The difference between Communism and Socialism

[bigrebnc1775]

lol

'redo my Capital'?



Not only do you know nothing about socialism, you know nothing about capitalism, either.

At least I am not stupid enough to think that if I live in a socialist system I will have my indivdual rights protected.

Except I do live in a socialist society (both in the Marxian sense and as the term is used by the SI) and I do have protection of my individual rights (most of the time, though abuses do occur).

You will not have any rights except for those given by the State.

That's been the case since 1869, when SCOTUS betrayed the American people and supported Lincoln's power grab.

Anyway I should know what fucking capitalism is I have been living in that type of system for 48 years.

No, you haven't. You've been living in a nation with a mixed economy. You've never seen unbridled capitalism and you refuse to click the links and see its effects, l;est you see all you've been taught to believe fall apart.

I do not know where you live but is is not the America I know.
Have you ever heard of the 10th amendment?
Do you know why we have a Bill of Rights in America?

 

[JBeukema]

The US has been practing fascism since, at least, 1913 and is fast heading towards a socialist/communist dictatorship.

.

of course, using your yardstick, the US has been fascist since the declaration of independence.

With the institution of slavery in America and using the word fascism in it's truest form I would have to agree. I would hope we would have learned our lesson by now

wow... you don't even know what fascism is....

I'm amazed that anyojne can be so ignorant in America...

 

[JBeukema]

John Locke was an English philosopher or didn't you know that do you know where he is buried? Do you know what in the hell you are talking about?

This shit's hilarious!

 

[bigrebnc1775]

of course, using your yardstick, the US has been fascist since the declaration of independence.

With the institution of slavery in America and using the word fascism in it's truest form I would have to agree. I would hope we would have learned our lesson by now

wow... you don't even know what fascism is....

I'm amazed that anyojne can be so ignorant in America...

Damn you're stupid
Main Entry: fas·cism
Pronunciation: \ˈfa-ˌshi-zəm also ˈfa-ˌsi-\
Function: noun
Etymology: Italian fascismo, from fascio bundle, fasces, group, from Latin fascis bundle & fasces fasces
Date: 1921
1 often capitalized : a political philosophy, movement, or regime (as that of the Fascisti) that exalts nation and often race above the individual and that stands for a centralized autocratic government headed by a dictatorial leader, severe economic and social regimentation, and forcible suppression of opposition
2 : a tendency toward or actual exercise of strong autocratic or dictatorial control <early instances of army fascism and brutality

 

[bigrebnc1775]

John Locke was an English philosopher or didn't you know that do you know where he is buried? Do you know what in the hell you are talking about?

This shit's hilarious!

Come on smartass who is John Locke?

 

[JBeukema]

At least I am not stupid enough to think that if I live in a socialist system I will have my indivdual rights protected.

Except I do live in a socialist society (both in the Marxian sense and as the term is used by the SI) and I do have protection of my individual rights (most of the time, though abuses do occur).


That's been the case since 1869, when SCOTUS betrayed the American people and supported Lincoln's power grab.

Anyway I should know what fucking capitalism is I have been living in that type of system for 48 years.

No, you haven't. You've been living in a nation with a mixed economy. You've never seen unbridled capitalism and you refuse to click the links and see its effects, l;est you see all you've been taught to believe fall apart.

I do not know where you live but is is not the America I know.
Have you ever heard of the 10th amendment?
Do you know why we have a Bill of Rights in America?

Ever heard of Texas v. White? It effectively struck the Tenth from the Constitution. Besides, I think you meant the 9th anyway.

Any patriot who loves liberty knows about Texas v. White and SCOTUS' betrayal of the American people when they effective ruled that the 10th amendment does not exist.


Again, go, read, and come back when you have a clue

 

[JBeukema]

With the institution of slavery in America and using the word fascism in it's truest form I would have to agree. I would hope we would have learned our lesson by now

wow... you don't even know what fascism is....

I'm amazed that anyojne can be so ignorant in America...

