Yes, You're A Communist

[initforme]

Hey PC says I am a threat to this nation. Any other senior citizen threats who collect social security out there? When I am in church tomorrow I will thank my savior that I am a threat. My savior says that it is imperative to take care of the least among us. That's what really makes me a huge threat...when I am worshipping....right PC? Guess what? When I need to use my medicare or medicaid I will use it...thinking of you and how you appteciate it.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Are Liberals, communists?
You betcha!
If you need something to hide behind....to cut the heat...OK, communist-lite.
But with the same ultimate goals.


8. During the Roosevelt regime, the era when the US President encouraged Soviet communist infiltration of society and government, the phrase 'Liberals in a hurry' was the way folks referred to communists.

Whittaker Chambers wrote in his book WITNESS that liberals are/were incapable of ever effectively fighting Communism because they did not see anything in Communism that was antithetical to their own beliefs. In short, Liberals are Communists and Communists are Liberals.
And Whittaker Chambers knew the subject!



9. How did so many get here? This will surprise you: one of Senator Joseph McCarthy's greatest critics brought them in!

Post #229 gives a short lesson about the vipers nest called the Frankfurt School.....a confab of neo-Marxists who fled Germany.

Waiting to ally themselves with the Frankfurt School Marxists were the Americans who had accepted the Wilson/TR synthesis of Hegel and Marx. And a welcoming ‘nest’ was provided for these vipers by the Columbia University Sociology department. And, the perfect storm: America was up for helping scholars fleeing from Germany.


The guy in charge of this was Edward R. Murrow, the Emergency Committee in Aid of Displaced Foreign Scholars. He rolled out the red (pun intended) carpet for them.
And the rest is history.


Academia is always more than ready to spew anti-bourgeois, anti-religion, anti-tradition.....anti-America, dogma.
And just as they did in the 19th century, Progressivism, with Hegelian all-powerful statism, they got a shot in the arm from the Frankfurt School.


You can see the result in our universities today.
And in our society.

And right in this thread.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Are Liberals, communists?
You betcha!
If you need something to hide behind....to cut the heat...OK, communist-lite.
But with the same ultimate goals.


8. During the Roosevelt regime, the era when the US President encouraged Soviet communist infiltration of society and government, the phrase 'Liberals in a hurry' was the way folks referred to communists.

Whittaker Chambers wrote in his book WITNESS that liberals are/were incapable of ever effectively fighting Communism because they did not see anything in Communism that was antithetical to their own beliefs. In short, Liberals are Communists and Communists are Liberals.
And Whittaker Chambers knew the subject!



9. How did so many get here? This will surprise you: one of Senator Joseph McCarthy's greatest critics brought them in!

Post #229 gives a short lesson about the vipers nest called the Frankfurt School.....a confab of neo-Marxists who fled Germany.

Waiting to ally themselves with the Frankfurt School Marxists were the Americans who had accepted the Wilson/TR synthesis of Hegel and Marx. And a welcoming ‘nest’ was provided for these vipers by the Columbia University Sociology department. And, the perfect storm: America was up for helping scholars fleeing from Germany.


The guy in charge of this was Edward R. Murrow, the Emergency Committee in Aid of Displaced Foreign Scholars. He rolled out the red (pun intended) carpet for them.
And the rest is history.


Academia is always more than ready to spew anti-bourgeois, anti-religion, anti-tradition.....anti-America, dogma.
And just as they did in the 19th century, Progressivism, with Hegelian all-powerful statism, they got a shot in the arm from the Frankfurt School.


You can see the result in our universities today.
And in our society.

And right in this thread.

At least you're consistent at being ignorant, ridiculous, and wrong.

 

[Mac1958]

I'd sure like to drill down and get specific on this, rather just cutting & pasting & tossing out platitudes.

When, precisely, do we go from NOT COMMUNIST to COMMUNIST in the following ways?

• Personal income tax highest margin
• Business income tax
  
• Government spending as a percentage of GDP
  
• Percentage of overall production owned by government
• Percentage of overall distribution owned by government

Let's get specific, so I can keep an eye out for communism.

