Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
Yes, they were; as was the Bad management of our Indian affairs even under our form of Capitalism even with the social bailout of the Wisdom of our Founding Fathers with our supreme law of the land.i am not the one equating it; those on your side are. i know Bad management is a problem under any form of political-economy.
No.
You are the one claiming that Genocide and Tyranny were nothing but "bad management" and thus to be lumped in with the Boom Bust Cycle of Capitalism.
yes; that Policy was Bad management; just like any social Policy or capital Policy.Yes, they were; as was the Bad management of our Indian affairs even under our form of Capitalism even with the social bailout of the Wisdom of our Founding Fathers with our supreme law of the land.i am not the one equating it; those on your side are. i know Bad management is a problem under any form of political-economy.
No.
You are the one claiming that Genocide and Tyranny were nothing but "bad management" and thus to be lumped in with the Boom Bust Cycle of Capitalism.
The various issues with the Indians were not Bad Management, it was a Policy.
The fact that Genocide and Tyranny are nearly universal with Communists governments strongly indicates that it is a fundamental part of , or at least nearly unavoidable outcome of Communistic Doctrine and Practice.
yes; that Policy was Bad management; just like any social Policy or capital Policy.Yes, they were; as was the Bad management of our Indian affairs even under our form of Capitalism even with the social bailout of the Wisdom of our Founding Fathers with our supreme law of the land.i am not the one equating it; those on your side are. i know Bad management is a problem under any form of political-economy.
No.
You are the one claiming that Genocide and Tyranny were nothing but "bad management" and thus to be lumped in with the Boom Bust Cycle of Capitalism.
The various issues with the Indians were not Bad Management, it was a Policy.
The fact that Genocide and Tyranny are nearly universal with Communists governments strongly indicates that it is a fundamental part of , or at least nearly unavoidable outcome of Communistic Doctrine and Practice.
dude, the Religious practice truer forms of Communism.
You can't claim capitalism has no oppression. The management of our Indian affairs was simple bad management from an "equality" and "eminent domain" perspective. How was that any worse than what you ascribe to truer forms of socialism.yes; that Policy was Bad management; just like any social Policy or capital Policy.Yes, they were; as was the Bad management of our Indian affairs even under our form of Capitalism even with the social bailout of the Wisdom of our Founding Fathers with our supreme law of the land.i am not the one equating it; those on your side are. i know Bad management is a problem under any form of political-economy.
No.
You are the one claiming that Genocide and Tyranny were nothing but "bad management" and thus to be lumped in with the Boom Bust Cycle of Capitalism.
The various issues with the Indians were not Bad Management, it was a Policy.
The fact that Genocide and Tyranny are nearly universal with Communists governments strongly indicates that it is a fundamental part of , or at least nearly unavoidable outcome of Communistic Doctrine and Practice.
dude, the Religious practice truer forms of Communism.
No, the management of the policy was fine. You will note that all their land is now ours.
On the other hand, COmmunism was created with the intent of Freeing man from the State, and instead empowered the State to commit Genocide and Oppress the very workers it was supposedly freeing.
How did that work out?
THat's more than Bad Management, that's a Bad System.
I have no idea what you are referring to when you bring up the "Religious" "practicing" "truer forms of Communism".
I strongly suspect you are just trying to redirect the conversation into nonsense.
You can't claim capitalism has no oppression. The management of our Indian affairs was simple bad management from an "equality" and "eminent domain" perspective. How was that any worse than what you ascribe to truer forms of socialism.
I strongly suspect you are just trying to redirect the conversation into nonsense.
it must have been, under our form of Capitalism.You can't claim capitalism has no oppression. The management of our Indian affairs was simple bad management from an "equality" and "eminent domain" perspective. How was that any worse than what you ascribe to truer forms of socialism.