Damn you're stupid
Main Entry: fas·cism
Pronunciation: \&#712;fa-&#716;shi-z&#601;m also &#712;fa-&#716;si-\
Function: noun
Etymology: Italian fascismo, from fascio bundle, fasces, group, from Latin fascis bundle & fasces fasces
Date: 1921
1 often capitalized : a political philosophy, movement, or regime (as that of the Fascisti) that exalts nation and often race above the individual and that stands for a centralized autocratic government headed by a dictatorial leader, severe economic and social regimentation, and forcible suppression of opposition
2 : a tendency toward or actual exercise of strong autocratic or dictatorial control <early instances of army fascism and brutality

Now highlight where that says it's a synonym for slavery

 

[JBeukema]

who is John Locke?

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Except I do live in a socialist society (both in the Marxian sense and as the term is used by the SI) and I do have protection of my individual rights (most of the time, though abuses do occur).


That's been the case since 1869, when SCOTUS betrayed the American people and supported Lincoln's power grab.
No, you haven't. You've been living in a nation with a mixed economy. You've never seen unbridled capitalism and you refuse to click the links and see its effects, l;est you see all you've been taught to believe fall apart.

I do not know where you live but is is not the America I know.
Have you ever heard of the 10th amendment?
Do you know why we have a Bill of Rights in America?

Ever heard of Texas v. White ? It effectively struck the Tenth from the Constitution. Besides, I think you meant the 9th anyway.

Any patriot who loves liberty knows about Texas v. White and SCOTUS' betrayal of the American people when they effective ruled that the 10th amendment does not exist.


Again, go, read, and come back when you have a clue

1. you are no patriot.
2. I meant the 10th
Amendment X

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.
3. Texas v. White
Justice Robert Grier wrote a dissent in which he stated that he disagreed "on all points raised and decided" by the majority. Grier relied on the case Hepburn v. Ellzey in which Chief Justice John Marshall had defined a state as an entity entitled to representatives in both Congress and the Electoral College. Thus, her status had become more analogous to an Indian tribe than to a state. He also believed that the issue of Texas statehood was a matter for congressional rather than judicial determination

So no you would be wrong oh and the case had more to do with BONDS THEN states rights
Texas v. White - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[bigrebnc1775]

wow... you don't even know what fascism is....

I'm amazed that anyojne can be so ignorant in America...

Damn you're stupid
Main Entry: fas·cism
Pronunciation: \&#712;fa-&#716;shi-z&#601;m also &#712;fa-&#716;si-\
Function: noun
Etymology: Italian fascismo, from fascio bundle, fasces, group, from Latin fascis bundle & fasces fasces
Date: 1921
1 often capitalized : a political philosophy, movement, or regime (as that of the Fascisti) that exalts nation and often race above the individual and that stands for a centralized autocratic government headed by a dictatorial leader, severe economic and social regimentation, and forcible suppression of opposition
2 : a tendency toward or actual exercise of strong autocratic or dictatorial control <early instances of army fascism and brutality

Now highlight where that says it's a synonym for slavery

What the fuck is your major malfucntion? Here's a clue.

 

[JBeukema]

Right... a ruling that overruled the 10th and said the States don't possess the right, not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, to dissolve their ties with the Union and other member States has nothing to do with the 10th and States' Rights

[ame=http://www.amazon.com/Questions-About-American-History-Supposed/dp/0307346684]Amazon.com: 33 Questions About American History You&#39;re Not Supposed to Ask (9780307346681):&#133;[/ame]


read chapters 4, 10, and 19 and come back when you have a clue

 

[bigrebnc1775]

One more time
3. Texas v. White
Justice Robert Grier wrote a dissent in which he stated that he disagreed "on all points raised and decided" by the majority. Grier relied on the case Hepburn v. Ellzey in which Chief Justice John Marshall had defined a state as an entity entitled to representatives in both Congress and the Electoral College. Thus, her status had become more analogous to an Indian tribe than to a state. He also believed that the issue of Texas statehood was a matter for congressional rather than judicial determination

So no you would be wrong oh and the case had more to do with BONDS THEN states rights

 

[JBeukema]

When you're proven wrong, merely repeating yourself doesn't make you right


From your link:

Holding:

Texas (and the rest of the Confederacy) never left the Union during the Civil War, because a state cannot unilaterally secede from the United States.

