The CCP must be removed

[P@triot]

How do you envision that happening, and what role would YOU be willing to play?

I've explained this many times already. I cannot help it if your intellect is limited to 8 word fortune cookie sentences.

 

[Rigby5]

No one is buying the horseshit that the Soviet Union wasn't communist/socialist. How do you put everyone in a cooperative without taking their property first?

A wealthy minority forcing things on everyone else, is not communism.
That is capitalism.
All monarchs, dictators, feudal baron, etc., in all of history are all out for their own profit, so are capitalists.

Communism may put the means of production into a cooperative, but it has to be for the benefit of all to do that.
If it is just to benefit a few, that is capitalism.

 

[HenryBHough]

There is absolutely no place in the 21st century for communism. None.

It is time the entire international community ban together and permanently remove Xi Jinping and the CCP from power.

Top Secret US intelligence study concluded COVID-19 could have leaked from a Chinese lab | Blaze Media

The conclusion reached by the previously undisclosed study counters recent reports from World Health Organization investigators

www.theblaze.com

Oh but there IS a place for it! It's in Washington, D.C. where it landed in January.

 

[Rigby5]

Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (someone should teach you how to use Google).

But that aside sweetie…quick lesson on propaganda. As you can see with North Korea here, dictators and oppressive governments employ tactics to make themselves look better - not worse, dummy

A capitalist, free society would not call themselves communists in an attempt to “trick” the world.

Capitalist call their system a "free society" when it clearly isn't, so they will call it anything they think will help make them more wealthy.
The reality is that any capitalist society is never free, and in fact is always the most repressive and costly.
That is the whole point of capitalism, the most profits for a few.

 

[Rigby5]

Wrong it is a relatively new idea. A political ideology invented in the 19th cenury and based on tyranny and slavery.

It is not as some people believe some idea of communal living.

Not true,
Communism is as old as human society.

{...
Many historical groups have been considered as following forms of communism. Karl Marx and other early communist theorists believed that hunter-gatherer societies as were found in the Paleolithic through to horticultural societies as found in the Chalcolithic were essentially egalitarian and he, therefore, termed their ideology to be primitive communism.[8] One of the first writers to espouse a belief in the primitive communism of the past was the Roman Stoic philosopher Seneca who stated," How happy was the primitive age when the bounties of nature lay in common...They held all nature in common which gave them secure possession of the public wealth."[9] Because of this he believed that such primitive societies were the richest as there was no poverty.[9] Other Greco-Roman writers that believed in a prehistoric humanity that practiced communism include Diodorus Siculus, Virgil, and Ovid.[10] Similarly the early Church Fathers, like their pagan predecessors, maintained that humans society had declined to its current state from a now lost egalitarian social order.[11]

Around the late 5th century BC in Ancient Greece, ideas similar to communism were becoming widespread to the extent that they were parodied by the dramatist Aristophanes in his comedy The Assemblywomen in which the women of Athens seize control of the Ecclesia or city government and abolish all private property while making the sharing or women and the collective rearing of children mandatory.[12] Over a decade later in Plato's Republic Socrates declares that an ideal state would eliminate all forms of private property among the elite of society to the extent that even children and wives are shared.[13][14] He asserts that such practices would prevent internal conflict within a society and promote a sense of unity and common identity.[15] Around AD 500 in Iran, the Zoroastrian priest and reformist Mazdak purportedly founded a movement preaching religious communism while under the patronage of the Sassanian King Kavad I who initially supported the priest and his reforms, but later had the Mazdakians repressed and Mazdak executed.[16]

Developments in Christian communism​

Main articles: Christian communism and Communalism
Early Christianity supported a form of common ownership based on the teachings in the New Testament which emphasised sharing.[11] For example, in the Book of Acts the passages Acts 2:44-45 and Acts 4:32-45 state all believers held their possessions communally and would distribute goods based on need.[17] Additionally, the related Jewish sect known as the Essenes was committed to, "social and material egalitarianism."[18] Despite these practices falling into decline even before the era of Constantine, the principles of sharing property and holding goods in common continued within the Christian traditions of monasticism.[11][18]

From the High Middle Ages to the early modern period in Europe, various groups supporting Christian communist and communalist ideas were occasionally adopted by reformist Christian sects. An early 12th century proto-protestant group originating in Lyon, Kingdom of Burgundy-Arles known as the Waldensians held their property in common in accordance with the Book of Acts, but were persecuted by the Catholic Church and retreated to the Piedmont.[19] Around 1300 the Apostolic Brethren in northern Italy were taken over by Fra Dolcino who formed a sect known as the Dulcinians which advocated ending feudalism, dissolving hierarchies in the church, and holding all property in common.[19] The 14th century English scholastic and founder of Lollardy, John Wycliffe, preached of an idealized Christian state with collective ownership and disapproved of those rejecting the, "common charity and common property of Christian men."[20][21][22]:54 Around the same time the revolutionary priest John Ball, who was later executed for his prominent role in the doomed Wat Tyler Rebellion allegedly declared, "things cannot go well in England, nor ever will, until all goods are held in common."[23]
...}

History of communism - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

All hunter/gatherer tribes are always communist.