100% stupid since management of indian affairs was was not economic in nature.
it must have been, under our form of Capitalism.You can't claim capitalism has no oppression. The management of our Indian affairs was simple bad management from an "equality" and "eminent domain" perspective. How was that any worse than what you ascribe to truer forms of socialism.
100% stupid since management of indian affairs was was not economic in nature.
it must, under our form of Government and our form of Commerce, well regulated.it must have been, under our form of Capitalism.You can't claim capitalism has no oppression. The management of our Indian affairs was simple bad management from an "equality" and "eminent domain" perspective. How was that any worse than what you ascribe to truer forms of socialism.
100% stupid since management of indian affairs was was not economic in nature.
it had nothing to do with captalism or socialism you idiot!
No, the management of the policy was fine.
was it Good capitalism?No, the management of the policy was fine.
I was going to say... because this deals with MY people... Our "Indian Affairs" was not bad management.... they managed their policy of marching us 2,000 miles across the desert against our will on the Trail of Tears just fine. Even when the Supreme Court told them they couldn't... they managed to do it anyway. That's pretty fucking GOOD management, when you can get the job done even when authority forbids you to.
The white man didn't wipe out 30 million indigenous people through "bad management".
was it Good capitalism?
You can't claim capitalism has no oppression. The management of our Indian affairs was simple bad management from an "equality" and "eminent domain" perspective. How was that any worse than what you ascribe to truer forms of socialism.yes; that Policy was Bad management; just like any social Policy or capital Policy.Yes, they were; as was the Bad management of our Indian affairs even under our form of Capitalism even with the social bailout of the Wisdom of our Founding Fathers with our supreme law of the land.No.
You are the one claiming that Genocide and Tyranny were nothing but "bad management" and thus to be lumped in with the Boom Bust Cycle of Capitalism.
The various issues with the Indians were not Bad Management, it was a Policy.
The fact that Genocide and Tyranny are nearly universal with Communists governments strongly indicates that it is a fundamental part of , or at least nearly unavoidable outcome of Communistic Doctrine and Practice.
dude, the Religious practice truer forms of Communism.
No, the management of the policy was fine. You will note that all their land is now ours.
On the other hand, COmmunism was created with the intent of Freeing man from the State, and instead empowered the State to commit Genocide and Oppress the very workers it was supposedly freeing.
How did that work out?
THat's more than Bad Management, that's a Bad System.
I have no idea what you are referring to when you bring up the "Religious" "practicing" "truer forms of Communism".
I strongly suspect you are just trying to redirect the conversation into nonsense.
No, the management of the policy was fine.
I was going to say... because this deals with MY people... Our "Indian Affairs" was not bad management.... they managed their policy of marching us 2,000 miles across the desert against our will on the Trail of Tears just fine. Even when the Supreme Court told them they couldn't... they managed to do it anyway. That's pretty fucking GOOD management, when you can get the job done even when authority forbids you to.
The white man didn't wipe out 30 million indigenous people through "bad management".
Yes, it must have been "bad management" if there are any discrepancies in stated goals and objectives, and actual goals and objectives. It really is that simple, for some on the left.was it Good capitalism?
No, it was bad policy instituted by godless little nitwits like you who had no moral foundation or understanding of God's inalienable rights endowed by man. Abject racists like Andrew Jackson who thought Native Americans were not even human beings. Didn't feel remorse for them, didn't feel guilty about lying to them and reneging on his treaties with them, didn't mind exploiting them and ultimately, didn't mind watching thousands of them die.
That was not "bad management" and it wasn't any form of Capitalism.
In other words, it doesn't depend on Socialism or Capitalism, but rather, Good management and not Bad management.You can't claim capitalism has no oppression. The management of our Indian affairs was simple bad management from an "equality" and "eminent domain" perspective. How was that any worse than what you ascribe to truer forms of socialism.yes; that Policy was Bad management; just like any social Policy or capital Policy.Yes, they were; as was the Bad management of our Indian affairs even under our form of Capitalism even with the social bailout of the Wisdom of our Founding Fathers with our supreme law of the land.
