Obama as a Marxist

[editec]

There are degrees to socialism....Bush was a big spender, social on some, and conservatice on others. Obama is going to take us a lot further into socialism that Bush ever did. Remember, Obama just got into his office, and with the likes of Pelosi, and Reid...

No there's aren't.

Socialism has a MEANING.

Obama might be fifty kinds of fool, he may be all sort of things you disapprove of but until he nationalizes this nations MEANS OF PRODUCTION he is no more a socialist than you are.

Jesus christ on a crutch go get a fucking education.

What the hell are you talking about??

I'm talking about socialism, and what it really means.

Right now we have social security, we have medicare, welfare....which is socialiism...that is socialism...

ACtually no, they are not socialism.

They may be something that our government does which you object to, and your complaints about them might be 100% spot on, but they are NOT socialism.

Socialism is when the government takes owwnership and control over the means of PRODUCTION. What is then spends its resources on is irrelevant to that nation being socialist.

For example, the government takes over all means of production but provided absolutely NO SOCIAL SERVICES would still be SOCIALIST.

. That's what I mean about degrees of socialism.

Yes, I understood what you meant.

I will merely pointing out that you are wrong.

If he takes us more and more in the direction of nationalizing, like healthcare, or energy, financing, expanding welfare...that is more and more socialism.

Ah now there you are onto something...if he NATIONALIZES the means of production such that the government OWNS them, THEN that truly is socialism, I quite agree.

He wants this along with redistribution of wealth in America.

All TAXATION, whether or not you and I like it, or think it is a good thing, is REDISTRIBUTION OF WEALTH.

ATaxing for the military? Redistribution of wealth

Taxing to give the money to welfare mothers driving cadillacs? ALSO redistribution of wealth.

Governments are about the business of TAXING in order to DO SOEMTHING, and regardless of how you or I might feel about what they are doing, it is all REDISTRIBUTION of WEALTH.

This is from HIS own mouth. Then you have the full blown socialists like Nancy pelosi, and Harry Reid..that is a recipe for socialism. You may like it, but I assure you most Americans won't like it. Give him, and the House, and Senate a chance. They will move a lot closer. Perhaps, if their are some changes in the next election in 2010 that will hinder what he proposes. This stimulus bill has a lot of social overtones to it. Socialism isn't done over night, it chips away a little at a time, Edit. That's how it was done in France, and all over Europe. I assure you....I'm no socialist..don't call me one. But we do have some socialism in our country right now.

I understand your concerns, and more or less agree with some of them, too.

However, if you want you concerns to be taken seriously by people who really care just as much as you do about these issues, you have GOT to learn that words like socialism and marxism and capitalism, actually do have SPECIFIC meanings.

I do NOT balme you for not fully understanding why this is important.

The talking heads have done a marvelous job of destroying our language, and by doing so, they make it impossible to have rational discussions about what is happening.

If you object to welfare, for example, call it WELFARE...it is NOT socialism.

If you object to military spending, call it MILITARY SPENDING...it is not socialism either.

 

[PubliusInfinitum]

No, she didn't. Her point was irrelevant and off-topic. But since you're the economics expert, here's your question about Marxian economics: When it comes to two specific forms of crisis, underconsumption crisis and profit squeeze crisis, which occurs when the capitalist class is too strong and which occurs when they are too weak?

Marx figured that production factors could led to crises, not consumption. Underconsumption would be attributed to underproduction. I'm not an expert on Marx by any means, but I'd think that underconsumption crisis occurs when the capitalist class is too weak.

And you'll never see me refer to Obama as a Marxist. Number one, I don't care enough to make that parallel, and number two, he's just NOT. He's a mixed economy stooge just like all other stooges that have been president. Big business shapes US politics, and big business has nothing to gain from Marxism. No real Marxist would ever get to be president in this country.

Well it's true that President Hussein is advocating for and advancing policy which manifestly exemplifies fascism (mixed economics of socialism and capitalism) but you'll notice that NOWHERE in his rhetoric or his policy initiatives is he or has he advocated for greater economic freedom (capitalism). ALL... and that means to represent 100% of his rhetoric and policy initiatives have advocated for and served to lesser economic freedom, thus greater levels of government intervention in the means of the individual to produce.

Now, it should be noted that the opposition, in particular Ag-whatsername was asked to define Marxism and each and every element of Marxism which she advanced as Marxist is present in SPADES in the rhetoric and policy initiatives of President Hussein.

That's not true. You're simply completely ignorant of Marxian economics, which accounted for your failure to summarize crisis theory, for instance.

ROFLMNAO... What's not true Clueless?

What accounted for my not discussing irrelevant minutia, was your EPIC FAILURE which was determined through your failure to respond; a failure to respond during periods where there is indisputable evidence that you were in the thread... all serving as incontestable indicators of your having fled the field; conceding the debate to your opposition...

(Howdy!)