 

[Rigby5]

The employer does not dictate those things the market does.

No, the market does not decide what an employer wants to do.
The employer has to decide, based on things like expertise, long term stability vs quick maximum profits, business resale, etc.
When ever someone makes a new market like they have for EVs, that is not dictated by the market, but instead takes years of marketing in order to create the market for it.

 

[bripat9643]

A wealthy minority forcing things on everyone else, is not communism.
That is capitalism.

Nope. That's communism. No one forces any to purchase anything under capitalism.

All monarchs, dictators, feudal baron, etc., in all of history are all out for their own profit, so are capitalists.

So are communists.

Communism may put the means of production into a cooperative, but it has to be for the benefit of all to do that.
If it is just to benefit a few, that is capitalism.

It's never for the benefit of all. That's a fairy tale.

Of course, this discussion is all pointless since communism is a triangle with four sides. It's a contradiction.

 

[Rigby5]

Communism is at its heart old fashioned totalitarian dictatorship

Sorry, I disagree.
Communism is at its heart, sharing, like any normal human society always does.
It is capitalism, that is centered solely on profits and materialism, that always wants to create a totalitarian dictatorship.

Just go back and look at history before Marx is you want to be impartial.
And monarchs, conquistadors, Genghis Khan, Atilla the Hun, Alexander the Great, Napoleon, etc., are all capitalists.

 

[bripat9643]

Capitalist call their system a "free society" when it clearly isn't, so they will call it anything they think will help make them more wealthy.
The reality is that any capitalist society is never free, and in fact is always the most repressive and costly.
That is the whole point of capitalism, the most profits for a few.

No society is "free" from the laws of nature, but that's exactly what you mean by a "free society."

Painful experience has proven that communism is the most repressive kind of society there is.

 

[Rigby5]

I'm pleased you cleared that up.
Why are republicans so against the CCP if they are not communist any more?
Why does America invade countries like Vietnam and Iraq trying to democratize them?

Republicans would be against anyone they can't make a profit from
But republicans are not against the CCP, and if you remember, it was Nixon who opened up western trade to China.
America invades countries like Vietnam and Iraq because the US arms dealers want war profits.
We never wanted democracies in any other country.
We tried to destroy democracy in Vietnam and installed a series of brutal dictators, like Diem, Theiu, Ky, etc.
We installed a religious Shiite dictatorship in Iraq.

 

[Rigby5]

No society is "free" from the laws of nature, but that's exactly what you mean by a "free society."

Painful experience has proven that communism is the most repressive kind of society there is.

The laws of nature regarding human beings, is that we are all communal, cooperative, and collective by nature, just like Meerkats.

We have no experience with communism on a country wide scale, because real communists are too trusting and get bumped off by capitalists all the time.

 

[Colin norris]

Republicans would be against anyone they can't make a profit from
But republicans are not against the CCP, and if you remember, it was Nixon who opened up western trade to China.
America invades countries like Vietnam and Iraq because the US arms dealers want war profits.
We never wanted democracies in any other country.
We tried to destroy democracy in Vietnam and installed a series of brutal dictators, like Diem, Theiu, Ky, etc.
We installed a religious Shiite dictatorship in Iraq.

In fact it was gough Whitlam from Australia who was there before Nixon.
If republicans don't mind CCP, why are you all demanding an inquiry, fearful of the a communist takeover and generally hate them. Don't give me tgatcrap that you love them. Fuck off. You're my Iying.

You went into Iraq to secure the oil because Saddam was putting it on the market cheaper than anyone because America placed sanctions on him.
You know nothing.
You went into Vietnam to stop the north vietnamese who were communist,from invading them. It was a democracy but You obviously didn't know that.

Clearly you have no idea. Instead of having a wild swing at me because you don't like criticism, go and get some facts. You're a fool

 

[Colin norris]

china is opposed in USA because they're a competitor that is expected to overtake US economy in year 2032.

As for invading other countries to democratize them, thats just a façade to justify attacking a perceived threat. Iraq was a threat to its neighbors. Vietnam was just fear of communism 50 years ago. But today there are six billionaires in Vietnam, and China has nearly 700 billionaires.

Who cares. History shows they were massive defeats. Add Afghanistan to that now.

