Leftism: Your Overdue Education

[PaintMyHouse]

Nope.

Yup.

Prove it? Oh right, you can't...

Prove what?

That you oppose free speech, as is the wont of Leftists?

No prob:


"Think stupid, talk stupid, and we bury you, for your own good." The Liberal Commitment.....

And this:

Yep, and free speech is how we discover you need to be dropped into the sea,.... Anti-Gay Stickers At High School In Indio Touch Off Debate



Both quotes of yours.

Funny, in both cases I defend free speech. It's a liberal thing.

No you don't.

It's a lie, based your embarrassment at being revealed as the Fascist you are.

Nope. And anyone who reads the thread will see you are lying, as usual.

 

[PoliticalChic]

View attachment 66242

You do realize that everything I posted is correct, accurate and true.

Beyond that, you may conclude as you wish.

If you really think that, then please explain what current model of political analysis / classification system you are using, whether it is one, two, or three dimensional, the axis of your dimensions and what they represent, and why all these extreme political ideologies fall on the "left" side, and what, exactly that means.

Also, as it appears you are using a 1-dimensional model please write a detailed response justifying why you are using a model that is considered outdated by most modern academics as it pigeonholes different aspects of vastly different ideologies onto a line where they aren't properly represented.

I'm asking you to establish these basics because, as I've stated, it appears, from your post, that you don't even grasp the basics of politics and generally look at biased sources / google things that agree with your pre-established belief set. I've literally seen nothing from academic work classifying anything on a 1-dimensional scale since like grade school.

Edit: Also, as your topic is on education, I'm certainly interested in being educated. I'm open to the fact that it has been a bit since I've done my college coursework and that I'm not always in touch with the academic community. As such, I'm simply asking you to build your "education" from an established base set that seems so counter to theory I've been exposed to in higher coursework.

This is what I posted...to you:
"You do realize that everything I posted is correct, accurate and true."

Why did you ignore it?

Oh....because it is totally correct...and you can't dispute anything I've posted.

And, further....once you admit that, my conclusion is ironclad.

Ah, sorry I didn't know it was a troll account.

Well played sir, well played.

I never use the term 'troll'....

I only use words I can define....but it seems 'troll' means folks that I disagree with, but can't find a cogent way to answer them.

I literally disputed your basic understanding of political classification...which is one of the underpinnings of your argument but you said that I didn't dispute anything.

So....

No you didn't.

You ignored the well-constructed thread and every post of mine in it.

Again...I challenge you to quote my statements, and see if you can dispute any.



Seems I'm correct about the meaning of 'troll,' huh?

 

[Never3ndr]

View attachment 66242

If you really think that, then please explain what current model of political analysis / classification system you are using, whether it is one, two, or three dimensional, the axis of your dimensions and what they represent, and why all these extreme political ideologies fall on the "left" side, and what, exactly that means.

Also, as it appears you are using a 1-dimensional model please write a detailed response justifying why you are using a model that is considered outdated by most modern academics as it pigeonholes different aspects of vastly different ideologies onto a line where they aren't properly represented.

I'm asking you to establish these basics because, as I've stated, it appears, from your post, that you don't even grasp the basics of politics and generally look at biased sources / google things that agree with your pre-established belief set. I've literally seen nothing from academic work classifying anything on a 1-dimensional scale since like grade school.

Edit: Also, as your topic is on education, I'm certainly interested in being educated. I'm open to the fact that it has been a bit since I've done my college coursework and that I'm not always in touch with the academic community. As such, I'm simply asking you to build your "education" from an established base set that seems so counter to theory I've been exposed to in higher coursework.

This is what I posted...to you:
"You do realize that everything I posted is correct, accurate and true."

Why did you ignore it?

Oh....because it is totally correct...and you can't dispute anything I've posted.

And, further....once you admit that, my conclusion is ironclad.

Ah, sorry I didn't know it was a troll account.

Well played sir, well played.

I never use the term 'troll'....

I only use words I can define....but it seems 'troll' means folks that I disagree with, but can't find a cogent way to answer them.

I literally disputed your basic understanding of political classification...which is one of the underpinnings of your argument but you said that I didn't dispute anything.

So....

No you didn't.

You ignored the well-constructed thread and every post of mine in it.

Again...I challenge you to quote my statements, and see if you can dispute any.



Seems I'm correct about the meaning of 'troll,' huh?