Now, it's been a several days... but if you'd like to go back into the record, pull the direct and unbambiguous challenges which have been set to you and advance a well reasoned, intellectually sound, logically valid response... then I will entertain your attempt to change the subject.

Don't be an idiot; you're utterly ignorant of Marxian political economy, as has now been extensively documented. Even Toro, himself an anti-socialist, notes that you're ignorant not simply of Marxian political economy, but of political economy in general.

Well... you're on quite a roll aren't ya sis?

IF your opinion that I'm ignorant of Marxian Economics was at issue, you'd at least have a relevant point... Sadly, your opinion of my intellectual manifest regarding Marxian Economics is NOT at issue... a fact which only amplifies, this you latest EPIC FAILURE... which you've AGAIN wrapped in a humiliating ad populum fallacy by trying to validate it through the JUST AS IRRELEVANT opinion of the Douche-bag, El Toro...

The relevant issues are President Hussein and his long standing advocacy of, adherence to and implementation of policy which can and will only move the US culture towards the tyranny of Socialism...

Now the record INDISPUTABLY reflects your CHRONIC FAILURE TO ENGAGE THE POINTS MADE IN THE ARGUMENTS... You've refused to respond to specific, direct and unambiguos challenges for you to support YOUR OWN ASSERTIONS...

The only thing you've done is to deny that your failure to engage, respond and support your own stated positions IS A FAILURE... it's a certifiable delusion sis... a raw inmitigated symptom of psychotic anti-social behavior... which in and of itself serves reason... given you're also a self described Anarchist.

Now the record is clear... YOU PROVED that President Hussein is a Marxist... I went point for point down the list of the elements of Marxism WHICH YOU PROVIDED. Which is where and when YOU BAILED...

Ya lost... get over it... it's what losers do.

 

[Agnapostate]

 

[PubliusInfinitum]

ROFLMNAO... What's not true Clueless?

What accounted for my not discussing irrelevant minutia, was your EPIC FAILURE which was determined through your failure to respond; a failure to respond during periods where there is indisputable evidence that you were in the thread... all serving as incontestable indicators of your having fled the field; conceding the debate to your opposition...

(Howdy!)

Now, it's been a several days... but if you'd like to go back into the record, pull the direct and unbambiguous challenges which have been set to you and advance a well reasoned, intellectually sound, logically valid response... then I will entertain your attempt to change the subject.

Don't be an idiot; you're utterly ignorant of Marxian political economy, as has now been extensively documented. Even Toro, himself an anti-socialist, notes that you're ignorant not simply of Marxian political economy, but of political economy in general.

Well... you're on quite a roll aren't ya sis?

IF your opinion that I'm ignorant of Marxian Economics was at issue, you'd at least have a relevant point... Sadly, your opinion of my intellectual manifest regarding Marxian Economics is NOT at issue... a fact which only amplifies, this you latest EPIC FAILURE... which you've AGAIN wrapped in a humiliating ad populum fallacy by trying to validate it through the JUST AS IRRELEVANT opinion of the Douche-bag, El Toro...

The relevant issues are President Hussein and his long standing advocacy of, adherence to and implementation of policy which can and will only move the US culture towards the tyranny of Socialism...

Now the record INDISPUTABLY reflects your CHRONIC FAILURE TO ENGAGE THE POINTS MADE IN THE ARGUMENTS... You've refused to respond to specific, direct and unambiguos challenges for you to support YOUR OWN ASSERTIONS...

The only thing you've done is to deny that your failure to engage, respond and support your own stated positions IS A FAILURE... it's a certifiable delusion sis... a raw inmitigated symptom of psychotic anti-social behavior... which in and of itself serves reason... given you're also a self described Anarchist.

Now the record is clear... YOU PROVED that President Hussein is a Marxist... I went point for point down the list of the elements of Marxism WHICH YOU PROVIDED. Which is where and when YOU BAILED...

Ya lost... get over it... it's what losers do.

Yet ANOTHER:

UNSPEAKABLE FAILURE TO LAUNCH!

I'm actually starting to feel sorry for your pathetic ass...

Does it not even occur to you that you have absolutely NO MEANS TO SUPPORT A WORD YOU'VE POSTED IN THIS THREAD? Nothing at all?

 

[PubliusInfinitum]

No there's aren't.

Socialism has a MEANING.

Actually, as your opponent has pointed out and as this thread conclusively PROVES... "Socialism" has a LOT of meanings...

In most works which have spoken to 'Socialism' you'll find somewhere near the front a common disclaimer where the author notes the many divergent opinions on what "Socialism' actually is and/or what it means... and they typically explain that there are many facets and sub-facets of Socialism with each advocate of the respective facet claiming their views as 'true Socialism...' Marx and Engles were the best known and most widely celebrated... with Marx's works gaining such notariety that he ended up with his own and perhaps the largest of these facets, from which dozens of sub-facets were cut; but they weren't the first by any means, and the volumes on the subject since have filled many commercial dumpsters since... So the assertion that there is anything approaching unanimous concensus that a Socialist is a person that demands instantaneous transformation of a culture's means of production to government ownership is absurd beyond measure; this entire thesis is set to lie, on little more than the certianty that such an advocacy would be hard pressed to realize the power necessary to make such a CHANGE... Thus the Socialists in the US, for instance, have been reticent to expose their tyrannical ends... Often portraying themselves, as President Hussein has done, as a 'moderate, centrist and one of Progressive views...