 

[Rigby5]

In fact it was gough Whitlam from Australia who was there before Nixon.
If republicans don't mind CCP, why are you all demanding an inquiry, fearful of the a communist takeover and generally hate them. Don't give me tgatcrap that you love them. Fuck off. You're my Iying.

You went into Iraq to secure the oil because Saddam was putting it on the market cheaper than anyone because America placed sanctions on him.
You know nothing.
You went into Vietnam to stop the north vietnamese who were communist,from invading them. It was a democracy but You obviously didn't know that.

Clearly you have no idea. Instead of having a wild swing at me because you don't like criticism, go and get some facts. You're a fool

How could an Australian lift US economic sanctions on China?
Clearly it was Nixon who did that, and it turned out terribly.

We blockaded Saddam and would not let him sell any oil except a small amount that we would exchange for food.
The program was called OFF, Oil For Food.

South Vietnam was not a democracy. It originally was under Bau Dai, but we encouraged the military to over throw the democracy and establish Diem as a dictator in 1955, later Theiu and Ky were also military dictators. When we were there, South Vietnam was always a dictatorship.

 

[Unkotare]

I've explained this many times already. I cannot help it if your intellect is limited to 8 word fortune cookie sentences.

That’s not an answer.

 

[Colin norris]

How could an Australian lift US economic sanctions on China?
Clearly it was Nixon who did that, and it turned out terribly.

We blockaded Saddam and would not let him sell any oil except a small amount that we would exchange for food.
The program was called OFF, Oil For Food.

South Vietnam was not a democracy. It originally was under Bau Dai, but we encouraged the military to over throw the democracy and establish Diem as a dictator in 1955, later Theiu and Ky were also military dictators. When we were there, South Vietnam was always a dictatorship.

The Australian didn't lift US sanctions.
Many governments were allied to the US and told to not trade with them.
Whitlam said fuck the Americans and went and traded with them before Nixon who eventually realised the country wouldn't collapse if they did also.

Saddam. You sanctioned him and he also said fuck America, I'll sell my oil where I like. Rumsfeld, rice and Cheney with their oil investments didn't like that so convinced GWB to go and kill him.
They first thing Saddam did was light all the oil wells. Does that ring a bell dickhead?. The first priority was to extinguish them. Are you warming up to it now?
In fact, oil was stolen from Iraq by Bush and taken to the gulf if Mexico and redeposited into empty wells. Never mind helping the remaining Iraqis rebuilt their economy. No siree. Steal as much oil as we can.

 

[Colin norris]

The Australian didn't lift US sanctions.
Many governments were allied to the US and told to not trade with them.
Whitlam said fuck the Americans and went and traded with them before Nixon who eventually realised the country wouldn't collapse if they did also.

Saddam. You sanctioned him and he also said fuck America, I'll sell my oil where I like. Rumsfeld, rice and Cheney with their oil investments didn't like that so convinced GWB to go and kill him.
They first thing Saddam did was light all the oil wells. Does that ring a bell dickhead?. The first priority was to extinguish them. Are you warming up to it now?
In fact, oil was stolen from Iraq by Bush and taken to the gulf if Mexico and redeposited into empty wells. Never mind helping the remaining Iraqis rebuilt their economy. No siree. Steal as much oil as we can.

Here is the history of Vietnam. Note it became a republic like the USA and was recognised by the USA.
I'd check your facts before you blow off again. You have a habit of being loose with the truth.

South Vietnam, officially the Republic of Vietnam (RVN; Vietnamese: Việt Nam Cộng Hòa; French: République du Viêt Nam), was a country that existed from 1955 to 1975, the period when the southern portion of Vietnam was a member of the Western Bloc during part of the Cold War. It first received international recognition in 1949 as the State of Vietnam within the French Union, with its capital at Saigon (renamed to Ho Chi Minh City in 1976), before becoming a republic in 1955. South Vietnam was bordered by North Vietnam to the north, Laos to the northwest, Cambodia to the southwest, and Thailand across the Gulf of Thailand to the southwest. Its sovereignty was recognized by the United States and 87 other nations, though it failed to gain admission into the United Nations as a result of a Soviet veto in 1957.[1][2]

Republic of Vietnam
Việt-Nam Cộng-Hòa (Vietnamese)
République du Viêt Nam (French)
1955–1975
Flag of South Vietnam
Flag
Coat of arms (1963–1975) of South Vietnam
Coat of arms
(1963–1975)
Motto: "Tổ Quốc – Danh Dự – Trách Nhiệm"
(English: "Fatherland – Honor – Duty")
Anthem: Tiếng Gọi Công Dân
(English: "Call to the Citizens")
South Vietnam (red) in 1972.
South Vietnam (red) in 1972.
Capital
and largest city
Saigon
10°48′N 106°39′E
Official languages
Vietnamese
Spoken languages
French, English
Religion
Buddhism
Catholicism
Confucianism
Taoism
Folk religions
Caodaism
Hoahaoism
Demonym(s)
Vietnamese
Government
Presidential republic (1955–1956)
Unitary presidential constitutional republic (1956–1963)
Military dictatorship (1963–1967)
Unitary multi-party presidential republic (1967–1969)
Dominant-party presidential constitutional republic (1969–1975)
President

 

[Soupnazi630]

I'm pleased you cleared that up.
Why are republicans so against the CCP if they are not communist any more?
Why does America invade countries like Vietnam and Iraq trying to democratize them?

