Condemning communism

[Lastamender]

Your hero Jefferson was a slaver and rapist you deplorable piece of shit. You can't run and hide from those facts in the real world little cuck.

I never said Jeffereson was my hero. If you have to invent what other people say no one is going to take you seriously. I don't think anyone has so far.

 

[bripat9643]

Socialism and communism do not at all require taking any property from anyone.

Sure they do. How are you going to have government ownership of the means of production if you don't take it from those who currently own it?

While the ending of colonialism through violent rebellion often does involve nationalization of private holdings, that is usually the penalty you would expect imperialists to pay for decades or centuries of colonial abuses.

That's what I expect communists to do.

But if any democratic country decided to start implementing socialism or communism, that would not have to involve any taking of any private property.

I just explained what that isn't so.

 

[Curried Goats]

I never said Jeffereson was my hero. If you have to invent what other people say no one is going to take you seriously. I don't think anyone has so far.

Plenty are. That's why veneration of old Founders is getting re-examined.

 

[Rigby5]

Slaves can't consent you moron. That's called duress. I have all the details I need.

If you chain someone to your room and she agrees to sleep with you in exchange for food that isn't a consensual relationship, even if she initiated the transaction.

We do not know if Sally Hemmings was ever chained at all.
From what I read, she was given money to travel, to places like Paris, where she could not have been under any slavery duress.
The fact she went back to Montecello implies consent.
And her children were all free.

I agree it was suspicious, but we do need proof, since Jefferson seems to be one heck of a heroic figure.
And the evidence does not condemn Jefferson in any way.
If one of Romeo and Juliet had been a slave, that would not have diminished their relationships significance, but increased it.

 

[Rigby5]

Sure they do. How are you going to have government ownership of the means of production if you don't take it from those who currently own it?


That's what I expect communists to do.



I just explained what that isn't so.

Wrong.
All you need to do to have popular ownership of the means of production is to build competing industries that either make a better product or sells for less.

But socialism does not at all require popular ownership of the means of production, as long as the private means do not violate obvious fairness laws.

There is no means by which communism or socialism can take ownership of private property.
So communism and socialism never imply any nationalization of property.

 

[Curried Goats]

We do not know if Sally Hemmings was ever chained at all.

Chains in this instance were metaphorical, we know Jefferson owned her and her family as property. We also know she was Martha Jeffersons half sister because Sally was a product of rape between Martha's father and Sally's mother who he owned. The rape of slave women was disgustingly common among the Founders and with the one drop rule it meant they could pass and trade off their black daughters to other slavers and rapists. Trying to romanticize what was no better than America's version of Boko Haram is some white supremacy fan fiction bullshit.

From what I read, she was given money to travel, to places like Paris, where she could not have been under any slavery duress.

Her family was still enslaved back in America when she was in Paris. That's a fact.

The fact she went back to Montecello implies consent.

On the contrary the fact that Jefferson still owned the rest of her family as property proves duress.

And her children were all free.

On his death. Is it magnanimous to release your slaves when you can no longer profit off their lives and labor? What's wrong with you white people? You don't get credit for relinquishing your hold on your slaves with your literal cold dead hands. Give me a ******* break.

I agree it was suspicious, but we do need proof, since Jefferson seems to be one heck of a heroic figure.

Only to deplorable pieces of shits who venerate slavers and rapists.

And the evidence does not condemn Jefferson in any way.

Perhaps not to mutants and morons.

If one of Romeo and Juliet had been a slave, that would not have diminished their relationships significance, but increased it.

Romeo didn't spend his entire life denying his love for Juliet you simple ****. Did you even read that story?

 

[bripat9643]

Plenty are. That's why veneration of old Founders is getting re-examined.

The real reason is that you're a bunch of ******* commies.

 

[Curried Goats]

The real reason is that you're a bunch of ******* commies.

Don't forget the part about you all being a bunch of pussies.

 

[bripat9643]

Wrong.
All you need to do to have popular ownership of the means of production is to build competing industries that either make a better product or sells for less.

No, because then those private industries will still exist. Furthermore, no government run enterprise has ever been able to produce goods and services cheaper and better than the private market.

But socialism does not at all require popular ownership of the means of production, as long as the private means do not violate obvious fairness laws.

ROFL! It's government ownership of the means of production, not "popular ownership." what "violate obvious fairness laws?"

There is no means by which communism or socialism can take ownership of private property.
So communism and socialism never imply any nationalization of property.

Sure they can. They can simply point guns at the owners if they refuse to hand it over.

 

[bripat9643]

Don't forget the part about you all being a bunch of pussies.

Do you really want your wife and kids to be threatened by communist governments?

The "you're a *****" argument is the proof that you're a ******* moron.

 

[Curried Goats]

Do you really want your wife and kids to be threatened by communist governments?

I don't want my wife and kids threatened by any government.

The "you're a *****" argument is the proof that you're a ******* moron.

It's not an argument, it's an insult and a show of my complete lack of respect for you and your culture.

 

[bripat9643]

I don't want my wife and kids threatened by any government.

Apparently you do because you call people who object to it "pussies."

It's not an argument, it's an insult and a show of my complete lack of respect for you and your culture.

So, you hate white people? Is that what you're saying?

 

[Curried Goats]

Apparently you do because you call people who object to it "pussies."

The government isn't threatening your wife and kids you *****.

So, you hate white people? Is that what you're saying?

Racist whites, absolutely.

 

[bripat9643]

The government isn't threatening your wife and kids you *****.

Sure it is, especially the government you advocate.

Racist whites, absolutely.

See? What did I tell you?

 

[Curried Goats]

Sure it is, especially the government you advocate.

No it isn't you *****.

See? What did I tell you?

I said I hate racist whites, is this your admission that you think all whites are racist?

 

[bripat9643]

No it isn't you *****.

Calling me a ***** only indicates that the government is threatening me.

I said I hate racist whites, is this your admission that you think all whites are racist?

No, you do. It also shows that you're a thug.

 

[EvMetro]

I smelt ***** on you, you safe space needing mother ******.

Although the ***** rhetoric sounds like typical juvenile lefty rhetoric, you have attempted to hijack the mocking of safe spaces from your political opponents. You didn't build that. Safe spaces are a lefty thing, those belong to your side.

 

[Curried Goats]

Although the ***** rhetoric sounds like typical juvenile lefty rhetoric, you have attempted to hijack the mocking of safe spaces from your political opponents. You didn't build that. Safe spaces are a lefty thing, those belong to your side.

Republicans have always been the biggest safe space needing mother fuckers.

 

[bripat9643]

Republicans have always been the biggest safe space needing mother fuckers.

What does that even mean? You know the term is derogatory, so you use it against those you hate. That's the sum total of your wisdom.

 

[Rigby5]

Romeo didn't spend his entire life denying his love for Juliet you simple ****. Did you even read that story?

Oh come on.
The reason to deny the relationship is obvious, and a product of the time, not the fault of Jefferson.
If he had admitted the relationship, it would have had to retire from politics, which is not something anyone should have wanted him to do.
Even the most liberal abolitionist would not have approved of a mix-marriage back then.

Slavery was a universal convention the churches backed at the time, so individuals had little recourse.
The rational was that people were considered too ignorant and emotional, so needed to be under the guidance of the best.
Very much like the concept of modern gun control advocates who want government to have a monopoly on weapons.