What do Communist, Socialist mean?

[konradv]

And you just proved to the board that confirmation bias is alive and well. Oh, and that you're unteachable, too.

You've been teaching? What would that be? How to waste people's time on a board by saying nothing at all? When you I asked you to post something substantive, you said that would be a waste of time. Care to tell us which story you're going to stick with, Mitt?

 

[kwc57]

Sounds like a chance for a golden slumber.

Is that what you call it, when you don't make it out of the refrigerator box in time to pee?

I see you fear engaging in honest, intelligent debate. How liberal of you.

 

[francoHFW]

Communists and Marxists? What a pile of crappe in the USA- that's nationalizing ALL business-
Fascists are leftists? A brand new theory for ignorant RW wackjobs, who are a couple big lemming scares from being fascists themselves- all those macho uniforms to lynch the ACLU, intellectual eggheads, and of course minorities. Anti-American IDIOCY.

 

[TakeAStepBack]

Is that what you call it, when you don't make it out of the refrigerator box in time to pee?

Seriously, that's actually funny. You should move over to making jokes and leave the important debates to those that understand what they are talking about. Because you clearly have no fucking idea regarding libertarian ideology.

Most of all, public campaign finance reform is a fucking horrible idea and has been shown as such on this very board over and over and yet, you keep throwing it back out there as if it is A) a good idea B) viable C) will ever get passed into law.

There you have it, libertarian "ideology". I'm afraid we've had enough of those. I'm just taking it to its logical conclusions, using human nature as my guide. Libertarians never explain how with minimal regulation, we escape some of the strong preying on the weak. It's human nature to seek advantage wherever it lies. Whether its bribing Congress with campaign donations, taking advantage of someone's ignorance or simply taking, because one is stronger. Libertarianism never explains how the shady side of human nature doesn't come to the fore and become the the real "ethic" of the system.

Yes, actually. It is all within the debates held amongst libertarians. Seems some morons have the impression that all libertarians lockstep like socialists and corporatists do. They dont. Thankfully, the founders, already gave the USA a nice way to deal with what you're trying desperately to spout as a conclusive end to libertarian fault. It's already in the constitution.

That does not mean that the pea inside your head can make such comprehensions and then "guide yourself forward using human nature". You, simply put, are just not all that bright, comrade.

 

[francoHFW]

Everyone but dupe/cold war dinosaur/morons agree:

Communist: China, Cuba, N. Korea- totalitarian central planning, state owned everything, never democratic, always put in by revolution..

Socialist- France, Sweden Germany, ALWAYS democratic, some nationaliztion of industry NEEDED by people- health, energy- capitalism regulated to protect citizenry. "Social democrats".

Fascism- Corporate/dictatorship RW nationalistic/militaristic, often racist wackjobs lol.

That's pretty ridiculous too. While socialist parties did play a role in France, Sweden, Germany, etc. it is ridiculous to classify these countries as socialist. They are in essence free market economies, with an elaborate welfare state.

Your definition of Fascism is pretty off too.

franco is one of our resident liberal trolls. Pay him no mind.

I'm a retired teacher with a Masters in world history, and you're an ignorant babbling hater/moron/dittohead idiot. Change the channel, dupe.

 

[TakeAStepBack]

Ah, schooled at Berkley university of socialist indoctrination. Excellent, comrade. Excellent.

 

[kwc57]

The problem is that you've really haven't said anything at all. Given that, I filled in the blanks with what libertarians usually say. Want to clear things up? Post something substantive.

In other words, you lied.

As for posting something substantive, I've learned it's not worth the pixels to do anything but make fun of shitbirds like you and Fakey, so that's what I'll do.

If you don't like that, you're free to fuck right off.

Same to you, .

You're just proving to me that libertarianism is platitudes without solutions. Whenever they're called on to explain inconsistencies, they take on a smug pomposity that's supposed to count as logic.

Hope
Change
Fair Share

 

[kwc57]

That's pretty ridiculous too. While socialist parties did play a role in France, Sweden, Germany, etc. it is ridiculous to classify these countries as socialist. They are in essence free market economies, with an elaborate welfare state.

Your definition of Fascism is pretty off too.

franco is one of our resident liberal trolls. Pay him no mind.

I'm a retired teacher with a Masters in world history, and you're an ignorant babbling hater/moron/dittohead idiot. Change the channel, dupe.

Congrats, you're the most clueless retired teacher with a masters in world history in the world. You should get a ribbon or something.

 

[konradv]

Sounds like a chance for a golden slumber.

Is that what you call it, when you don't make it out of the refrigerator box in time to pee?

I see you fear engaging in honest, intelligent debate. How liberal of you.

What about the comment I responded to looks like debate? Y'all are just too much.

 

[francoHFW]

franco is one of our resident liberal trolls. Pay him no mind.

I'm a retired teacher with a Masters in world history, and you're an ignorant babbling hater/moron/dittohead idiot. Change the channel, dupe.

Congrats, you're the most clueless retired teacher with a masters in world history in the world. You should get a ribbon or something.

So where am I wrong, shyttthead? LOL!