We did not invade VIetnam

 

[Soupnazi630]

Not true,
Communism is as old as human society.

{...
Many historical groups have been considered as following forms of communism. Karl Marx and other early communist theorists believed that hunter-gatherer societies as were found in the Paleolithic through to horticultural societies as found in the Chalcolithic were essentially egalitarian and he, therefore, termed their ideology to be primitive communism.[8] One of the first writers to espouse a belief in the primitive communism of the past was the Roman Stoic philosopher Seneca who stated," How happy was the primitive age when the bounties of nature lay in common...They held all nature in common which gave them secure possession of the public wealth."[9] Because of this he believed that such primitive societies were the richest as there was no poverty.[9] Other Greco-Roman writers that believed in a prehistoric humanity that practiced communism include Diodorus Siculus, Virgil, and Ovid.[10] Similarly the early Church Fathers, like their pagan predecessors, maintained that humans society had declined to its current state from a now lost egalitarian social order.[11]

Around the late 5th century BC in Ancient Greece, ideas similar to communism were becoming widespread to the extent that they were parodied by the dramatist Aristophanes in his comedy The Assemblywomen in which the women of Athens seize control of the Ecclesia or city government and abolish all private property while making the sharing or women and the collective rearing of children mandatory.[12] Over a decade later in Plato's Republic Socrates declares that an ideal state would eliminate all forms of private property among the elite of society to the extent that even children and wives are shared.[13][14] He asserts that such practices would prevent internal conflict within a society and promote a sense of unity and common identity.[15] Around AD 500 in Iran, the Zoroastrian priest and reformist Mazdak purportedly founded a movement preaching religious communism while under the patronage of the Sassanian King Kavad I who initially supported the priest and his reforms, but later had the Mazdakians repressed and Mazdak executed.[16]

Developments in Christian communism​

Main articles: Christian communism and Communalism
Early Christianity supported a form of common ownership based on the teachings in the New Testament which emphasised sharing.[11] For example, in the Book of Acts the passages Acts 2:44-45 and Acts 4:32-45 state all believers held their possessions communally and would distribute goods based on need.[17] Additionally, the related Jewish sect known as the Essenes was committed to, "social and material egalitarianism."[18] Despite these practices falling into decline even before the era of Constantine, the principles of sharing property and holding goods in common continued within the Christian traditions of monasticism.[11][18]

From the High Middle Ages to the early modern period in Europe, various groups supporting Christian communist and communalist ideas were occasionally adopted by reformist Christian sects. An early 12th century proto-protestant group originating in Lyon, Kingdom of Burgundy-Arles known as the Waldensians held their property in common in accordance with the Book of Acts, but were persecuted by the Catholic Church and retreated to the Piedmont.[19] Around 1300 the Apostolic Brethren in northern Italy were taken over by Fra Dolcino who formed a sect known as the Dulcinians which advocated ending feudalism, dissolving hierarchies in the church, and holding all property in common.[19] The 14th century English scholastic and founder of Lollardy, John Wycliffe, preached of an idealized Christian state with collective ownership and disapproved of those rejecting the, "common charity and common property of Christian men."[20][21][22]:54 Around the same time the revolutionary priest John Ball, who was later executed for his prominent role in the doomed Wat Tyler Rebellion allegedly declared, "things cannot go well in England, nor ever will, until all goods are held in common."[23]
...}

History of communism - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

All hunter/gatherer tribes are always communist.

Quite wrong.

You are confusing communism with communal

Communism is a strictly modern ideology of authoritarian tyranny and slavery. Exaclty what marx described. It has nothing whatsoever to do with consensual communal living.

 

[Soupnazi630]

No, the market does not decide what an employer wants to do.
The employer has to decide, based on things like expertise, long term stability vs quick maximum profits, business resale, etc.
When ever someone makes a new market like they have for EVs, that is not dictated by the market, but instead takes years of marketing in order to create the market for it.

Yes indedd the market forces employers what to do/.

If no one buys what you maske the market destroys your business it is THAT simple