You use leftwing and rightwing...in case you don't understand the English I am speaking:

Why are you using these terms, indicative of judging on a 1-dimensional scale, when the modern systems of classification tend to relate things on 2 or 3-dimensional basis.

If you are not using an outdated, 1-dimensional model, then why are you not also including the additional classification axis you are utilizing as systems of judgement?

If you are using the outdated model, then why does your opinion or anything you link have relevance when our more modern understanding of political classifications utilize more detailed 2 or 3 dimensional systems that, in the mind of academics, more accurately depict the landscape of different ideologies.

 

[PoliticalChic]

View attachment 66242

This is what I posted...to you:
"You do realize that everything I posted is correct, accurate and true."

Why did you ignore it?

Oh....because it is totally correct...and you can't dispute anything I've posted.

And, further....once you admit that, my conclusion is ironclad.

Ah, sorry I didn't know it was a troll account.

Well played sir, well played.

I never use the term 'troll'....

I only use words I can define....but it seems 'troll' means folks that I disagree with, but can't find a cogent way to answer them.

I literally disputed your basic understanding of political classification...which is one of the underpinnings of your argument but you said that I didn't dispute anything.

So....

No you didn't.

You ignored the well-constructed thread and every post of mine in it.

Again...I challenge you to quote my statements, and see if you can dispute any.



Seems I'm correct about the meaning of 'troll,' huh?

You use leftwing and rightwing...in case you don't understand the English I am speaking:

Why are you using these terms, indicative of judging on a 1-dimensional scale, when the modern systems of classification tend to relate things on 2 or 3-dimensional basis.

If you are not using an outdated, 1-dimensional model, then why are you not also including the additional classification axis you are utilizing as systems of judgement?

If you are using the outdated model, then why does your opinion or anything you link have relevance when our more modern understanding of political classifications utilize more detailed 2 or 3 dimensional systems that, in the mind of academics, more accurately depict the landscape of different ideologies.

Still....not a single quote from me that you are able to deny.

Think about why that is.

 

[NYcarbineer]

(...are the Democrats starting to worry, with a Marxist-Socialist running as their presidential nominee??
Ya' think?)

.[/QUOTE]

Neither Clinton nor Sanders are Marxists.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Wanna try to claim that both Hitler and Stalin based their doctrines on Karl Marx???

Why would I claim that when it isn't true...

Try this one:

Wanna try to claim that both Hitler and Stalin didn't based their doctrines on Karl Marx???

Neither followed Marx much at all. Had they both Germany and Russia would have been capitalist, then socialist, then communist. One jumped to Fascism, the other to Communism, then they went to war, and now both are back to State Capitalism.

"Neither followed Marx much at all."


Hmmm......nice twist.

This is what I said:
"Wanna try to claim that both Hitler and Stalin didn't based their doctrines on Karl Marx???"

And, of course, you've done that little tap dance because you can't dispute what I posted.


Psssst.....before you embarrass yourself further....

1. A year after Lenin's death, 1924, the NYTimes published a small article about a newly established party in Germany, the National Socialist Labor Party, which "...persists in believing that Lenin and Hitler can be compared or contrasted...Dr. Goebell's....assertion that Lenin was the greatest man second only to Hitler....and that the difference between communism and the Hitler faith was very slight...." November 27, 1925, NYTimes

2. Early on the propaganda and the visuals....flags and posters.....of the Nazis mirrored those of the German communists.....disagreements followed.
Shortly thereafter the Nazis found it more useful to stress differences, and the earlier campaign posters showing similarities disappeared, posters with both the hammer and sickle and the swastika

a. "Hitler often stated that he learned much from reading Marx, and the whole of National Socialism is doctrinally based on Marxism." George Watson, Historian, Cambridge.

b. "Socialists in Germany were national socialists, communists were international socialists." Vladimir Bukovsky.



I'm never wrong.
Never.

You were wrong to accuse all Democrats of being Fascists, Nazis, and Marxists.

 

[PoliticalChic]

(...are the Democrats starting to worry, with a Marxist-Socialist running as their presidential nominee??
Ya' think?)

.