Somebody give me some figures, some data points I can sink my teeth into, so we'll know when to buy more red clothes.

I don't look good in red, by the way, full disclosure.
.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Here's a refutation of Poltical Chic's OP, using PolticalChic's own method of 'debate'

1. Karl Marx's lethal philosophy is the basis of both communism and of Nazism.

a. A year after Lenin's death, 1924, the NYTimes published a small article about a newly established party in Germany, the National Socialist Labor Party, which "...persists in believing that Lenin and Hitler can be compared or contrasted...Dr. Goebell's....assertion that Lenin was the greatest man second only to Hitler....and that the difference between communism and the Hitler faith was very slight...." NYTimes, November 27, 1925.

The Times is lying.

b. "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.

George Watson is lying.


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

Vladimir Bukovsky is lying.



2. I don't use "lethal" in a cavalier fashion: Over 100 million men, women, and children were slaughtered by Soviet Communism alone. When that fact was stated, one inveterate Liberal poster laughed, and said 'You sure it wasn't 100 billion?'
And the horrors of Nazism are well known. But both began here:

a. "Early socialists publically advocated genocide, in the 19th and 20th centuries. It first appeared in Marx's journal, Rheinishe Zeitung, in January of 1849. When the socialist class war happens, there will be primitive societies in Europe, two stages behind- not even capitalist yet- the Basques, the Bretons, the Scottish Highlanders, the Serbs, and others he calls 'racial trash,' and they will have to be destroyed because, being two stages behind in the class struggle, it will be impossible to bring them up to being revolutionary." George Watson, Historian, Cambridge University.

George Watson is lying.

b. "The classes and races, too weak to master the new conditions of life, must give way...they must perish in the revolutionary holocaust." Karl Marx, People's Paper, April 16, 1856, Journal of the History of Idea, 1981

Karl Marx was lying.

c. "Before Marx, no other European thinker publically advocated racial extermination. He was the first."
George Watson.

George Watson is lying.

Well done.

PC is lying.

She is quoting third hand heresay about Hitler claimed to have been said in 'private conversations' that contradicts what he said openly in the written and the spoken word.

Since PC never personally defends the content of her cut and paste with, god forbid, thoughts of her own,

it's futile to ask, but I would like to see her identify the modern day Nazis from among the liberals in America today,
and prove by valid argument that they can fairly be categorized both as liberals and Nazis. And do so not quoting any more unknown nutcases from the bowels of the internet.

The mere effort might literally kill her.

 

[PoliticalChic]

I'd sure like to drill down and get specific on this, rather just cutting & pasting & tossing out platitudes.

When, precisely, do we go from NOT COMMUNIST to COMMUNIST in the following ways?

• Personal income tax highest margin
• Business income tax
  
• Government spending as a percentage of GDP
  
• Percentage of overall production owned by government
• Percentage of overall distribution owned by government

Let's get specific, so I can keep an eye out for communism.

Somebody give me some figures, some data points I can sink my teeth into, so we'll know when to buy more red clothes.

I don't look good in red, by the way, full disclosure.
.

".... get specific on this, rather just cutting & pasting ...."

Why in the world would you pretend that the two are mutually exclusive?

Assuming that you are bright enough to know that they are not.....then you are fibbing.
And, if so......could the reason be that I am correct.
There is no essential difference between communism, socialism, Liberalism and/or Progressivism. At the heart of each is a faith and adherence to big, overarching government, the representative of the collective, at the cost of individual liberty and freedom.

For some reason, you are not courageous enough to admit the above.



For some reason, foreign to me, some folks are more afraid of offending those with an......erroneous...view, than than they are of allowing said views to go unchallenged.
They are known as 'fence sitters.'

 

[NYcarbineer]

But it's true. There is no essential difference between communism, socialism, Liberalism and/or Progressivism. At the heart of each is a faith and adherence to big, overarching government, the representative of the collective, at the cost of individual liberty and freedom.

.

And what are the great pillars of individual liberty that Conservatism purports to champion?

