Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Does the GOP really want to raise this embarrassing part of their history in the 50s?
Allen Wests campaign releases its own video of his Communist Party claim about Democrats | Post on Politics
I have no doubt that it is the answer. America is still a wealthy nation. The problem is the way our wealth has been vertically distributed since the inception of Reaganomics. What is needed is to redistribute it horizontally to the class of people who will spend it rather than hoard it, which is the way to keep the economic engine running.The economic circumstances which existed in the U.S. prior to FDR's New Deal were conducive to rebellion, which accounts for the interest shown by the Communist Party. But the burgeoning rise of the Middle Class fostered by equitable redistribution of the Nation's bounty, mainly via increased taxes on excessive wealth which enabled the WPA and CCC programs, eliminated any potential for communist infiltration. Communism is the offspring of extreme wealth inequality, which high-level GOP leadership is busily promoting on behalf of their corporatist sponsors. The very fact we are once again hearing whispers of rising communism is political deja vu. Working class Americans of the right wing persuasion need to wise up -- asap.History has totally vindicated Joe McCarty; key people in FDR's White House reported directly to Moscow
I am impressed. Of course we are hearing about "hearing whispers" from the far, far right, I assume. You image then that equitable wealth redistribution to reinvigorate middle class health and consumption is the answer?
So how did that Pub cronyism and deregulation boom for the rich go in the 20's? LOL
So how did that Pub cronyism and deregulation boom for the rich go in the 20's? LOL
How did severe brain damage at birth go for you?
You've been caught AGAIN. I notice you stopped fomenting violence in your posts as I called YOU out on weeks ago...
There's a hundred percent chance of you being called a commie for making entirely too much sense.
Fascism and socialism are two varations on the same theme. They are both based on government control of the economy.
Fascism and socialism are two varations on the same theme. They are both based on government control of the economy.
Absolutely wrong. Fascism is a political philosophy, not an economic philosophy. If a lot of historical fascist states have in fact imposed economic controls, this is an incidental characteristic not a defining one. The defining characteristics of fascism are:
1) Dictatorship
2) Either no elections or rigged elections
3) Suppression of dissent
4) Militarism
5) Extreme nationalism
A state with these characteristics is a fascist state. In theory, a state with these characteristics and a laissez-faire economy, or a state-owned capitalist one, would be a fascist state; the fact that no fascist state has ever had either of those economic arrangements is a meaningless coincidence.
A state without these characteristics is NOT a fascist state. If it imposes controls on the economy, that does not make it a fascist state.
Does the GOP really want to raise this embarrassing part of their history in the 50s?
Allen Wests campaign releases its own video of his Communist Party claim about Democrats | Post on Politics
Does the GOP really want to raise this embarrassing part of their history in the 50s?
Allen Wests campaign releases its own video of his Communist Party claim about Democrats | Post on Politics
West simply pointed out what everyone already knew but wouldn't say. He is correct and about 80% of America knows it, it wont hurt the GOP one bit. When a party implements communist values and policies, it is kinda hard to argue that they are not communist.
One of the communist goals of 1963 was to take over one or both political parties, do you think that goal went away? Nope, they succeeded.
Oh, there's another common characteristic of fascist regimes that hasn't been pointed out and should be: they are all (at least so far) violently anti-Communist.
Fascism and socialism are two varations on the same theme. They are both based on government control of the economy.
Absolutely wrong. Fascism is a political philosophy, not an economic philosophy. If a lot of historical fascist states have in fact imposed economic controls, this is an incidental characteristic not a defining one. The defining characteristics of fascism are:
1) Dictatorship
2) Either no elections or rigged elections
3) Suppression of dissent
4) Militarism
5) Extreme nationalism
A state with these characteristics is a fascist state. In theory, a state with these characteristics and a laissez-faire economy, or a state-owned capitalist one, would be a fascist state; the fact that no fascist state has ever had either of those economic arrangements is a meaningless coincidence.
A state without these characteristics is NOT a fascist state. If it imposes controls on the economy, that does not make it a fascist state.
Fascism is also marked by a very clear social and legal division between the working class and the ownership class with labor organizations being illegal or a government controlled sham.
Oh, there's another common characteristic of fascist regimes that hasn't been pointed out and should be: they are all (at least so far) violently anti-Communist.
More correctly they are anti-populist. The masses are considered too self interested to know what's good for the country.
Oh, there's another common characteristic of fascist regimes that hasn't been pointed out and should be: they are all (at least so far) violently anti-Communist.
More correctly they are anti-populist. The masses are considered too self interested to know what's good for the country.
Call bs on that: they are anti-communist. Fascism is built on populist love for the leader, the party, and the nation.
More correctly they are anti-populist. The masses are considered too self interested to know what's good for the country.
Call bs on that: they are anti-communist. Fascism is built on populist love for the leader, the party, and the nation.
That's not real populism, it's the substitute that is indoctrinated into the populace to keep them in line. The people of a fascist nation could no more protest a war or an unpopular political decision than join a labor union. All collective action must further the aims of the state, no exceptions.
Call bs on that: they are anti-communist. Fascism is built on populist love for the leader, the party, and the nation.
That's not real populism, it's the substitute that is indoctrinated into the populace to keep them in line. The people of a fascist nation could no more protest a war or an unpopular political decision than join a labor union. All collective action must further the aims of the state, no exceptions.
Occupied, I propose a simple word change that would end this (frankly rather pointless) disagreement: substitute "democracy" for "populism."
Most analyses of fascism agree that it is populist. But no one would ever call it democratic.
