[Unkotare]

What do you think we have in this country? Sham voting is a pretty good description.

False comparison, drama-queen.

 

[Unkotare]

Perhaps the best method to slow a people's or nation's progress is to bring in religion. Seems the more religious the government can keep the nation, the less progress.

Ignorant bullshit.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

Maximum liberty = no abortions, no alcohol, no drugs, no jay-walking, no sex, no decent education, however there are lots of wars to scare you into accepting draconian measures with lots of spying, lots of controls on what you can and can't do.

Yeah right.

how does "Maximum liberty = no abortions, no alcohol, no drugs, no jay-walking, no sex, no decent education"?????????

It doesn't, that's the point. The point is the right wing, which is actually very good at taking away liberty for it's own profit and gain, tells people that they're all about liberty and suckers believe them.

Actually that is the problem with the Democrat Party right now. Since Obummer has been in power the net worth of the average American has dropped. All while the rich get richer. The people have figured out that the Dems are worse than the Repubs in this issue. Far worse.

That would take work, and this is just the tilted market at work. The Middle Class is not a product of capitalism, it has to be created.

Actually you are completely wrong. The middle class exists purely because of the capitalist system. In a socialist system the eventual outcome is rich and poor with no middle class. Soviet Russia had virtually no middle class till it was broken up and capitalism ran rampant which allowed the middle class to flourish.

I used to travel in Russia frequently and the number of cars were very few indeed before the collapse. Now they are everywhere.

That is because of capitalism instead of communism, and capitalism, by itself, does not create a middle class. There are a few merchants, many rich, and a mass of poor who work mostly for the rich. Capitalism is something everyone here needs to learn. A middle class, that is a creation of the government and collective bargaining both of which get short shrift in the US ergo, no longer a middle class..

 

[westwall]

how does "Maximum liberty = no abortions, no alcohol, no drugs, no jay-walking, no sex, no decent education"?????????

It doesn't, that's the point. The point is the right wing, which is actually very good at taking away liberty for it's own profit and gain, tells people that they're all about liberty and suckers believe them.

Actually that is the problem with the Democrat Party right now. Since Obummer has been in power the net worth of the average American has dropped. All while the rich get richer. The people have figured out that the Dems are worse than the Repubs in this issue. Far worse.

That would take work, and this is just the tilted market at work. The Middle Class is not a product of capitalism, it has to be created.

Actually you are completely wrong. The middle class exists purely because of the capitalist system. In a socialist system the eventual outcome is rich and poor with no middle class. Soviet Russia had virtually no middle class till it was broken up and capitalism ran rampant which allowed the middle class to flourish.

I used to travel in Russia frequently and the number of cars were very few indeed before the collapse. Now they are everywhere.

That is because of capitalism instead of communism, and capitalism, by itself, does not create a middle class. There are a few merchants, many rich, and a mass of poor who work mostly for the rich. Capitalism is something everyone here needs to learn. A middle class, that is a creation of the government and collective bargaining both of which get short shrift in the US ergo, no longer a middle class..

Yes, it does. Capitalism requires workers with knowledge. Workers with knowledge demand higher wages. In a totalitarian regime they can go piss up a rope. But in a capitalistic system they leave and go where they will be paid what they are worth. Government doesn't create a middle class. Though it can certainly destroy one. Government creates very little. A middle class is beyond government to create.

 

[frigidweirdo]

You're confused. No surprise because you're a lib and that comes with the territory.

Government control is leftwing

Sent from smartphone using my wits and Taptalk

Right, so exactly who isn't left wing in govt then? Seems the US really is a Socialist/Communist state along with just about every other government going.

Bush is definately left wing, nigh on extreme left of the Communist Party of the USA for increasing federal funding by more than double in 8 years. But the RIGHT supported this in full. Why? If he's extreme left?

 

[frigidweirdo]

No, I'm not. Progressives are the problem. Corrupt capitalists are merely one symptom of an overall illness. That illness is progressivism.

er.... why?

There's no point telling me something with nothing to back it up with.

 

[frigidweirdo]

Actually that is the problem with the Democrat Party right now. Since Obummer has been in power the net worth of the average American has dropped. All while the rich get richer. The people have figured out that the Dems are worse than the Repubs in this issue. Far worse.

Er.... well that's hardly surprising seeing as there's been a recession going on since a few months before he took office.

What, exactly, was he supposed to do to increase the net worth of average Americans when A) the very rich were getting richer from poor people defaulting on houses, and losing their jobs, and taking jobs for less money and B) when the US was in the worst recession since the Great Depression?

Also, what was Congress doing about this? The Democrats controlled the whole of Congress for the last 6 years?

 

[Discombobulated]

You guys are all funny. Let's take a look at what the Progressives of the era had to say about Hitler and Stalin. As you can see, progressives felt the same about BOTH fascism, and Soviet style socialism...

