Yes, You're A Communist

[Moonglow]

[QUOTE Conservatives and Republicans have been using that fear of communism on us for probably a hundred years now, the peak probably coming during the Red Scares and McCarthy period. I took a college course one time and the instructor suggested we put covers on our books or some parents would accuse the school of teaching communism and he would end up before a committee of some type. When did the USSR drop Marx, 1924? What nation has ever practiced Marx?

" I took a college course one time...."

Aha!

So that was your mistake.

Unlike you, I do independent research, and, that is why I can provide sourced, linked, and documented material.

You, our greatest source of greenhouse gases.

All you do is cut-n-paste, other people have done the research work for you...

How about you try it....then, you might not come off as a dunce.

You never have to go to the store to get the ham, it's with you always..

 

[Dr Grump]

[QU


"there has never ever been a Communist country in the world."

Truly the most hoary, long-in-the-tooth diaphanous attempt at support for collectivism.

1. All of these are collectivist: Nazism, Liberalism, socialism, communism, fascism, and Progressivism.
All lack respect for humanity and none find human life sacred.

The only differences are the number each has slaughtered and/or oppressed.

2. It is well past time for you tho assume the new avi, Dr. Fool.
Get to it!

you lost me when you put Nazism and communism in the same basket. Two ideologies that hated each other.

 

[PoliticalChic]

The liberal use of money to produce real wealth is not a problem. 'Capitalism' should really have a different suffix, as it isn't an 'ism' as most others. It is merely a way that economics can function. Particularly as it was being invented at the Renaissance, it was quite liberating. Turning it into a philosophy or quasi-religion is absurd. All its foibles, errors and horrors have been displayed in history. As with any other human endeavor, motivation is the key.
If Christianity functioned as it should in America, U.S. capitalism would be under proper control; i. e., personal moral control.

"If Christianity functioned as it should in America, U.S. capitalism would be under proper control; i. e., personal moral control."

And yet another lesson to clear up your muddled thinking:
The service that is an inherent part of capitalism is more in accord with Judeo-Christian values than is socialism/Liberalism.


Mull that over.

 

[Norman]

The only way to respond to these sort of arguments is laughter.

Wherever communism has been tried it has been a failure. A regressive response? "It wasn't true communism!"

All right, but why do all of these countries keep calling themselves communists, and act exactly according to the communist plan of regressive oppression? Perhaps the truth is your ideology is totalitarian and freedom hating, but you just fail to admit it to yourself. Perhaps your Marxist university professor forgot to tell you that.

I don't particularly like Communism. I like aspects of it. I have yet to see it in practice though. I prefer a mixture of socialism and capitalism.

I dunno why they call it Communism. Why does every tv channel keep on telling me I "can't miss the next episode of such and such" and yet I can quite happily. People oversell things all the time.

Not one single country has practiced Karl Marx's version of Communism. Not one. Ever.

I don't know, perhaps because the countries call themselves communist and use communist mainfesto as their society defining document.

If it barks like a dog, and calls itself a dog, loos like a dog... perhaps it's a dog? Oh but no "true ideal version of dog" ever existed.

This is like saying to an artist that "no true color purple ever existed, therefore you can't call this drawing purple". It is "Marxist" grade of a dumb argument...There are countries that are more communist, and less communist. The ones that are the least communist do the best. Theft and coercion doesn't work, even if it might work for some lazy bums and your overlords in the short run.

 

[PoliticalChic]

There is no essential difference between communism, socialism,

Well, this drawing shows that some one does not agree with you!

Well, the cartoonist is entitled to be wrong.


I'm never in that circumstance.


Until June 21, 1941, Stalin and Hitler were joined-at-the-hip blood brothers.

But what happened AFTER that?

Simple.....Franklin Roosevelt decided he loved Stalin more than Hitler, and made certain that Stalin survived and communism had a cozy home in Americ.


Simple, huh.....just like you.

Evidently FDR made the right choices. We now have a thriving middle class as a result. It's just that simple, huhnh!

In that case, you must imagiine......I almost said 'think'.....that the Founders were wrong, and Roosevlet, and Stalin, are more correct.

The Founders offered us a nation based on individualism, free markets, and limited constitutional government.