Neither Clinton nor Sanders are Marxists.[/QUOTE]



1.Michael Harrington, founder of the Democratic Socialists of America, the DSA., knew that infiltration of the Democratic Party was primary, and it already contained all of the progressive elements The Eduard Bernstein Internet Archive Socialism time line. The DSA remains the principle branch of the Socialist International, whose primary goal is global governance under worldwide socialism.

a. The SI boasts it is successor to the First International of Karl Marx, 1864. “Ever since its inception in 1951, the Socialist International has made cosmetic efforts to distance itself from communist socialists.”
Congressional Socialists No Longer in the Marxist Closet 1
and
The Grasp of Socialist International

2. This from the DSA website:
"#WeNeedBernie
Senator Bernie Sanders (I-VT) has announced that he is officially running as a candidate for President in 2016 to further a desperately needed political revolution in the USA.

Senator Sanders is a lifelong champion of the public programs and democratic rights that empower working class people. His candidacy could help expand both the progressive movement and the democratic socialist voice within that movement." #WeNeedBernie


3. Creation of the Progressive Caucus is credited to Bernie Sanders. The groups in the radical network include a) the Congressional Progressive Caucus, b) the Congressional Black Caucus, c) the Populist Caucus, and the d) Progressive Democrats of America.

a. Allied with the above is ACORN, SEIU, and the Institute for Policy Studies

b. And, indirectly, the Center for American Progress and the Apollo Alliance.



Socialist, communist, whatever....distinctions without difference.

 

[NYcarbineer]

The OP believes modern day Germany is still a Nazi country and yet she supports giving Germany military aid. I think that makes the OP a Nazi sympathizer.

 

[NYcarbineer]

(...are the Democrats starting to worry, with a Marxist-Socialist running as their presidential nominee??
Ya' think?)

.

Neither Clinton nor Sanders are Marxists.

1.Michael Harrington, founder of the Democratic Socialists of America, the DSA., knew that infiltration of the Democratic Party was primary, and it already contained all of the progressive elements The Eduard Bernstein Internet Archive Socialism time line. The DSA remains the principle branch of the Socialist International, whose primary goal is global governance under worldwide socialism.

a. The SI boasts it is successor to the First International of Karl Marx, 1864. “Ever since its inception in 1951, the Socialist International has made cosmetic efforts to distance itself from communist socialists.”
Congressional Socialists No Longer in the Marxist Closet 1
and
The Grasp of Socialist International

2. "#WeNeedBernie
Senator Bernie Sanders (I-VT) has announced that he is officially running as a candidate for President in 2016 to further a desperately needed political revolution in the USA.

Senator Sanders is a lifelong champion of the public programs and democratic rights that empower working class people. His candidacy could help expand both the progressive movement and the democratic socialist voice within that movement." #WeNeedBernie


3. Creation of the Progressive Caucus is credited to Bernie Sanders. The groups in the radical network include a) the Congressional Progressive Caucus, b) the Congressional Black Caucus, c) the Populist Caucus, and the d) Progressive Democrats of America.

a. Allied with the above is ACORN, SEIU, and the Institute for Policy Studies

b. And, indirectly, the Center for American Progress and the Apollo Alliance.



Socialist, communist, whatever....distinctions without difference.[/QUOTE]

A post that has nothing to do with what I posted. As usual.

Answering only yes or no

Is Bernie a Nazi?

 

[PoliticalChic]

The OP believes modern day Germany is still a Nazi country and yet she supports giving Germany military aid. I think that makes the OP a Nazi sympathizer.

Where is a quote of mine that says that?


You can't help lying.....it's what Liberals do.

 

[PoliticalChic]

(...are the Democrats starting to worry, with a Marxist-Socialist running as their presidential nominee??
Ya' think?)

.

Neither Clinton nor Sanders are Marxists.

1.Michael Harrington, founder of the Democratic Socialists of America, the DSA., knew that infiltration of the Democratic Party was primary, and it already contained all of the progressive elements The Eduard Bernstein Internet Archive Socialism time line. The DSA remains the principle branch of the Socialist International, whose primary goal is global governance under worldwide socialism.

a. The SI boasts it is successor to the First International of Karl Marx, 1864. “Ever since its inception in 1951, the Socialist International has made cosmetic efforts to distance itself from communist socialists.”
Congressional Socialists No Longer in the Marxist Closet 1
and
The Grasp of Socialist International

2. "#WeNeedBernie
Senator Bernie Sanders (I-VT) has announced that he is officially running as a candidate for President in 2016 to further a desperately needed political revolution in the USA.

