Zone1 Is communiusm a US obsession ?

[Rigby5]

Sure.

So what??? You seem to be assuming that mass killings and pogroms can never be the will of the majority. I think you're just plain wrong on that one.

While I would agree that a constitutional republic, with blind justice, is better and safer than a pure democracy, have the majority ever supported mass killings and pogroms?

 

[dblack]

No one has ever thought that socialism is controlling who gets the fruits of labor.

Hmmm.... "a political and economic theory of social organization which advocates that the means of production, distribution, and exchange should be owned or regulated by the community as a whole"

How do you manage to talk out of both sides of your mouth like that? Did you go to ventriloquist school?

 

[dblack]

While I would agree that a constitutional republic, with blind justice, is better and safer than a pure democracy, have the majority ever supported mass killings and pogroms?

Over, and over, and over again. Crack open a history book.

 

[TNHarley]

Totally and completely wrong.
Communism says nothing at all about how leaders are selected, whether the legislature should be bicameral, what the role of the judiciary is, etc.

If you follow history, the revolution in Russia was mostly by communists, socialists, and anarchists, who are all very similar on the concept of maximizing individual rights and freedoms.
And it should be clear that Lenin was not really a Russian communist, but a German agent, sent in to take Russia out of the war.
Between Lenin and Stalin, an absolute capitalist, they killed off all the communists, socialists, and anarchists and implemented pure capitalism, which is feudalism.

Thats because it CALLS for the state to be completely dissolved
The rest of your post is absolutely hilarious.

 

[Bob Blaylock]

That of course has to be a lie, because the only welfare available in the US either ADC or disability.
Able bodied males get no welfare in the US, and never have.

He's not American. He's British.

 

[Tommy Tainant]

What the OP doesn't get is that the aspects of socialism and communism that Americans reject are the same. Both reject free markets. Both advocate for democratic control of resources and labor. Many, if not most, Americans see such a goal in direct conflict with liberty. I agree.

The US runs similar welfare programmes to the UK.
Nobody is allowed to starve.
Vanks and big usiness are supported with public funds.
But there isnt a single elected communist in either country.
After over a century of trying that would suggest it isnt popular.
Therefore unworthy of being made into bogeyman.

 

[Tommy Tainant]

Thats because it CALLS for the state to be completely dissolved
The rest of your post is absolutely hilarious.

But who us calling for that ? Its a straw man.

 

[dblack]

The US runs similar welfare programmes to the UK.
Nobody is allowed to starve.
Vanks and big usiness are supported with public funds.
But there isnt a single elected communist in either country.
After over a century of trying that would suggest it isnt popular.
Therefore unworthy of being made into bogeyman.

It's true that some socialism has crept into our government. Fortunately, it's been limited by the anti-communism sentiment you're bitching about in this thread. I'm glad the sentiment is there, even if it can be a bit "knee-jerk" at times

 

[TNHarley]

But who us calling for that ? Its a straw man.

The theory of communism does.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Wrong.
Fascism is the wealthy elite uber alles.
Communism and socialism imply a democracy.

NASA wants to use your intellect on future space mission! They said your are "far denser than lead"

 

[Mac1958]

But who us calling for that ? Its a straw man.

No one is, of course. In fact, the calls for civil war are coming from the GQP, most notably MTG. Projection.

They don't even know what communism is, and yet are convinced others want it.

These people have been turned into living, breathing examples of the Dunning-Kruger Effect.

 

[Tommy Tainant]

The theory of communism does.

Thats deep.

 

[Tommy Tainant]

It's true that some socialism has crept into our government. Fortunately, it's been limited by the anti-communism sentiment you're bitching about in this thread. I'm glad the sentiment is there, even if it can be a bit "knee-jerk" at times

Socialism isnt communism. Socialism bails out capitalism when it frequently fails.

People generally support that. Nobody supports bringing everything into public ownership.

 

[Natural Citizen]

Communism has two phases.

The first phase is socialism.

Socialism is the phase between Keynesianism and communism.

And, of course, Keynesianism is designed to fail over the course of time.

That's what the so-called ''great reset'' is all about now. The transition is at our doorstep and the Keynesians are just about to the point where they're running out of road to kick the can down, naturally. So they're gonna be passing the baton over to the commies sooner than later. The country is observably being pushed toward the socialism phase now, it seems, given the predictable, prescribed failure of former.

The second phase being classless society. Here the discussion would move toward the whole from each according to his ability and to each according to his needs line. I suppose it's easy to figure out who decides need. Right? lol.

Dictatorship of the proletariat and whatnot...

 

[TNHarley]

Thats deep.

You asked, goob smooch.

 

[dblack]

Socialism isnt communism.

They're based on the same goal - democratic control of labor and resources. I'm going by the definitions posted above. If you have your own special definitions, that's nice. I can't care.

Socialism bails out capitalism when it frequently fails.

I'm going by the definitions in my link. They seem reasonable. If you have your own, that's nice. I can't care.

People generally support that. Nobody supports bringing everything into public ownership.

Mkay

Socialism and communism give government far too much control over society. I oppose both.

 

[Tommy Tainant]

They're based on the same goal - democratic control of labor and resources. I'm going by the definitions posted above. If you have your own special definitions, that's nice. I can't care.

I'm going by the definitions in my link. They seem reasonable. If you have your own, that's nice. I can't care.

Mkay

Socialism and communism give government far too much control over society. I oppose both.

Socialism is needed to bail capitalism out. Its a good thing.

 

[dblack]

Socialism is needed to bail capitalism out. Its a good thing.

No. It's not.

 

[Natural Citizen]

Socialism isnt communism. Socialism bails out capitalism when it frequently fails.

This is common, predictable rehetoric.

I don't even like the word ''capitaism'' because if you say free market and capitalism together, we don't have that.

But nobody ever says free market and capitalism together. The yalways argue their point on ''capitalism.''

Which is basically ignoring the Keynesian policy we actually have.

Amd that's the problem. People, collectively speaking, don't even understand what kinds of policies we actually have.

Keynesians have pretty much destroyed free market capitalism as it strategically takes us toward socialism and ultimately communism.

What we have now, from behind the cloak of ''capitalism'' is economic interventionism. A completely planned economy. Central economic planning by a central bank. A belief in deficit financing. Inflationism. A welfare state.

It's so far removed from free market capitalism that it's foolish to even refer to it as that.

And then, almost on key, we get the socialists such as yourself saying, oh man, ''capitalism is so bad, what we need is socialism.

It's designed to fail and it's designed to destroy the middle class, with the ultimate goal of establishing, as I said, a classless society...aka communism...

 

[dblack]

This is common, predictable rhetoric.

It is. The only important aspect is the primacy of democracy. That's where socialists go off the rails. You see it all the time in their arguments. Government control of anything and everything is fine with them, as long as it's democratic.