The liberty to live one's own sexual orientation without fear of persecution, discrimination, or oppression?

The liberty to choose one's own family planning without the fear of persecution or prosecution?

The liberty to choose a religion other than Christianity or Judaism without fear of persecution, discrimination, oppression, or prosecution?

The liberty to choose to be governed by a government of the People, without having that government of the People assailed at every turn by anti-democracy rightwing malcontents obsessed with concocting a oligarchical tyranny, democratic in name only?

What is conservative liberty, anyhow?

 

[PoliticalChic]

Here's a refutation of Poltical Chic's OP, using PolticalChic's own method of 'debate'

1. Karl Marx's lethal philosophy is the basis of both communism and of Nazism.

a. A year after Lenin's death, 1924, the NYTimes published a small article about a newly established party in Germany, the National Socialist Labor Party, which "...persists in believing that Lenin and Hitler can be compared or contrasted...Dr. Goebell's....assertion that Lenin was the greatest man second only to Hitler....and that the difference between communism and the Hitler faith was very slight...." NYTimes, November 27, 1925.

The Times is lying.

b. "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.

George Watson is lying.


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

Vladimir Bukovsky is lying.



2. I don't use "lethal" in a cavalier fashion: Over 100 million men, women, and children were slaughtered by Soviet Communism alone. When that fact was stated, one inveterate Liberal poster laughed, and said 'You sure it wasn't 100 billion?'
And the horrors of Nazism are well known. But both began here:

a. "Early socialists publically advocated genocide, in the 19th and 20th centuries. It first appeared in Marx's journal, Rheinishe Zeitung, in January of 1849. When the socialist class war happens, there will be primitive societies in Europe, two stages behind- not even capitalist yet- the Basques, the Bretons, the Scottish Highlanders, the Serbs, and others he calls 'racial trash,' and they will have to be destroyed because, being two stages behind in the class struggle, it will be impossible to bring them up to being revolutionary." George Watson, Historian, Cambridge University.

George Watson is lying.

b. "The classes and races, too weak to master the new conditions of life, must give way...they must perish in the revolutionary holocaust." Karl Marx, People's Paper, April 16, 1856, Journal of the History of Idea, 1981

Karl Marx was lying.

c. "Before Marx, no other European thinker publically advocated racial extermination. He was the first."
George Watson.

George Watson is lying.

Well done.

PC is lying.

She is quoting third hand heresay about Hitler claimed to have been said in 'private conversations' that contradicts what he said openly in the written and the spoken word.

Since PC never personally defends the content of her cut and paste with, god forbid, thoughts of her own,

it's futile to ask, but I would like to see her identify the modern day Nazis from among the liberals in America today,
and prove by valid argument that they can fairly be categorized both as liberals and Nazis. And do so not quoting any more unknown nutcases from the bowels of the internet.

The mere effort might literally kill her.

All my thoughts and opinions are my own.

And, my threads are undeniable.....your lying is not a denial....as you have found on a daily basis.

 

[JakeStarkey]

PC fails because her defintions of terms fail.

Socialism is the government manages the means, production, and distribution of a service or good.

Your town library, water, sanitation, fire and police departments, recreation and parks, and many other services, for example, are government owned entities and operations for which the town administers and manages and performs the means, production, and distribution of their services.

Far righties and far lefties are confused on definitions and terms.

Forms of economic systems include socialism and capitalism.

Forms of government include communism, democracy, militarism, and fascism, for example.

The millennials, unlike the gen Xrs and the older generations, get what is American government and market democracy.

 

[NYcarbineer]

I'd sure like to drill down and get specific on this, rather just cutting & pasting & tossing out platitudes.

When, precisely, do we go from NOT COMMUNIST to COMMUNIST in the following ways?

• Personal income tax highest margin
• Business income tax
  
• Government spending as a percentage of GDP
  
• Percentage of overall production owned by government
• Percentage of overall distribution owned by government

Let's get specific, so I can keep an eye out for communism.

Somebody give me some figures, some data points I can sink my teeth into, so we'll know when to buy more red clothes.