The simple fact is that President Obama, from his days matriculating at 'Hahhhrrrvahhhrd', through his campaigns for state rep, US Senate and US President and to his Presidency has advocated and now implemented policy which sets the stage for just such government ownership of the means of production; with strong support in the US Congress from those such as Maxine Waters; Dem CA. who has openly stated her intention to Socialize US industry... stating flat out that she intends to pursue the government ownership of the energy industry, healthcare industry and other critical US infrastrusture, 'taking away the onwership' of the respective private owners of that essential production.

It's not even CLOSE... President Hussein is a Marxist and the arguments opposing such have failed miserably in their contests to refute or discredit that fact.

 

[Agnapostate]

I'm under no obligation to reply to your idiocy since you continue to demonstrate a complete ignorance of Marxian economics, as more informed anti-socialists in this thread have noted. Regardless, I shall do so if only for the sake of comic relief.

 

[PubliusInfinitum]

I'm under no obligation to reply to your idiocy since you continue to demonstrate a complete ignorance of Marxian economics, as more informed anti-socialists in this thread have noted. Regardless, I shall do so if only for the sake of comic relief.

Well it is very true that you are under no obligation to reply to direct and unambiguous challenges of your now long discredited wales of idiocy... the only reason one would even consider responding is to advance a position which they knew to represent an effective contest... and since you've indisputably no effective contest to offer, it serves reason that you wouldn't.

Again... as long as you maintain your new found reticence; there is an air of doubt, that you could potentially advance an effective contest, were you so inclined... which you have every reason to enjoy; and given that with every attempt you wherein you grope some hope of propping up some delusion of credibility; a credibility which is sustained solely by your silence, the potential for such a doubt is exponentially drained away... thus your recognition of this fact, precludes you from offering much beyond these impotent little denials.

It's very simple really, such that even you should be able to get your head around it:

If you COULD advance a well reasoned, intellectually sound, logically valid argument ... YA WOULD! So... that you do not merely leads the reasonable intellect to deduce that YOU CANNOT and what's more (and this is my favorite part...) YOU KNOW YOU CAN'T... so you DO NOT!

 

[PubliusInfinitum]

Actually, as your opponent has pointed out and as this thread conclusively PROVES... "Socialism" has a LOT of meanings...

In most works which have spoken to 'Socialism' you'll find somewhere near the front a common disclaimer where the author notes the many divergent opinions on what "Socialism' actually is and/or what it means... and they typically explain that there are many facets and sub-facets of Socialism with each advocate of the respective facet claiming their views as 'true Socialism...' Marx and Engles were the best known and most widely celebrated... with Marx's works gaining such notariety that he ended up with his own and perhaps the largest of these facets, from which dozens of sub-facets were cut; but they weren't the first by any means, and the volumes on the subject since have filled many commercial dumpsters since... So the assertion that there is anything approaching unanimous concensus that a Socialist is a person that demands instantaneous transformation of a culture's means of production to government ownership is absurd beyond measure; this entire thesis is set to lie, on little more than the certianty that such an advocacy would be hard pressed to realize the power necessary to make such a CHANGE... Thus the Socialists in the US, for instance, have been reticent to expose their tyrannical ends... Often portraying themselves, as President Hussein has done, as a 'moderate, centrist and one of Progressive views...

The simple fact is that President Obama, from his days matriculating at 'Hahhhrrrvahhhrd', through his campaigns for state rep, US Senate and US President and to his Presidency has advocated and now implemented policy which sets the stage for just such government ownership of the means of production; with strong support in the US Congress from those such as Maxine Waters; Dem CA. who has openly stated her intention to Socialize US industry... stating flat out that she intends to pursue the government ownership of the energy industry, healthcare industry and other critical US infrastrusture, 'taking away the onwership' of the respective private owners of that essential production.

It's not even CLOSE... President Hussein is a Marxist and the arguments opposing such have failed miserably in their contests to refute or discredit that fact.

But don't feel bad, AG... Your comrade Moderates can't do it either...

 

[PubliusInfinitum]

Let the record reflect that even on the second, albeit pathetic attempt, those who contest President Hussein's Marxist tendencies have FAILED

 

[PubliusInfinitum]

It should be noted that the idiot Agwhatshername... was unable to defend her position and yet another impotent rage, she's offered to neg-rep me, through yet another flaccid peak in personal brilliance:

FUCKING IDIOT!

ROFL... Oh GOD... That's precious...

 

[Agnapostate]

Failed? You just have no absolutely no grasp of political economy, which is why you're incapable of answering even the most basic questions.