socialist congress members. WOW 70 Dems

[Artevelde]

LOL.

YOu must have missed some of the more outspoken ones that run the halls of the DNC.

Exhibit A:

Maxine Waters (D) Slip of the Tongue Reveals True Intentions (Socialism for America) - YouTube

Maxine Waters? Come on. She's just too plain stupid to even know what socialism is.

 

[Artevelde]

I've met a fair number of American politicians and observed a lot more and I've yet to see the first real socialist among them in my lifetime. Even Bernie Sanders doesn't really qualify.

There once were socialists in the US, but for the last 60 years or so they've been a completely fringe phenomenon.

Utter horseshit.

I stand in awe of your reasoning and argument.

 

[bripat9643]

I've met a fair number of American politicians and observed a lot more and I've yet to see the first real socialist among them in my lifetime. Even Bernie Sanders doesn't really qualify.

There once were socialists in the US, but for the last 60 years or so they've been a completely fringe phenomenon.

Exactly. In all fairness, now, Sanders might advocate real socialism if it were politically possible; then again, he might not. He might be more of a European-type "socialist." He's in the Senate, so it's hard to be sure.

Your pretension that there's any practical difference between the various infestations of socialists is absurd.

10,000 labratory rats might percieve vast differences between each other, but to the researches in the lab, they are indistinguishable. That's the kind of difference that you're quibbling about.

 

[bripat9643]

LOL.

YOu must have missed some of the more outspoken ones that run the halls of the DNC.

Exhibit A:

Maxine Waters (D) Slip of the Tongue Reveals True Intentions (Socialism for America) - YouTube

Maxine Waters? Come on. She's just too plain stupid to even know what socialism is.

That's true of most socialists. That doesn't prevent them from endorsing socialist policies.

 

[boilermaker55]

Well McCarthy had considerable success with, I have in my hand 205 names of communists working in the State Department. That was the beginning of America's second red scare and I wonder if we are now embarking on a third red scare? The period and McCarthy terrified many Americans and then as a Congressional committee held hearings and McCarthy spoke before the TV cameras and the American people and the Red Scare died as did McCarthy. It might work again but who will play McCarthy?

Americans should be scared. McCarthy simply told the truth about America's internal enemies. Every person who took the 5th before Congress was later proven to be a soviet spy or a member of the Communist Party.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!
Thanks for the laugh.
Want to be afraid of something, dream something and wake up and realize the boogeyman really lives.
You and your ilk are a joke.

 

[PoliticalChic]

LOL.

YOu must have missed some of the more outspoken ones that run the halls of the DNC.

Exhibit A:

Maxine Waters (D) Slip of the Tongue Reveals True Intentions (Socialism for America) - YouTube

Maxine Waters? Come on. She's just too plain stupid to even know what socialism is.

Congrats.

You've managed to produce some to the weakest arguments to ignore the obvious yet produced.

 

[bripat9643]

Not at all. You expressed them in extreme terms. In those extreme terms, I do NOT endorse them. What you are demonstrating is your inability to distinguish between an extreme and a more moderate position; to you, anything to the left of your own extreme position is Communist.

That's absurd, of course. But keep it up. You're discrediting yourself very nicely.

Can you describe how a moderate expropriation of wealth above a certain amount would work? A moderate nationalization of private industry above a certain size?

Can I describe how a moderate extreme position would work? Of course not. You are using words that mandate an extreme, and as such I disagree with those positions.

You've already admitted that you endorse nationalization of private industry above a certain size. So explain how the "moderate" version of that policy would work.

 

[Artevelde]

LOL.

YOu must have missed some of the more outspoken ones that run the halls of the DNC.

Exhibit A:

Maxine Waters (D) Slip of the Tongue Reveals True Intentions (Socialism for America) - YouTube

Maxine Waters? Come on. She's just too plain stupid to even know what socialism is.

Congrats.

You've managed to produce some to the weakest arguments to ignore the obvious yet produced.

Could you translate that into English for me please?

 

[Dragon]

Can you describe how a moderate expropriation of wealth above a certain amount would work? A moderate nationalization of private industry above a certain size?

Can I describe how a moderate extreme position would work? Of course not. You are using words that mandate an extreme, and as such I disagree with those positions.

You've already admitted that you endorse nationalization of private industry above a certain size.