And you tried telling me to study constitutional law

Chief Justice SALMON P. CHASE, in his majority opinion, held that the Constitution "in all its provisions, looks to an indestructible Union, composed of indestructible States." Once a territory gained admission to the Union as a state, its relationship to the Union was perpetual and indissoluble unless terminated by revolution or consent of the states. Therefore, the secession of the insurgent government from the Union was void. Texas remained a state during the Civil War, and its citizens were still citizens of the United States.

Texas v. White

 

[bigrebnc1775]

When you're proven wrong, merely repeating yourself doesn't make you right


From your link:

Holding:

Texas (and the rest of the Confederacy) never left the Union during the Civil War, because a state cannot unilaterally secede from the United States.

And you tried telling me to study constitutional law

Chief Justice SALMON P. CHASE, in his majority opinion, held that the Constitution "in all its provisions, looks to an indestructible Union, composed of indestructible States." Once a territory gained admission to the Union as a state, its relationship to the Union was perpetual and indissoluble unless terminated by revolution or consent of the states. Therefore, the secession of the insurgent government from the Union was void. Texas remained a state during the Civil War, and its citizens were still citizens of the United States.

Texas v. White

I tell you what, lets wait and see what happens with the states that have spoken out against the healthcare law. State Sovereignty Resolution. If the tenth Amendment was void why is it still on the books? Its not viod and it still is in effect.

 

[JBeukema]

SCOTUS ruled the 10th amendment void when they ruled in Texas v. White, saying that the States did not possess authority they clearly possess in accordance with the 10th amendment.

In Texas v. White, SCOTUS effectively overruled the 10th, supporting grabs for Federal power and giving the Fed a total monopoly on the ability to determine the limits of its own power.


Again, go, read, and come back when you know what you're talking about.


SCOTUS' ruling in Texas v. White remains unconstitutional.

 

[Bfgrn]

John Locke was an English philosopher or didn't you know that do you know where he is buried? Do you know what in the hell you are talking about?

Maybe you should cut back on the beer, or stop snorting gun powder; your brain damage is showing. You asked what an English philosopher has to do with 'life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness'. That you had to ask that question shows you don't know about John Locke.

Again, I learned about that shit in high school.

Again,

The works of Saul Alinsky at it's best will only work on those who do not know how to use them against those who try to use them. Think about that for a second.
My intent of asking the question was to find out what Life liberty and property had to do with life liberty and the presuit of happness? and keep it in the context that the OP was trying to make.

Jefferson&#8217;s intellectual heroes were Newton, Bacon, and Locke, and it was actually in Locke that he must have found the phrase. It appears not in the Two Treatises on Government but in the 1690 essay Concerning Human Understanding. There, in a long and thorny passage, Locke wrote:

The necessity of pursuing happiness [is] the foundation of liberty. As therefore the highest perfection of intellectual nature lies in a careful and constant pursuit of true and solid happiness; so the care of ourselves, that we mistake not imaginary for real happiness, is the necessary foundation of our liberty. The stronger ties we have to an unalterable pursuit of happiness in general, which is our greatest good, and which, as such, our desires always follow, the more are we free from any necessary determination of our will to any particular action, and from a necessary compliance with our desire, set upon any particular, and then appearing preferable good, till we have duly examined whether it has a tendency to, or be inconsistent with, our real happiness: and therefore, till we are as much informed upon this inquiry as the weight of the matter, and the nature of the case demands, we are, by the necessity of preferring and pursuing true happiness as our greatest good, obliged to suspend the satisfaction of our desires in particular cases.

Just the ideas that inspired our intellectual Founders were primarily European imports, so that defining American phrase, &#8220;the pursuit of happiness,&#8221; is not native to our shores. Furthermore, as the quotation from Locke demonstrates, &#8220;the pursuit of happiness&#8221; is a complicated concept. It is not merely sensual or hedonistic, but engages the intellect, requiring the careful discrimination of imaginary happiness from &#8220;true and solid&#8221; happiness. It is the &#8220;foundation of liberty&#8221; because it frees us from enslavement to particular desires.