Senator Sanders is a lifelong champion of the public programs and democratic rights that empower working class people. His candidacy could help expand both the progressive movement and the democratic socialist voice within that movement." #WeNeedBernie


3. Creation of the Progressive Caucus is credited to Bernie Sanders. The groups in the radical network include a) the Congressional Progressive Caucus, b) the Congressional Black Caucus, c) the Populist Caucus, and the d) Progressive Democrats of America.

a. Allied with the above is ACORN, SEIU, and the Institute for Policy Studies

b. And, indirectly, the Center for American Progress and the Apollo Alliance.



Socialist, communist, whatever....distinctions without difference.

A post that has nothing to do with what I posted. As usual.

Answering only yes or no

Is Bernie a Nazi?[/QUOTE]



Your post #85:
"Neither Clinton nor Sanders are Marxists."


You're not even a good liar.

 

[NYcarbineer]

The OP believes modern day Germany is still a Nazi country and yet she supports giving Germany military aid. I think that makes the OP a Nazi sympathizer.

Where is a quote of mine that says that?


You can't help lying.....it's what Liberals do.

You support the US membership in NATO. Deny it.

You believe modern Germany is a socialist country, and you equate Nazism and Socialism. Deny it.

 

[NYcarbineer]

(...are the Democrats starting to worry, with a Marxist-Socialist running as their presidential nominee??
Ya' think?)

.

Neither Clinton nor Sanders are Marxists.

1.Michael Harrington, founder of the Democratic Socialists of America, the DSA., knew that infiltration of the Democratic Party was primary, and it already contained all of the progressive elements The Eduard Bernstein Internet Archive Socialism time line. The DSA remains the principle branch of the Socialist International, whose primary goal is global governance under worldwide socialism.

a. The SI boasts it is successor to the First International of Karl Marx, 1864. “Ever since its inception in 1951, the Socialist International has made cosmetic efforts to distance itself from communist socialists.”
Congressional Socialists No Longer in the Marxist Closet 1
and
The Grasp of Socialist International

2. "#WeNeedBernie
Senator Bernie Sanders (I-VT) has announced that he is officially running as a candidate for President in 2016 to further a desperately needed political revolution in the USA.

Senator Sanders is a lifelong champion of the public programs and democratic rights that empower working class people. His candidacy could help expand both the progressive movement and the democratic socialist voice within that movement." #WeNeedBernie


3. Creation of the Progressive Caucus is credited to Bernie Sanders. The groups in the radical network include a) the Congressional Progressive Caucus, b) the Congressional Black Caucus, c) the Populist Caucus, and the d) Progressive Democrats of America.

a. Allied with the above is ACORN, SEIU, and the Institute for Policy Studies

b. And, indirectly, the Center for American Progress and the Apollo Alliance.



Socialist, communist, whatever....distinctions without difference.

A post that has nothing to do with what I posted. As usual.

Answering only yes or no

Is Bernie a Nazi?

Your post #85:
"Neither Clinton nor Sanders are Marxists."


You're not even a good liar.[/QUOTE]

I also asked you to explain why Sanders is a Nazi. Is he or is he not?

 

[NYcarbineer]

(...are the Democrats starting to worry, with a Marxist-Socialist running as their presidential nominee??
Ya' think?)

.

Neither Clinton nor Sanders are Marxists.

1.Michael Harrington, founder of the Democratic Socialists of America, the DSA., knew that infiltration of the Democratic Party was primary, and it already contained all of the progressive elements The Eduard Bernstein Internet Archive Socialism time line. The DSA remains the principle branch of the Socialist International, whose primary goal is global governance under worldwide socialism.

a. The SI boasts it is successor to the First International of Karl Marx, 1864. “Ever since its inception in 1951, the Socialist International has made cosmetic efforts to distance itself from communist socialists.”
Congressional Socialists No Longer in the Marxist Closet 1
and
The Grasp of Socialist International

2. "#WeNeedBernie
Senator Bernie Sanders (I-VT) has announced that he is officially running as a candidate for President in 2016 to further a desperately needed political revolution in the USA.

Senator Sanders is a lifelong champion of the public programs and democratic rights that empower working class people. His candidacy could help expand both the progressive movement and the democratic socialist voice within that movement." #WeNeedBernie


3. Creation of the Progressive Caucus is credited to Bernie Sanders. The groups in the radical network include a) the Congressional Progressive Caucus, b) the Congressional Black Caucus, c) the Populist Caucus, and the d) Progressive Democrats of America.

a. Allied with the above is ACORN, SEIU, and the Institute for Policy Studies

b. And, indirectly, the Center for American Progress and the Apollo Alliance.