None of these doctrines subscribe to these views...Liberalism, communism, Nazism, socialism, Progressivism, or fascism.


And neither do you.

 

[PoliticalChic]

[QUOTE Conservatives and Republicans have been using that fear of communism on us for probably a hundred years now, the peak probably coming during the Red Scares and McCarthy period. I took a college course one time and the instructor suggested we put covers on our books or some parents would accuse the school of teaching communism and he would end up before a committee of some type. When did the USSR drop Marx, 1924? What nation has ever practiced Marx?

" I took a college course one time...."

Aha!

So that was your mistake.

Unlike you, I do independent research, and, that is why I can provide sourced, linked, and documented material.

You, our greatest source of greenhouse gases.

All you do is cut-n-paste, other people have done the research work for you...

How about you try it....then, you might not come off as a dunce.

You never have to go to the store to get the ham, it's with you always..

It seems to really irk you that you can never contest, dispute or rebut any of my post.
All you can do is attempt to dodge them with the oh-so-Liberal schreech 'cut and paste!!"

....as though that obviates or disqualifies any of my posts.


It doesn't

 

[Norman]

[QU


"there has never ever been a Communist country in the world."

Truly the most hoary, long-in-the-tooth diaphanous attempt at support for collectivism.

1. All of these are collectivist: Nazism, Liberalism, socialism, communism, fascism, and Progressivism.
All lack respect for humanity and none find human life sacred.

The only differences are the number each has slaughtered and/or oppressed.

2. It is well past time for you tho assume the new avi, Dr. Fool.
Get to it!

you lost me when you put Nazism and communism in the same basket. Two ideologies that hated each other.

And yet, both ideologies are defined by their overt authoritarianism/collectivism. Hate is not a measure of similarity.

 

[Dr Grump]

I don't know, perhaps because the countries call themselves communist and use communist mainfesto as their society defining document.

If it barks like a dog, and calls itself a dog... perhaps it's a dog?

This is like saying to an artist that "no true color black ever existed, therefore you can't call this drawing black". It is "Marxist" grade of dumb argument...There are countries that are more communist, and less communist. The ones that are the least communist do the best. Theft and coercion doesn't work, even if it might work for some lazy bums and your overlords.

Just because somebody or something calls itself whatever doesn't mean it is.

They've hidden behind the facade of communism. So tell me, did the guy who swept the leaves in Red Square in the 1950s have a dacha on the Black Sea equal to that of Stalin? Was the standard of health care the street vendor in Leningrad the same as Beria's? Did the carpenter in Vladvostok drive around in a Mercedes like Khrushchev? If you have answered 'yes' to any of the above, then you are right. If 'no' you are wrong. USSR was not Communist. It wasn't a society where all come together for the common good. It was a totalitarian, brutal regime. Not Communist.

 

[Moonglow]

Which philosopher of liberalism did the Founders use in setting up the nation?

 

[Mac1958]

Still wondering what the practical application is of a hardcore right wing partisan ideologue calling someone a "communist".

Okay, now what?

Anyone?
.

 

[Dr Grump]

And yet, both ideologies are defined by their overt authoritarianism/collectivism. Hate is not a measure of similarity.

But it is a measure of whether the ideologies are similar.

 

[Moonglow]

Still wondering what the practical application is of a hardcore right wing partisan ideologue calling someone a "communist".

Okay, now what?

Anyone?
.

It's a nasty word to some....makes them scared and nervous..

 

[Norman]

I don't know, perhaps because the countries call themselves communist and use communist mainfesto as their society defining document.

If it barks like a dog, and calls itself a dog... perhaps it's a dog?

This is like saying to an artist that "no true color black ever existed, therefore you can't call this drawing black". It is "Marxist" grade of dumb argument...There are countries that are more communist, and less communist. The ones that are the least communist do the best. Theft and coercion doesn't work, even if it might work for some lazy bums and your overlords.

Just because somebody or something calls itself whatever doesn't mean it is.