The Greek word for &#8220;happiness&#8221; is eudaimonia. In the passage above, Locke is invoking Greek and Roman ethics in which eudaimonia is linked to aretê, the Greek word for &#8220;virtue&#8221; or &#8220;excellence.&#8221; In the Nicomachean Ethics, Aristotle wrote, &#8220;the happy man lives well and does well; for we have practically defined happiness as a sort of good life and good action.&#8221; Happiness is not, he argued, equivalent to wealth, honor, or pleasure. It is an end in itself, not the means to an end. The philosophical lineage of happiness can be traced from Socrates, Plato, and Aristotle through the Stoics, Skeptics, and Epicureans.

Jefferson admired Epicurus and owned eight copies of De rerum Natura (On the Nature of Things) by Lucretius, a Roman disciple of Epicurus. In a letter Jefferson wrote to William Short on October 13, 1819, he declared, &#8220;I too am an Epicurean. I consider the genuine doctrines of Epicurus as containing everything rational in moral philosophy which Greece and Rome have left us.&#8221; At the end of the letter, Jefferson made a summary of the key points of Epicurean doctrine, including:

Moral.&#8212;Happiness the aim of life.
Virtue the foundation of happiness.
Utility the test of virtue.

Properly understood, therefore, when John Locke, Samuel Johnson, and Thomas Jefferson wrote of &#8220;the pursuit of happiness,&#8221; they were invoking the Greek and Roman philosophical tradition in which happiness is bound up with the civic virtues of courage, moderation, and justice. Because they are civic virtues, not just personal attributes, they implicate the social aspect of eudaimonia. The pursuit of happiness, therefore, is not merely a matter of achieving individual pleasure. That is why Alexander Hamilton and other founders referred to &#8220;social happiness.&#8221;
The Surprising Origins and Meaning of the &#8220;Pursuit of Happiness&#8221;


The ancient Greek definition of happiness was the full use of your powers along lines of excellence.
John F. Kennedy

 

[bigrebnc1775]

SCOTUS ruled the 10th amendment void when they ruled in Texas v. White, saying that the States did not possess authority they clearly possess in accordance with the 10th amendment.

In Texas v. White, SCOTUS effectively overruled the 10th, supporting grabs for Federal power and giving the Fed a total monopoly on the ability to determine the limits of its own power.


Again, go, read, and come back when you know what you're talking about.


SCOTUS' ruling in Texas v. White remains unconstitutional.

No hell they did not maybe in your fantasy world, but not in the real world. You need to stop telling me to read when you are the one lacking. No one gave the Federal Government the ok to supersede the U.S. Constitution the 10th amendment has never been amended. It takes more than just the opinion of a Supreme Court justice to amend the Constitution. Do you understand?

“The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.”
No one gave the federal Government that much authority. The Constitution can be amended using two methods. The first method begins in the Congress. If two-thirds of the members of both chambers (House of Representatives and the Senate) vote for the amendment, it is sent to the various state legislatures. Three-quarters of the state legislatures must approve the amendment before it can be adopted.
The second method for amending the Constitution involves the convening of conventions. This method has never been used. A Constitutional Convention can be called by Congress or by the Petition of two-thirds of the states, resulting in conventions involving three-quarters of all states.
This is the only way the 10th amendment can be made void.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Maybe you should cut back on the beer, or stop snorting gun powder; your brain damage is showing. You asked what an English philosopher has to do with 'life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness'. That you had to ask that question shows you don't know about John Locke.

Again, I learned about that shit in high school.

Again,

The works of Saul Alinsky at it's best will only work on those who do not know how to use them against those who try to use them. Think about that for a second.
My intent of asking the question was to find out what Life liberty and property had to do with life liberty and the presuit of happness? and keep it in the context that the OP was trying to make.