No, I haven't. What I have done is to say that we are going to have to come up with a different way to distribute wealth besides wages paid for work. Advances in automation mean that wages won't do the job anymore. Nationalizing big business would be one way to do that; I don't claim it's the only one, and I'd be happy to entertain alternative suggestions.

 

[Artevelde]

Can I describe how a moderate extreme position would work? Of course not. You are using words that mandate an extreme, and as such I disagree with those positions.

You've already admitted that you endorse nationalization of private industry above a certain size.

No, I haven't. What I have done is to say that we are going to have to come up with a different way to distribute wealth besides wages paid for work. Advances in automation mean that wages won't do the job anymore. Nationalizing big business would be one way to do that; I don't claim it's the only one, and I'd be happy to entertain alternative suggestions.

Even assuming it would be the task of the state to "distribute" wealth, historical experience teaches us that nationalization of industries is a better way of distributing economic decline and relative decline in wealth.

 

[TakeAStepBack]

Maxine Waters? Come on. She's just too plain stupid to even know what socialism is.

Congrats.

You've managed to produce some to the weakest arguments to ignore the obvious yet produced.

Could you translate that into English for me please?

I'll do it for you. She begins by saying "This liberal will be all about social...er, um....um....Basically we will take over all of your companies.."

She's advocating openly the expropriation of private enterprise into the hands of government. That is socialism. She''s dumb, buut so are most socialists as they clearly are "going on a feeling" and not using any logical basis in reality of what exactly it is they mean to advocate.

There are more like her too. Many more. I could go on and on. But the point is clear, Brussels. Socialism is alive, well and thriving in the democrat party.

 

[Dragon]

I've met a fair number of American politicians and observed a lot more and I've yet to see the first real socialist among them in my lifetime. Even Bernie Sanders doesn't really qualify.

There once were socialists in the US, but for the last 60 years or so they've been a completely fringe phenomenon.

Exactly. In all fairness, now, Sanders might advocate real socialism if it were politically possible; then again, he might not. He might be more of a European-type "socialist." He's in the Senate, so it's hard to be sure.

Your pretension that there's any practical difference between the various infestations of socialists is absurd.

No, actually your pretense that there isn't any such difference is what's absurd. There have been European countries in which Socialist parties have held commanding majorities, and they did not implement socialist economies according to the strict definition of that term -- that is to say, their economies are still for the most part privately owned. It's entirely possible, even likely, that if Sanders could call the shots he would want to implement something like Sweden, not like the Soviet Union. We don't know that for sure because he's not in a position to call the shots, but intuitively that seems likely to be true.

 

[LogikAndReazon]

"We are the party of the African American, Mexican American, Puerto Rican, all other Latino American, Native American, Asian American, and all racially and nationally oppressed peoples, as well as women, youth, and all other working people.

The living standards of workers and the natural environment on which life depends are under constant attack due to the drive for maximum profits inherent in capitalism. Our party fights for jobs and economic security, a decent and rising standard of living, peace, justice, equality, a sustainable environment, gay rights, health care, education, affordable housing, the needs of seniors, democracy, and a fulfilling life for everyone, with socialism as our goal. Only through the abolition of the capitalist system and the socialist reorganization of society can exploitation of human beings by others, and the evils of oppression, war, racism, environmental degradation, and poverty be ended. We seek to build a socialist society which puts people and nature before profits.

Our country’s founding Revolution exalted the ideals of equality, justice, and democracy, of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness for all. Marxists have long hailed its progressive significance, while recognizing its historical limitations, chief of which was the failure to abolish slavery. The Communist Party today upholds the continuing struggle to realize these ideals. The revolutionary democratic traditions of the United States call for radical change when injustice, inequality, and exploitation become unbearably oppressive. This legacy gives us, the working class and its allies, the right and responsibility to build a new society. We advocate an expanded Bill of Rights to guarantee religious, political, and individual freedoms, but also freedom from poverty, hunger, joblessness, and racism."

CPUSA Constitution » cpusa

Progressives........... they sound, think, believe and act like communists and then wonder why theyre called reds

 

[Artevelde]

Congrats.

You've managed to produce some to the weakest arguments to ignore the obvious yet produced.

Could you translate that into English for me please?

I'll do it for you. She begins by saying "This liberal will be all about social...er, um....um....Basically we will take over all of your companies.."

She's advocating openly the expropriation of private enterprise into the hands of government. That is socialism. She''s dumb, buut so are most socialists as they clearly are "going on a feeling" and not using any logical basis in reality of what exactly it is she means.