I don't look good in red, by the way, full disclosure.
.

".... get specific on this, rather just cutting & pasting ...."

Why in the world would you pretend that the two are mutually exclusive?

Assuming that you are bright enough to know that they are not.....then you are fibbing.
And, if so......could the reason be that I am correct.
There is no essential difference between communism, socialism, Liberalism and/or Progressivism. At the heart of each is a faith and adherence to big, overarching government, the representative of the collective, at the cost of individual liberty and freedom.

For some reason, you are not courageous enough to admit the above.



For some reason, foreign to me, some folks are more afraid of offending those with an......erroneous...view, than than they are of allowing said views to go unchallenged.
They are known as 'fence sitters.'

You post 3rd party opinions, claim they are fact, contribute nothing out of your own nearly vacant skull in any attempt to support them with substantive argument, and then resort to childish insults when you are rightfully called on it.

 

[JakeStarkey]

All my thoughts and opinions are my own. And, my threads are undeniable.....your lying is not a denial....as you have found on a daily basis.

Your delusionalism increases. Even Limbaugh knows that words and terms have particular, definite meaning. Yours do not comport with accepted definitions. They have not done so for a long time.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Here's a refutation of Poltical Chic's OP, using PolticalChic's own method of 'debate'

1. Karl Marx's lethal philosophy is the basis of both communism and of Nazism.

a. A year after Lenin's death, 1924, the NYTimes published a small article about a newly established party in Germany, the National Socialist Labor Party, which "...persists in believing that Lenin and Hitler can be compared or contrasted...Dr. Goebell's....assertion that Lenin was the greatest man second only to Hitler....and that the difference between communism and the Hitler faith was very slight...." NYTimes, November 27, 1925.

The Times is lying.

b. "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.

George Watson is lying.


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

Vladimir Bukovsky is lying.



2. I don't use "lethal" in a cavalier fashion: Over 100 million men, women, and children were slaughtered by Soviet Communism alone. When that fact was stated, one inveterate Liberal poster laughed, and said 'You sure it wasn't 100 billion?'
And the horrors of Nazism are well known. But both began here:

a. "Early socialists publically advocated genocide, in the 19th and 20th centuries. It first appeared in Marx's journal, Rheinishe Zeitung, in January of 1849. When the socialist class war happens, there will be primitive societies in Europe, two stages behind- not even capitalist yet- the Basques, the Bretons, the Scottish Highlanders, the Serbs, and others he calls 'racial trash,' and they will have to be destroyed because, being two stages behind in the class struggle, it will be impossible to bring them up to being revolutionary." George Watson, Historian, Cambridge University.

George Watson is lying.

b. "The classes and races, too weak to master the new conditions of life, must give way...they must perish in the revolutionary holocaust." Karl Marx, People's Paper, April 16, 1856, Journal of the History of Idea, 1981

Karl Marx was lying.

c. "Before Marx, no other European thinker publically advocated racial extermination. He was the first."
George Watson.

George Watson is lying.

Well done.

PC is lying.

She is quoting third hand heresay about Hitler claimed to have been said in 'private conversations' that contradicts what he said openly in the written and the spoken word.

Since PC never personally defends the content of her cut and paste with, god forbid, thoughts of her own,

it's futile to ask, but I would like to see her identify the modern day Nazis from among the liberals in America today,
and prove by valid argument that they can fairly be categorized both as liberals and Nazis. And do so not quoting any more unknown nutcases from the bowels of the internet.

The mere effort might literally kill her.

All my thoughts and opinions are my own.

And, my threads are undeniable.....your lying is not a denial....as you have found on a daily basis.

Is it undeniable fact that you say Hitler a Marxist, or is it just an opinion pulled out of thin air with thin factual support?

Is it undeniable fact that you say Joe Biden is a Communist? Where did you prove Joe Biden is a Communist?

 

[NYcarbineer]

PC fails because her defintions of terms fail.

Socialism is the government manages the means, production, and distribution of a service or good.