They've hidden behind the facade of communism. So tell me, did the guy who swept the leaves in Red Square in the 1950s have a dacha on the Black Sea equal to that of Stalin? Was the standard of health care the street vendor in Leningrad the same as Beria's? Did the carpenter in Vladvostok drive around in a Mercedes like Khrushchev? If you have answered 'yes' to any of the above, then you are right. If 'no' you are wrong. USSR was not Communist. It wasn't a society where all come together for the common good. It was a totalitarian, brutal regime. Not Communist.

Erm, communism is totalitarian. You must be completely clueless.

Nothing in communism defines itself as a society where "everyone comes together for the common good". That would be much closer to the empirical results of capitalism. Have you actually read the communist manifesto, or are you simply talking out of your ass? Communism is defined by its authoritarian coercion of individuals to achieve the aims of equality or whatever. If you don't agree with the communist vision, you are shot, thrown to prison or worse.

"Hey, if I define communism as everything that is awesome, then communism is awesome". No shit Sherlock, no shit... What a regressed individual...

 

[there4eyeM]

The liberal use of money to produce real wealth is not a problem. 'Capitalism' should really have a different suffix, as it isn't an 'ism' as most others. It is merely a way that economics can function. Particularly as it was being invented at the Renaissance, it was quite liberating. Turning it into a philosophy or quasi-religion is absurd. All its foibles, errors and horrors have been displayed in history. As with any other human endeavor, motivation is the key.
If Christianity functioned as it should in America, U.S. capitalism would be under proper control; i. e., personal moral control.

"If Christianity functioned as it should in America, U.S. capitalism would be under proper control; i. e., personal moral control."

And yet another lesson to clear up your muddled thinking:
The service that is an inherent part of capitalism is more in accord with Judeo-Christian values than is socialism/Liberalism.


Mull that over.

'Service'? What 'service'?
Apparently another version of Christ and associated teachings has been revealed to you. Mine refer more to the Beatitudes and the Christian communities in Acts. There, if we are to believe the New Testament, goods were held in common, with each member receiving or contributing as necessary. Capitalism had nothing to do with it.

 

[PoliticalChic]

[QU


"there has never ever been a Communist country in the world."

Truly the most hoary, long-in-the-tooth diaphanous attempt at support for collectivism.

1. All of these are collectivist: Nazism, Liberalism, socialism, communism, fascism, and Progressivism.
All lack respect for humanity and none find human life sacred.

The only differences are the number each has slaughtered and/or oppressed.

2. It is well past time for you tho assume the new avi, Dr. Fool.
Get to it!

you lost me when you put Nazism and communism in the same basket. Two ideologies that hated each other.

"...you lost me when you put Nazism and communism in the same basket."


That's because you are an uneducated bumpkin....and should certainly hurry to assume the 'Dr. Fool' avi.


Here....one bit of evidence of which you were unaware:

1. 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...." November 27, 1925.

2. Shortly thereafter the Nazis found it more useful to stress differences, and the earlier campaign posters showing similarities disappeared, posters with both the hammer and sickle and the swastika.

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.

Nazi and Russian propaganda posters....except for the language, almost identical.



Nazism and communsim.....two peas in the same Leftist pod.

 

[there4eyeM]

'Nazism' and 'Stalinism' are two examples of authoritarianism at its worst.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Which philosopher of liberalism did the Founders use in setting up the nation?

Mostly God, you dunce.

1. The most quoted source by the Founders was the Bible. Established in the original writings of our Founding Fathers we find that they discovered in Isaiah 33:22 the three branches of government: Isaiah 33:22 “For the LORD is our judge, the LORD is our lawgiver, the LORD is our king; he will save us.” Here we see the judicial, the legislative and the executive branches. In Ezra 7:24 we see where they established the tax exempt status of the church: Ezra 7:24 “Also we certify you, that touching any of the priests and Levites, singers, porters, Nethinims, or ministers of this house of God, it shall not be lawful to impose toll, tribute, or custom, upon them.”