Socialist, communist, whatever....distinctions without difference.

A post that has nothing to do with what I posted. As usual.

Answering only yes or no

Is Bernie a Nazi?

Your post #85:
"Neither Clinton nor Sanders are Marxists."


You're not even a good liar.[/QUOTE]

Marxists don't believe in private business as part of the economy. Both Clinton and Sanders do. They can't be Marxists.

 

[PoliticalChic]

1. "What?" I hear you say. "Socialists in the Congress of the United States? Dozens, dear reader, dozens. And they make no secret of it. Although of late it has been refurbished and the address altered, they have their own web site. They call themselves the "Progressive Caucus," until recently an arm of the Democratic Socialists of America, itself an arm of the Socialist International. The Progressive Caucus may be a separate entity now, but the details of its program, as advertised on the web site (www.dsausa.org/pc/pc.caucus.html), are indistinguishable from that of the Socialist International.” .” The Riddle That Isn't
The riddle that isn't

 

[PoliticalChic]

1. The Socialist International boasts it is successor to the First International of Karl Marx, 1864. “Ever since its inception in 1951, the Socialist International has made cosmetic efforts to distance itself from communist socialists.” The Grasp of Socialist International

2. “”The Socialist International carries the torch for Karl Marx, Friedrich Engels, V.I. Lenin, Leon Trotzky, and Josef Stalin. Pay no attention to the desperate attempts by socialists to distance themselves from Stalin. For our purposes, it suffices to observe that every single tenet of the Socialist International is the exact opposite of the principles upon which America was founded, and which define the U.S. Constitution. DSA/USA, the "Democratic Socialists of America" are the U.S. arm of the Socialist International. They share the symbol of the fist holding the rose, and they share the tasks to be accomplished - in our case, an altogether different America. You may verify all this at www.dsausa.org.
Putting the Cards on the Table

 

[NYcarbineer]

The OP believes modern day Germany is still a Nazi country and yet she supports giving Germany military aid. I think that makes the OP a Nazi sympathizer.

Where is a quote of mine that says that?


You can't help lying.....it's what Liberals do.

You don't deny either because you don't want to eat one of your own past quotes.

 

[NYcarbineer]

1. "What?" I hear you say. "Socialists in the Congress of the United States? Dozens, dear reader, dozens. And they make no secret of it. Although of late it has been refurbished and the address altered, they have their own web site. They call themselves the "Progressive Caucus," until recently an arm of the Democratic Socialists of America, itself an arm of the Socialist International. The Progressive Caucus may be a separate entity now, but the details of its program, as advertised on the web site (www.dsausa.org/pc/pc.caucus.html), are indistinguishable from that of the Socialist International.” .” The Riddle That Isn't
The riddle that isn't

So you admit that every Democratic Socialist country in Europe is the equivalent of Nazism, and yet you want to aid them militarily?

Why do you want to give aid and comfort to Nazis?

 

[flacaltenn]

Communism and fascism in Europe were kinda like todays Bloods and the Crips in the ghetto. Same agenda and goals. In reality almost zero difference except leadership.

Both wanted to be the top gang and rule their hood (europe). ......

The reason folks are confused are that they measure political positions on a ONE dimensional scale. Left wingers to Right Wingers. That simply does not work..

The REAL differences can only be seen when you position these philosophies on a 2 dimensional scale that allows for a degree of authoritarianism for both economic and social liberties. While Communism exerts FULL central control on economic liberties -- It's SOCIAL outlook was COMPLETELY different from the Nat. Socialists in Germany. By suppressing BOTH measures of freedom -- the Nazis win the authoritarian trophy..

But at the same time -- we also learn how many constituents you can kill with just economic policy and the expanded powers of a state ALLOWED to enforce that regime under Communism..

Can't EVER get ALL your leftists straight on a one dimensional line chart. .

 

[Agit8r]

"How can Communism be thought possible in the most individualistic country in the world? It is only possible where every man is a number, not in Italy where every man is an individual, and more, has individuality."
-- Benito Mussolini; from speech at Trieste, 20th September 1920

"The Jewish doctrine of Marxism rejects the aristocratic principle in nature, and in place of the eternal privilege of force and strength sets up the mass and dead weight of numbers. It thus denies the value of the individual among men"
-- Adolf Hitler; from 'Mein Kampf'