Your town library, water, sanitation, fire and police departments, recreation and parks, and many other services, for example, are government owned entities and operations for which the town administers and manages and performs the means, production, and distribution of their services.

Far righties and far lefties are confused on definitions and terms.

Forms of economic systems include socialism and capitalism.

Forms of government include communism, democracy, militarism, and fascism, for example.

The millennials, unlike the gen Xrs and the older generations, get what is American government and market democracy.

Yes. Governments are generally, in fact almost inevitably, socialistic to some degree. Cuba has free enterprise to a degree.

Is Cuba a socialist country or not?

PC is a Cuba a socialist country or not?

 

[Mac1958]

I'd sure like to drill down and get specific on this, rather just cutting & pasting & tossing out platitudes.

When, precisely, do we go from NOT COMMUNIST to COMMUNIST in the following ways?

• Personal income tax highest margin
• Business income tax
  
• Government spending as a percentage of GDP
  
• Percentage of overall production owned by government
• Percentage of overall distribution owned by government

Let's get specific, so I can keep an eye out for communism.

Somebody give me some figures, some data points I can sink my teeth into, so we'll know when to buy more red clothes.

I don't look good in red, by the way, full disclosure.
.

".... get specific on this, rather just cutting & pasting ...."

Why in the world would you pretend that the two are mutually exclusive?

Assuming that you are bright enough to know that they are not.....then you are fibbing.
And, if so......could the reason be that I am correct.
There is no essential difference between communism, socialism, Liberalism and/or Progressivism. At the heart of each is a faith and adherence to big, overarching government, the representative of the collective, at the cost of individual liberty and freedom.

For some reason, you are not courageous enough to admit the above.



For some reason, foreign to me, some folks are more afraid of offending those with an......erroneous...view, than than they are of allowing said views to go unchallenged.
They are known as 'fence sitters.'

Your point is full of subjective terms: Faith, big, liberty, freedom.

I'm just asking for specifics.

Let's start at zero. Zero government, pure anarchy.

How much government would you accept at a local, state, and federal level so that we're not losing "liberty and freedom"?

Seems like a pretty low bar. One city park and we're fucked.
.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Surprising how many good Americans have been fooled into accepting, and voting for, communism. And when the truth is revealed, they are startled, incensed, and furious that anyone would say such a thing.

But it's true. There is no essential difference between communism, socialism, Liberalism and/or Progressivism. At the heart of each is a faith and adherence to big, overarching government, the representative of the collective, at the cost of individual liberty and freedom.

How did communism become the public religion of America? The following will explain, ....as we say in science....'its origin and insertion."


In a recent thread, one that illustrated the connections between environmentalists, communists, with the confiscation of private property, a government school graduate demonstrated how offended she was by posting this as part of a scathing disavowal of the above:

"OP tries to connect communism to the moderate left wing democrats." One More Of Those Environmentalist Fairytales

Clearly, an intervention is sorely needed.

It follows:



1. Karl Marx's lethal philosophy is the basis of both communism and of Nazism.

a. A year after Lenin's death, 1924, the NYTimes published a small article about a newly established party in Germany, the National Socialist Labor Party, which "...persists in believing that Lenin and Hitler can be compared or contrasted...Dr. Goebell's....assertion that Lenin was the greatest man second only to Hitler....and that the difference between communism and the Hitler faith was very slight...." NYTimes, November 27, 1925.

b. "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.

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



2. I don't use "lethal" in a cavalier fashion: Over 100 million men, women, and children were slaughtered by Soviet Communism alone. When that fact was stated, one inveterate Liberal poster laughed, and said 'You sure it wasn't 100 billion?'
And the horrors of Nazism are well known. But both began here:

a. "Early socialists publically advocated genocide, in the 19th and 20th centuries. It first appeared in Marx's journal, Rheinishe Zeitung, in January of 1849. When the socialist class war happens, there will be primitive societies in Europe, two stages behind- not even capitalist yet- the Basques, the Bretons, the Scottish Highlanders, the Serbs, and others he calls 'racial trash,' and they will have to be destroyed because, being two stages behind in the class struggle, it will be impossible to bring them up to being revolutionary." George Watson, Historian, Cambridge University.

b. "The classes and races, too weak to master the new conditions of life, must give way...they must perish in the revolutionary holocaust." Karl Marx, People's Paper, April 16, 1856, Journal of the History of Idea, 1981

c. "Before Marx, no other European thinker publically advocated racial extermination. He was the first."
George Watson.