The various issues with the Indians were not Bad Management, it was a Policy.
The fact that Genocide and Tyranny are nearly universal with Communists governments strongly indicates that it is a fundamental part of , or at least nearly unavoidable outcome of Communistic Doctrine and Practice.
dude, the Religious practice truer forms of Communism.
No, the management of the policy was fine. You will note that all their land is now ours.
On the other hand, COmmunism was created with the intent of Freeing man from the State, and instead empowered the State to commit Genocide and Oppress the very workers it was supposedly freeing.
How did that work out?
THat's more than Bad Management, that's a Bad System.
I have no idea what you are referring to when you bring up the "Religious" "practicing" "truer forms of Communism".
I strongly suspect you are just trying to redirect the conversation into nonsense.
I did not claim that "Capitalism has no oppression".
How is it different?
Easy. When the Westward expansion was done, it did not slow down the growth of the US at all.
Our Indian Policy was not a Fundamental Part of our System.
The Soviets let in a little bit of Freedom and it snowballed and quickly destroyed the SOviet Union and their Communistm system.
Tyranny and Oppression was a Fundamental Part of their System that it could not survive without.
In other words, it doesn't depend on Socialism or Capitalism, but rather, Good management and not Bad management.You can't claim capitalism has no oppression. The management of our Indian affairs was simple bad management from an "equality" and "eminent domain" perspective. How was that any worse than what you ascribe to truer forms of socialism.yes; that Policy was Bad management; just like any social Policy or capital Policy.The various issues with the Indians were not Bad Management, it was a Policy.
The fact that Genocide and Tyranny are nearly universal with Communists governments strongly indicates that it is a fundamental part of , or at least nearly unavoidable outcome of Communistic Doctrine and Practice.
dude, the Religious practice truer forms of Communism.
No, the management of the policy was fine. You will note that all their land is now ours.
On the other hand, COmmunism was created with the intent of Freeing man from the State, and instead empowered the State to commit Genocide and Oppress the very workers it was supposedly freeing.
How did that work out?
THat's more than Bad Management, that's a Bad System.
I have no idea what you are referring to when you bring up the "Religious" "practicing" "truer forms of Communism".
I strongly suspect you are just trying to redirect the conversation into nonsense.
I did not claim that "Capitalism has no oppression".
How is it different?
Easy. When the Westward expansion was done, it did not slow down the growth of the US at all.
Our Indian Policy was not a Fundamental Part of our System.
The Soviets let in a little bit of Freedom and it snowballed and quickly destroyed the SOviet Union and their Communistm system.
Tyranny and Oppression was a Fundamental Part of their System that it could not survive without.
It is just your opinion. I gave a valid rebuttal to which you have nothing but a non sequitur and Excuse for not having a better point and argument.In other words, it doesn't depend on Socialism or Capitalism, but rather, Good management and not Bad management.You can't claim capitalism has no oppression. The management of our Indian affairs was simple bad management from an "equality" and "eminent domain" perspective. How was that any worse than what you ascribe to truer forms of socialism.yes; that Policy was Bad management; just like any social Policy or capital Policy.
dude, the Religious practice truer forms of Communism.
No, the management of the policy was fine. You will note that all their land is now ours.
On the other hand, COmmunism was created with the intent of Freeing man from the State, and instead empowered the State to commit Genocide and Oppress the very workers it was supposedly freeing.
How did that work out?
THat's more than Bad Management, that's a Bad System.
I have no idea what you are referring to when you bring up the "Religious" "practicing" "truer forms of Communism".
I strongly suspect you are just trying to redirect the conversation into nonsense.
I did not claim that "Capitalism has no oppression".
How is it different?
Easy. When the Westward expansion was done, it did not slow down the growth of the US at all.
Our Indian Policy was not a Fundamental Part of our System.