 

[kwc57]

I'm a retired teacher with a Masters in world history, and you're an ignorant babbling hater/moron/dittohead idiot. Change the channel, dupe.

Congrats, you're the most clueless retired teacher with a masters in world history in the world. You should get a ribbon or something.

So where am I wrong, shyttthead? LOL!

Every comment you post trollyhead!

 

[Full-Auto]

I'm a retired teacher with a Masters in world history, and you're an ignorant babbling hater/moron/dittohead idiot. Change the channel, dupe.

Congrats, you're the most clueless retired teacher with a masters in world history in the world. You should get a ribbon or something.

So where am I wrong, shyttthead? LOL!

Besides having Alzheimer's kick in diminishing your ability to communicate in an articulate manner.

 

[konradv]

Yes, actually. It is all within the debates held amongst libertarians. Seems some morons have the impression that all libertarians lockstep like socialists and corporatists do. They dont. Thankfully, the founders, already gave the USA a nice way to deal with what you're trying desperately to spout as a conclusive end to libertarian fault. It's already in the constitution.

That does not mean that the pea inside your head can make such comprehensions and then "guide yourself forward using human nature". You, simply put, are just not all that bright, comrade.

And I suppose you feel you're clever calling me, comrade. I thought this board was different. It took a while, but idiots who can't even explain there own philiosophy coherently without putting people to sleep, always seem to shoot for the lowest common denominator.

I'm glad libertarians have their debates, but kindly let us in on them. We can't trust our future on platitudes about "freedom", when freedom for some could become serfdom for others. How do libertarians ensure that doesn't happen?

 

[Clementine]

What's in a name? Call people what you want, I just hate control freaks who have the audacity to think they should take the reins of my life and tell me what to do. As long as something is legal and I'm paying, they need to shut up whether we're talking about smoking, abortions, etc.

 

[francoHFW]

JJEBUS you RWers are clueless. And you vote Pub Clem? WTF?

 

[Crackerjack]

And you just proved to the board that confirmation bias is alive and well. Oh, and that you're unteachable, too.

You've been teaching? What would that be? How to waste people's time on a board by saying nothing at all? When you I asked you to post something substantive, you said that would be a waste of time. Care to tell us which story you're going to stick with, Mitt?

More reading fail.

 

[M.D. Rawlings]

Communists and Marxists? What a pile of crappe in the USA- that's nationalizing ALL business-
Fascists are leftists? A brand new theory for ignorant RW wackjobs, who are a couple big lemming scares from being fascists themselves- all those macho uniforms to lynch the ACLU, intellectual eggheads, and of course minorities. Anti-American IDIOCY.

See, more leftist slogan spouting. A new theory? See their historical ignorance, the untutored and incurious assumption that popular media's post-WWII revisionism is accurate. Never mind that early-Twentieth century Western thinkers understood that fascism was a leftist ideology, initially admired by leftist icons like Wilson and by FDR in his youth, prior to the rise of Nazism. Note once again the knee-jerk reactionism against classical liberals, the dunderheaded association of classical liberalism (the antithesis of authoritarianism/totalitarianism) with fascism. And the ACLU? Initially an unabashedly socialist organization!

Intellectual eggheads?! There's nothing intellectual or eggheaded about you leftists. Your historical and philosophical illiterates, through and through. You just think--after decades of lefty's network monopoly on the dissemination of information prior to the rise of competitive media, Internet, talk radio, cable television--that your shoeshine remains unexposed for the bullshit that it is.

 

[ScreamingEagle]

Socialist? Communist? I often notice some of you extreme righties throw the invective, “communist” or “socialist” around. It looks like these invectives mean to you anyone to your left. If they mean something else, would one of you please explain to us what you mean by these?

Here's what Winston Churchill had to say about socialism.....was he too just "throwing invective around".......?

Churchill wrote, "Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy, its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery."

Winston Churchill, election broadcast (May, 1945) "I must tell you that a socialist policy is abhorrent to British ideas on freedom. There is to be one State, to which all are to be obedient in every act of their lives. This State, once in power, will prescribe for everyone: where they are to work, what they are to work at, where they may go and what they may say, what views they are to hold, where their wives are to queue up for the State ration, and what education their children are to receive. A socialist state could not afford to suffer opposition - no socialist system can be established without a political police. They (the Labour government) would have to fall back on some form of Gestapo."

Winston Churchill - Conservapedia

 

[konradv]

Classical liberals!!! Translation- Libertarians running from a label that has become increasingly known as having little relevance to the real world. Commonly seen stealing the robes of The Founders and pretending they can read their minds.

 

[Clementine]

JJEBUS you RWers are clueless. And you vote Pub Clem? WTF?

I think it's clear I am not a Democrat. I think the party moved too far to the left.

If something is legal and a person isn't asking for others to pay their way, leave them alone.

Abortion is legal and no one is changing that. The left isn't content to have something legal, they want it paid for and that is where the dispute is.

Smoking is legal and yet the left wants to keep increasing taxes on it to pay for other things. A lot of poor people smoke, so that punishes them if they aren't able to quit.

I just don't expect things to make sense or be fair when control freaks are making new laws all the time.