There are more like her too. Many more. I could go on and on. But the point is clear, Brussels. Socialism is alive, well and thriving in the democrat party.

My request for a translation did not concern the incoherent rambling of Maxine Waters - who is a stupid hypocrite but hardly a socialist - but the grammatically challenged rejoinder of politicalchick.

 

[Dragon]

Even assuming it would be the task of the state to "distribute" wealth, historical experience teaches us that nationalization of industries is a better way of distributing economic decline and relative decline in wealth.

If it wants to avoid the peasants-with-pitchforks-and-torches and rich-people-hanging-from-lampposts type of event, it most certainly IS the state's task to distribute wealth, or rather to assure that wealth is distributed widely. Too much inequality leads to social unrest and eventually revolution. If you can conduct a séance, ask Louis XVI about that.

Nationalization of industry has never actually resulted in national decline, but as I said it may not be the only way to distribute wealth in the absence of work and it may not be the best way. I'm not married to the concept. It's the end that matters, not the means.

 

[bripat9643]

Can I describe how a moderate extreme position would work? Of course not. You are using words that mandate an extreme, and as such I disagree with those positions.

You've already admitted that you endorse nationalization of private industry above a certain size.

No, I haven't. What I have done is to say that we are going to have to come up with a different way to distribute wealth besides wages paid for work. Advances in automation mean that wages won't do the job anymore. Nationalizing big business would be one way to do that; I don't claim it's the only one, and I'd be happy to entertain alternative suggestions.

Either private industry pays your wage or the government pays it. There is no third alternative. You simply refuse to admit the obvious.

 

[TakeAStepBack]

Here we go. The unhinged and misguided understanding of the division of labor rides again....

 

[Dragon]

You've already admitted that you endorse nationalization of private industry above a certain size.

No, I haven't. What I have done is to say that we are going to have to come up with a different way to distribute wealth besides wages paid for work. Advances in automation mean that wages won't do the job anymore. Nationalizing big business would be one way to do that; I don't claim it's the only one, and I'd be happy to entertain alternative suggestions.

Either private industry pays your wage or the government pays it. There is no third alternative. You simply refuse to admit the obvious.

What we have hear is a failure of the imagination.

Suppose you can't get a job because all the work is being done by machines. Then neither private industry nor the government pays your wages. You just plain don't have any wages and can't get them. What happens then?

This is what we need to be thinking about. If you don't like the idea of nationalizing publicly-traded corporations, find an alternative.

 

[TakeAStepBack]

Could you translate that into English for me please?

I'll do it for you. She begins by saying "This liberal will be all about social...er, um....um....Basically we will take over all of your companies.."

She's advocating openly the expropriation of private enterprise into the hands of government. That is socialism. She''s dumb, buut so are most socialists as they clearly are "going on a feeling" and not using any logical basis in reality of what exactly it is she means.

There are more like her too. Many more. I could go on and on. But the point is clear, Brussels. Socialism is alive, well and thriving in the democrat party.

My request for a translation did not concern the incoherent rambling of Maxine Waters - who is a stupid hypocrite but hardly a socialist - but the grammatically challenged rejoinder of politicalchick.

Are you really this thick? I just posted 2 minutes of her advocating socialism openly and you say sh'e just stupid and not a socialist?

She is both. As is many others inside the democrat party.

 

[bripat9643]

Exactly. In all fairness, now, Sanders might advocate real socialism if it were politically possible; then again, he might not. He might be more of a European-type "socialist." He's in the Senate, so it's hard to be sure.

Your pretension that there's any practical difference between the various infestations of socialists is absurd.

No, actually your pretense that there isn't any such difference is what's absurd. There have been European countries in which Socialist parties have held commanding majorities, and they did not implement socialist economies according to the strict definition of that term -- that is to say, their economies are still for the most part privately owned.

That's only because when government starts going down the road to nationalization, it invariably faces widespread revolt. To continue down such a road always involves brutality and terror. So the government has only the options of retreating or converting to totalitarian state. Chile started proceeding down the road to a Soviet style command economy and the result was widespread revolt and a coup.

[It's entirely possible, even likely, that if Sanders could call the shots he would want to implement something like Sweden, not like the Soviet Union. We don't know that for sure because he's not in a position to call the shots, but intuitively that seems likely to be true.

The only thing that allows socialists such as Sanders and yourself to pose as "moderates" is the fact that it isn't politically feasible for you to accomplish your goals at this point in time.