• H. G. Wells, one of the most influential progressives of the 20th century, said in 1932 that progressives must become “liberal fascists” and “enlightened Nazis.” Regarding totalitarianism, he stated: “I have never been able to escape altogether from its relentless logic.” Calling for a “‘Phoenix Rebirth’ of Liberalism” under the umbrella of “Liberal Fascism,” Wells said: “I am asking for a Liberal Fascisti, for enlightened Nazis.”

• The poet Wallace Stevens pronounced himself “pro-Mussolini personally.”

• The eminent historian Charles Beard wrote of Mussolini’s efforts: “Beyond question, an amazing experiment is being made [in Italy], an experiment in reconciling individualism and socialism.”

• Muckraking journalists almost universally admired Mussolini. Lincoln Steffens, for one, said that Italian fascism made Western democracy, by comparison, look like a system run by “petty persons with petty purposes.” Mussolini, Steffens proclaimed reverently, had been “formed” by God “out of the rib of Italy.”

• McClure’s Magazine founder Samuel McClure, an important figure in the muckraking movement, described Italian fascism as “a great step forward and the first new ideal in government since the founding of the American Republic.”

• After having vistited Italy and interviewed Mussolini in 1926, the American humorist Will Rogers, who was informally dubbed “Ambassador-at-Large of the United States” by the National Press Club, said of the fascist dictator: “I’m pretty high on that bird.” “Dictator form of government is the greatest form of government,” Rogers wrote, “that is, if you have the right dictator.”

• Reporter Ida Tarbell was deeply impressed by Mussolini's attitudes regarding labor, affectionately dubbing him “a despot with a dimple.”

• NAACP co-founder W. E. B. DuBois saw National Socialism as a worthy model for economic organization. The establishment of the Nazi dictatorship in Germany, he wrote, had been “absolutely necessary to get the state in order.” In 1937 DuBois stated: “there is today, in some respects, more democracy in Germany than there has been in years past.”

• FDR adviser Rexford Guy Tugwell said of Italian fascism: “It's the cleanest, neatest, most efficiently operating piece of social machinery I've ever seen. It makes me envious.”

• New Republic editor George Soule, who avidly supported FDR, noted approvingly that the Roosevelt administration was “trying out the economics of fascism.”

• Playwright George Bernard Shaw hailed Stalin, Hitler, and Mussolini as the world’s great “progressive” leaders because they “did things,” unlike the leaders of those “putrefying corpses” called parliamentary democracies.

http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/viewSubCategory.asp?id=1223


Progressives generally greeted the 1917 Bolshevik revolution in Russia with great enthusiasm, embracing it as a worthy effort to create a socialist utopia. In the 1920s and 1930s, a host of credulous progressive journalists traveled to Russia to chronicle the the revolution's afterglow, so as to inform Americans about the historic significance of what was transpiring there. According to author Jonah Goldberg: “Most liberals saw the Bolsheviks as a popular and progressive movement.... Nearly the entire liberal elite, including much of FDR's Brain Trust, made the pilgrimage to Moscow to take admiring notes on the Soviet experiment.”

One key contributor to this pro-Bolshevik genre was the communist journalist John Reed, author of Ten Days that Shook the World. Reed dismissed concerns about the Red Terror and the mass murder of non-Bolshevists by praising the killers of “this treacherous gang.” Said Reed: “To the wall with them! I say I have learned one mighty expressive word: ‘raztrellyat’ [sic] (execute by shooting).”

Similarly, the intellectual E.A. Ross excused the Bolsheviks' violent campaign of terror on the theory that they did not kill all that many people. (Estimates of the number of deaths by execution range from 50,000 to 200,000.)

Some journalists, like Pulitzer Prize winner Walter Duranty of The New York Times, engaged in deliberate lies to conceal the harsh realities of post-revolution Soviet life. In 1933, for instance, at the height of the Ukrainian famine (engineered by Stalin) during which millions starved to death, Duranty wrote that “village markets [were] flowing with eggs, fruit, poultry, vegetables, milk and butter.... A child can see this is not famine but abundance.”

A British journalist writing in the progressive periodical New Republic declared that the Bolsheviks “stand for rationalism, for an intelligent system of cultivation, for education, for an active ideal of cooperation and social service.”

Most leaders in the American labor movement – including Sidney Hillman and John L. Lewis – expressed deep admiration for “Soviet pragmatism,” Stalin’s “experiment,” and the “heroism” of the Bolsheviks.

Upon returning from Russia in 1921, the muckraking journalist Lincoln Steffens announced: “I've seen the future, and it works.”


http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/viewSubCategory.asp?id=1222

None the less you've still failed completely to decouple Fascists and Nazis from being defined as right wing. No amount of out of context quotes will change actual history.

Not really. Progressives felt they were the same. The way they treat their subjects is the same. In other words based on the actions of the governments and how they treat their people....THEY ARE THE SAME! And.....they all resorted to mass murder to do what the progressives wanted....which the progressives all supported. Doesn't that make you feel all warm and fuzzy...knowing you support a philosophy that resorts to mass murder every time to get it's way? Why do YOU want to kill so many people?

Why do I want to kill so many people? Everyone should have a hobby.