And this is what we find leading the Democrat Party this very day:
"Bernie Sanders Makes His Pitch for Socialism" Bernie Sanders Outlines A Vision for Fixing American Society



Read more- if you dare, Liberals.

Quote Bernie Sanders advocating genocide.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Here's a refutation of Poltical Chic's OP, using PolticalChic's own method of 'debate'

1. Karl Marx's lethal philosophy is the basis of both communism and of Nazism.

a. A year after Lenin's death, 1924, the NYTimes published a small article about a newly established party in Germany, the National Socialist Labor Party, which "...persists in believing that Lenin and Hitler can be compared or contrasted...Dr. Goebell's....assertion that Lenin was the greatest man second only to Hitler....and that the difference between communism and the Hitler faith was very slight...." NYTimes, November 27, 1925.

The Times is lying.

b. "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.

George Watson is lying.


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

Vladimir Bukovsky is lying.



2. I don't use "lethal" in a cavalier fashion: Over 100 million men, women, and children were slaughtered by Soviet Communism alone. When that fact was stated, one inveterate Liberal poster laughed, and said 'You sure it wasn't 100 billion?'
And the horrors of Nazism are well known. But both began here:

a. "Early socialists publically advocated genocide, in the 19th and 20th centuries. It first appeared in Marx's journal, Rheinishe Zeitung, in January of 1849. When the socialist class war happens, there will be primitive societies in Europe, two stages behind- not even capitalist yet- the Basques, the Bretons, the Scottish Highlanders, the Serbs, and others he calls 'racial trash,' and they will have to be destroyed because, being two stages behind in the class struggle, it will be impossible to bring them up to being revolutionary." George Watson, Historian, Cambridge University.

George Watson is lying.

b. "The classes and races, too weak to master the new conditions of life, must give way...they must perish in the revolutionary holocaust." Karl Marx, People's Paper, April 16, 1856, Journal of the History of Idea, 1981

Karl Marx was lying.

c. "Before Marx, no other European thinker publically advocated racial extermination. He was the first."
George Watson.

George Watson is lying.

Well done.

PC is lying.

She is quoting third hand heresay about Hitler claimed to have been said in 'private conversations' that contradicts what he said openly in the written and the spoken word.

Since PC never personally defends the content of her cut and paste with, god forbid, thoughts of her own,

it's futile to ask, but I would like to see her identify the modern day Nazis from among the liberals in America today,
and prove by valid argument that they can fairly be categorized both as liberals and Nazis. And do so not quoting any more unknown nutcases from the bowels of the internet.

The mere effort might literally kill her.

All my thoughts and opinions are my own.

And, my threads are undeniable.....your lying is not a denial....as you have found on a daily basis.

Arrogance and ignorance make a heady brew. Bottoms up.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Here's a refutation of Poltical Chic's OP, using PolticalChic's own method of 'debate'

1. Karl Marx's lethal philosophy is the basis of both communism and of Nazism.

a. A year after Lenin's death, 1924, the NYTimes published a small article about a newly established party in Germany, the National Socialist Labor Party, which "...persists in believing that Lenin and Hitler can be compared or contrasted...Dr. Goebell's....assertion that Lenin was the greatest man second only to Hitler....and that the difference between communism and the Hitler faith was very slight...." NYTimes, November 27, 1925.

The Times is lying.

b. "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.

George Watson is lying.


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

Vladimir Bukovsky is lying.