Jefferson’s intellectual heroes were Newton, Bacon, and Locke, and it was actually in Locke that he must have found the phrase. It appears not in the Two Treatises on Government but in the 1690 essay Concerning Human Understanding. There, in a long and thorny passage, Locke wrote:

The necessity of pursuing happiness [is] the foundation of liberty. As therefore the highest perfection of intellectual nature lies in a careful and constant pursuit of true and solid happiness; so the care of ourselves, that we mistake not imaginary for real happiness, is the necessary foundation of our liberty. The stronger ties we have to an unalterable pursuit of happiness in general, which is our greatest good, and which, as such, our desires always follow, the more are we free from any necessary determination of our will to any particular action, and from a necessary compliance with our desire, set upon any particular, and then appearing preferable good, till we have duly examined whether it has a tendency to, or be inconsistent with, our real happiness: and therefore, till we are as much informed upon this inquiry as the weight of the matter, and the nature of the case demands, we are, by the necessity of preferring and pursuing true happiness as our greatest good, obliged to suspend the satisfaction of our desires in particular cases.

Just the ideas that inspired our intellectual Founders were primarily European imports, so that defining American phrase, “the pursuit of happiness,” is not native to our shores. Furthermore, as the quotation from Locke demonstrates, “the pursuit of happiness” is a complicated concept. It is not merely sensual or hedonistic, but engages the intellect, requiring the careful discrimination of imaginary happiness from “true and solid” happiness. It is the “foundation of liberty” because it frees us from enslavement to particular desires.

The Greek word for “happiness” is eudaimonia. In the passage above, Locke is invoking Greek and Roman ethics in which eudaimonia is linked to aretê, the Greek word for “virtue” or “excellence.” In the Nicomachean Ethics, Aristotle wrote, “the happy man lives well and does well; for we have practically defined happiness as a sort of good life and good action.” Happiness is not, he argued, equivalent to wealth, honor, or pleasure. It is an end in itself, not the means to an end. The philosophical lineage of happiness can be traced from Socrates, Plato, and Aristotle through the Stoics, Skeptics, and Epicureans.

Jefferson admired Epicurus and owned eight copies of De rerum Natura (On the Nature of Things) by Lucretius, a Roman disciple of Epicurus. In a letter Jefferson wrote to William Short on October 13, 1819, he declared, “I too am an Epicurean. I consider the genuine doctrines of Epicurus as containing everything rational in moral philosophy which Greece and Rome have left us.” At the end of the letter, Jefferson made a summary of the key points of Epicurean doctrine, including:

Moral.—Happiness the aim of life.
Virtue the foundation of happiness.
Utility the test of virtue.

Properly understood, therefore, when John Locke, Samuel Johnson, and Thomas Jefferson wrote of “the pursuit of happiness,” they were invoking the Greek and Roman philosophical tradition in which happiness is bound up with the civic virtues of courage, moderation, and justice. Because they are civic virtues, not just personal attributes, they implicate the social aspect of eudaimonia. The pursuit of happiness, therefore, is not merely a matter of achieving individual pleasure. That is why Alexander Hamilton and other founders referred to “social happiness.”
The Surprising Origins and Meaning of the “Pursuit of Happiness”


The ancient Greek definition of happiness was the full use of your powers along lines of excellence.
John F. Kennedy

and your point would be? giving things to people is not the intent of the Constitution

 

[Contumacious]

lol

'redo my Capital'?



Not only do you know nothing about socialism, you know nothing about capitalism, either.

At least I am not stupid enough to think that if I live in a socialist system I will have my indivdual rights protected. You will not have any rights except for those given by the State. Anyway I should know what fucking capitalism is I have been living in that type of system for 48 years. and you junior how long have you been around?

HUH?

WHERE do you live?

.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

lol

'redo my Capital'?



Not only do you know nothing about socialism, you know nothing about capitalism, either.

At least I am not stupid enough to think that if I live in a socialist system I will have my indivdual rights protected. You will not have any rights except for those given by the State. Anyway I should know what fucking capitalism is I have been living in that type of system for 48 years. and you junior how long have you been around?

HUH?

WHERE do you live?

.

Why are you asking a stupid question I see that you can read, I have my location listed under my moniker. So why do you have to ask?