The Soviets let in a little bit of Freedom and it snowballed and quickly destroyed the SOviet Union and their Communistm system.
Tyranny and Oppression was a Fundamental Part of their System that it could not survive without.
I made my point and supported it with historical examples, ie the continued survival of the US, and Fall of the Soviet Union.
Your statement claims an opposite conclusion, but without any supporting explanation or sited evidence.
My point stands.
Actually pretty much all my points have withstood your attempts at "rebuttal" such as they have been.
It is just your opinion. I gave a valid rebuttal to which you have nothing but a non sequitur and Excuse for not having a better point and argument.In other words, it doesn't depend on Socialism or Capitalism, but rather, Good management and not Bad management.You can't claim capitalism has no oppression. The management of our Indian affairs was simple bad management from an "equality" and "eminent domain" perspective. How was that any worse than what you ascribe to truer forms of socialism.No, the management of the policy was fine. You will note that all their land is now ours.
On the other hand, COmmunism was created with the intent of Freeing man from the State, and instead empowered the State to commit Genocide and Oppress the very workers it was supposedly freeing.
How did that work out?
THat's more than Bad Management, that's a Bad System.
I have no idea what you are referring to when you bring up the "Religious" "practicing" "truer forms of Communism".
I strongly suspect you are just trying to redirect the conversation into nonsense.
I did not claim that "Capitalism has no oppression".
How is it different?
Easy. When the Westward expansion was done, it did not slow down the growth of the US at all.
Our Indian Policy was not a Fundamental Part of our System.
The Soviets let in a little bit of Freedom and it snowballed and quickly destroyed the SOviet Union and their Communistm system.
Tyranny and Oppression was a Fundamental Part of their System that it could not survive without.
I made my point and supported it with historical examples, ie the continued survival of the US, and Fall of the Soviet Union.
Your statement claims an opposite conclusion, but without any supporting explanation or sited evidence.
My point stands.
Actually pretty much all my points have withstood your attempts at "rebuttal" such as they have been.
Your point is irrelevant since the "fail" of the "US under the Articles". Our Federal Constitution was Intelligently Designed from Inception by a Committee of the People.
It is merely and only Good or Bad management that can make the difference between Heaven and Hell.
Nope; the US under the Articles failed and was dissolved. Our Founding Fathers exercised Good management.It is just your opinion. I gave a valid rebuttal to which you have nothing but a non sequitur and Excuse for not having a better point and argument.In other words, it doesn't depend on Socialism or Capitalism, but rather, Good management and not Bad management.You can't claim capitalism has no oppression. The management of our Indian affairs was simple bad management from an "equality" and "eminent domain" perspective. How was that any worse than what you ascribe to truer forms of socialism.
I did not claim that "Capitalism has no oppression".
How is it different?
Easy. When the Westward expansion was done, it did not slow down the growth of the US at all.
Our Indian Policy was not a Fundamental Part of our System.
The Soviets let in a little bit of Freedom and it snowballed and quickly destroyed the SOviet Union and their Communistm system.
Tyranny and Oppression was a Fundamental Part of their System that it could not survive without.
I made my point and supported it with historical examples, ie the continued survival of the US, and Fall of the Soviet Union.
Your statement claims an opposite conclusion, but without any supporting explanation or sited evidence.
My point stands.
Actually pretty much all my points have withstood your attempts at "rebuttal" such as they have been.
Your point is irrelevant since the "fail" of the "US under the Articles". Our Federal Constitution was Intelligently Designed from Inception by a Committee of the People.
It is merely and only Good or Bad management that can make the difference between Heaven and Hell.
Your "valid rebuttal" was nothing but the Logical Fallacy of Proof by Assertion.
The "failure" of the Article of Confederation was a problem for the US. One that was dealt with and the US continued on growing in wealth and power. It in no way is equivalent to the complete disintegration of the Soviet Union.
Denying that different systems have more differences than just Management is delusional.
Why are you so invested in Communism?