When we look at our Constitution we see in Article 4 Section 4 that we are guaranteed a Republican form of government, that was found in Exodus 18 “Moreover thou shalt provide out of all the people able men, such as fear God, men of truth, hating covetousness; and place such over them, to be rulers of thousands, and rulers of hundreds, rulers of fifties, and rulers of tens:” This indicates that we are to choose, or elect God fearing men and women. Looking at Article 3 Section 3 we see almost word for word Deuteronomy 17:6: ‘No person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the testimony of two Witnesses. . .’ Deuteronomy 17:6 “At the mouth of two witnesses, or three witnesses. . .”. The next paragraph in Article 3 Section 3 refers to who should pay the price for treason. In England, they could punish the sons for the trespasses of the father, if the father died.
Roger Anghis -- Bring America Back To Her Religious Roots, Part 7


2. In a study that appeared in the American Political Science Review back in 1984, two political science professors, Dr. Donald Lutz and Dr. Charles Heineman researched 15,000 writings, letters, diaries, sermons and other works that were written by various leading Americans from 1760-1805. Their purpose was to identify quotations to find out who the founding fathers were quoting' where they got their ideas, what authorities they were most impressed with. They found that by far the most widely quoted source in the founding fathers' writings was the Bible. Thirty-four percent of all quotations came out of the Bible. And the book of the Bible they quoted most often was the book of Deuteronomy. Now most of us don't go around quoting Deuteronomy a great deal today, but Deuteronomy is the book of the law. And they were writing about law and government.
http://www.citizensforaconstitution...o_Restoring_Our_Constitutional _Republic.html

 

[PoliticalChic]

And yet, both ideologies are defined by their overt authoritarianism/collectivism. Hate is not a measure of similarity.

But it is a measure of whether the ideologies are similar.

Similar???
Let's check.

Here is a little quiz .....


Let's begin with definitions.
Nazism, communism, socialism..Liberalism, Progressivism,.and fascism....

1. Which stem from the works of Karl Marx?
2. Which is a form of command and control big government?
3. Which has no problem with genocide, actual or figurative, as an accepted procedure on its political enemies?
4. Which is based on the collective over the individual?
5. Which oppresses and/or slaughters its own citizens as pro forma (including depriving them of a living)....?
6. Which represents totalitarian governance?
7. Which believes that mandating/dictating every aspect of their citizen's lives is their prerogative?
8. Which aims for an all-encompassing state that centralizes power to perfect human nature by controlling every aspect of life

9. Which restricts free speech and thought?

10. Which can be summed up in Hegel's “The state says … you must obey …. The state has rights against the individual; its members have obligations, among them that of obeying without protest”



And, of course, they all are do...they are all consubstantial.

Nazism

Communism

Socialism

Fascism

Progressivism

Liberalism






How about pointing out which of them are defenders of religious, political, and economic freedom, and recognize the individual as the most important element of society?
Right....none of 'em.
Only right wing philosophies...i.e., conservatism.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Still wondering what the practical application is of a hardcore right wing partisan ideologue calling someone a "communist".

Okay, now what?

Anyone?
.

It's a nasty word to some....makes them scared and nervous..

There are the fearless ones who know less than zero about history.....folks like you.

 

[PoliticalChic]

The liberal use of money to produce real wealth is not a problem. 'Capitalism' should really have a different suffix, as it isn't an 'ism' as most others. It is merely a way that economics can function. Particularly as it was being invented at the Renaissance, it was quite liberating. Turning it into a philosophy or quasi-religion is absurd. All its foibles, errors and horrors have been displayed in history. As with any other human endeavor, motivation is the key.
If Christianity functioned as it should in America, U.S. capitalism would be under proper control; i. e., personal moral control.

"If Christianity functioned as it should in America, U.S. capitalism would be under proper control; i. e., personal moral control."

And yet another lesson to clear up your muddled thinking:
The service that is an inherent part of capitalism is more in accord with Judeo-Christian values than is socialism/Liberalism.


Mull that over.

'Service'? What 'service'?
Apparently another version of Christ and associated teachings has been revealed to you. Mine refer more to the Beatitudes and the Christian communities in Acts. There, if we are to believe the New Testament, goods were held in common, with each member receiving or contributing as necessary. Capitalism had nothing to do with it.

See....now you have earned 'dunce.'

Service...as in Wal-Mart
Socialism....as in the motor vehicle department.



"...if we are to believe the New Testament, goods were held in common, with each member receiving or contributing as necessary..."
Bogus.

"For even when we were with you, we used to give you this order: if anyone is not willing to work, then he is not to eat, either. (2 Thess. 3:10)"