 

[peach174]

One day liberals are being accused of supporting totalitarianism, the next they're being accused of supporting democracy,
which the conservatives decry as 'mob rule'.

Conservatives are repeating what our Founders said about democracy being a mob rule and that was one of the many reasons why the founders did not want a democracy and gave us a republic.

 

[Tom Sweetnam]

Nope.

The way I see the world there are only to forms of government: Democracy and Tyranny.

if it is a right wing tyranny or left wing tyranny doesnt make a difference to me, it still is tyranny.

It is, but whether you would live longer or be better off depnds very much on the nature of the tyranny.

Someone from a minority race would always be better off in a left-wing tyranny than right-wing; someone from the upper classes generally better off in a right-wing system that favoured the existing aristocracy. A Christian would be safer in a Fascist environment; an academic safe in neither.

Oh my God. I've seen major truckloads of stupid emanating from Saigon's posts, but this one resets the bar. She assumes a tyranny can be benevolent depending on the way you comb your hair. "Minorities races" are safer in communist dystopias? What a fool you are. And the fact that academics are always in peril in a tyranny of any stripe is a good indication of just how much such worthless chaff are valued in any communist regime that ever murdered its way into power...which means nearly all of them.

 

[westwall]

Nope.

The way I see the world there are only to forms of government: Democracy and Tyranny.

if it is a right wing tyranny or left wing tyranny doesnt make a difference to me, it still is tyranny.

It is, but whether you would live longer or be better off depnds very much on the nature of the tyranny.

Someone from a minority race would always be better off in a left-wing tyranny than right-wing; someone from the upper classes generally better off in a right-wing system that favoured the existing aristocracy. A Christian would be safer in a Fascist environment; an academic safe in neither.

Really now. Jesus wept man, those homosexuals did soooo well under the Nazi's. Yep they just loved them to death....well the death part is accurate. Or how about them Gypsies? Yep, loved them to death too! I won't even bother to mention the Jews. Clearly we see what your opinion of them is....

Moron.

 

[elektra]

Stalin, Communism, Socialism, Liberals, Democrats, and the National Socialists German Workers Party (NAZI's).


Yes, the American Socialists, the Democrats are no different than Stalin or other socialists, such as Hitler.

Socialists literally destroy the World, from famine to extreme pollution, Socialism is the disease.

Socialism needs to be eradicated, destroyed, like a weed, like a disease.

Have you got your anger out of your system now?

This, however, is a debate board and not an anger management program.

I figured I would at least put all these different terms for the same kind of people together, it serves a purpose, it identifies those like yourself, who will not discuss the facts, and instead begin with an attack.

So what offends you so much, that Socialists are known throughout history as those who hate and destroy and that the Democrats are very much of the same ilk.

You think you're using facts huh?

The East Germans were Socialists. They didn't have a famine, the Polish were Socialist, they didn't have a famine, the Hungarians were Socialist, they didn't have a famine. They didn't destroy the world, they didn't do anything.

You don't like Socialism. Nor do I.

However you talk about polluting the world

CO2 emissions per capita. The US is number 12 in the world although 2 of those 11 previous aren't actually countries.

Per capita greenhouse emissions

The US is 7th.

Damn those Socialists the Americans and their pollution.

Also the fact that you keep trying to equate the Nazis with Socialism when the only evidence presented was flimsy at best is incredible.

CO2 ain't pollution, idiot.

 

[frigidweirdo]

Stalin, Communism, Socialism, Liberals, Democrats, and the National Socialists German Workers Party (NAZI's).


Yes, the American Socialists, the Democrats are no different than Stalin or other socialists, such as Hitler.

Socialists literally destroy the World, from famine to extreme pollution, Socialism is the disease.

Socialism needs to be eradicated, destroyed, like a weed, like a disease.

Have you got your anger out of your system now?

This, however, is a debate board and not an anger management program.

I figured I would at least put all these different terms for the same kind of people together, it serves a purpose, it identifies those like yourself, who will not discuss the facts, and instead begin with an attack.

So what offends you so much, that Socialists are known throughout history as those who hate and destroy and that the Democrats are very much of the same ilk.

You think you're using facts huh?

The East Germans were Socialists. They didn't have a famine, the Polish were Socialist, they didn't have a famine, the Hungarians were Socialist, they didn't have a famine. They didn't destroy the world, they didn't do anything.

You don't like Socialism. Nor do I.

However you talk about polluting the world

CO2 emissions per capita. The US is number 12 in the world although 2 of those 11 previous aren't actually countries.

Per capita greenhouse emissions

The US is 7th.

Damn those Socialists the Americans and their pollution.

Also the fact that you keep trying to equate the Nazis with Socialism when the only evidence presented was flimsy at best is incredible.

CO2 ain't pollution, idiot.

CO2 is a greenhouse gas. CO2 emissions are man made. Putting man made CO2 into the atmosphere is polluting the atmosphere. Get it?

Oh, and an insult. Good for you, showing how intellectual you really are.