2. I don't use "lethal" in a cavalier fashion: Over 100 million men, women, and children were slaughtered by Soviet Communism alone. When that fact was stated, one inveterate Liberal poster laughed, and said 'You sure it wasn't 100 billion?'
And the horrors of Nazism are well known. But both began here:

a. "Early socialists publically advocated genocide, in the 19th and 20th centuries. It first appeared in Marx's journal, Rheinishe Zeitung, in January of 1849. When the socialist class war happens, there will be primitive societies in Europe, two stages behind- not even capitalist yet- the Basques, the Bretons, the Scottish Highlanders, the Serbs, and others he calls 'racial trash,' and they will have to be destroyed because, being two stages behind in the class struggle, it will be impossible to bring them up to being revolutionary." George Watson, Historian, Cambridge University.

George Watson is lying.

b. "The classes and races, too weak to master the new conditions of life, must give way...they must perish in the revolutionary holocaust." Karl Marx, People's Paper, April 16, 1856, Journal of the History of Idea, 1981

Karl Marx was lying.

c. "Before Marx, no other European thinker publically advocated racial extermination. He was the first."
George Watson.

George Watson is lying.

Well done.

PC is lying.

She is quoting third hand heresay about Hitler claimed to have been said in 'private conversations' that contradicts what he said openly in the written and the spoken word.

Since PC never personally defends the content of her cut and paste with, god forbid, thoughts of her own,

it's futile to ask, but I would like to see her identify the modern day Nazis from among the liberals in America today,
and prove by valid argument that they can fairly be categorized both as liberals and Nazis. And do so not quoting any more unknown nutcases from the bowels of the internet.

The mere effort might literally kill her.

All my thoughts and opinions are my own.

And, my threads are undeniable.....your lying is not a denial....as you have found on a daily basis.

Is it undeniable fact that you say Hitler a Marxist, or is it just an opinion pulled out of thin air with thin factual support?

Is it undeniable fact that you say Joe Biden is a Communist? Where did you prove Joe Biden is a Communist?

Her say so is self evident truth, just like keys.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Calling a person a Communist because they like the fact that their road gets plowed by the town's highway department after a blizzard is the kind of hyper-purist rightwing extremism that amazingly is finding fertile ground to grow in modern mainstream American conservatism.

 

[Theowl32]

Poor Joe was too drunk most of the time. Here comes a dissertation on how great he was.....wait for it.

He was great at running witch hunts had unbelievable acumen for being an asshole and possessed a remarkable talent for holding his liquor; each of us has our own unique path to greatness, Joe had his and we should respect him for it.

...and You're Welcome.

Oh and he was also vindicated after the discovery of the Venona papers and testimony of ex KGB agents.

I will bet you fucking communist cocksuckers did not know that. More importantly you do not give a rats ass.

Now, remain in your pathetic little bandwagon with the rest of the dipshit ignorant liars

 

[PoliticalChic]

I'd sure like to drill down and get specific on this, rather just cutting & pasting & tossing out platitudes.

When, precisely, do we go from NOT COMMUNIST to COMMUNIST in the following ways?

• Personal income tax highest margin
• Business income tax
  
• Government spending as a percentage of GDP
  
• Percentage of overall production owned by government
• Percentage of overall distribution owned by government

Let's get specific, so I can keep an eye out for communism.

Somebody give me some figures, some data points I can sink my teeth into, so we'll know when to buy more red clothes.

I don't look good in red, by the way, full disclosure.
.

".... get specific on this, rather just cutting & pasting ...."

Why in the world would you pretend that the two are mutually exclusive?

Assuming that you are bright enough to know that they are not.....then you are fibbing.
And, if so......could the reason be that I am correct.
There is no essential difference between communism, socialism, Liberalism and/or Progressivism. At the heart of each is a faith and adherence to big, overarching government, the representative of the collective, at the cost of individual liberty and freedom.

For some reason, you are not courageous enough to admit the above.



For some reason, foreign to me, some folks are more afraid of offending those with an......erroneous...view, than than they are of allowing said views to go unchallenged.
They are known as 'fence sitters.'

You post 3rd party opinions, claim they are fact, contribute nothing out of your own nearly vacant skull in any attempt to support them with substantive argument, and then resort to childish insults when you are rightfully called on it.

I regularly destroy you.

That's the truth,isn't it.