The Hidden Threat of Communism in America

[San Souci]

Maybe more socialist than Republicans, but definitely not communist. We still believe that the vote of the people is what matters and not getting people all riled up i and attempting to cause violent change.

Using the Gestapo to silence opposition is Communist. Democrats are doing that.

 

[San Souci]

Correction, I keep forgetting I'm not a Democrat. I should have said they instead of we. I'm actually an independent and I stand strongly with the Democrats against this wave of Republican authoritarianism and radicalization of their members.

Antifa vote Democrat. So do BLM. So do all Islamists.

 

[Stann]

Using the Gestapo to silence opposition is Communist. Democrats are doing that.

The only thing that resembled the Gestapo were your people on January 6th.

 

[miketx]

Good. You're a dolt.

Eat a dick.

 

[miketx]

Women don't even have autonomy over their own bodies now. And the Republican idiots are starting to talk against gays again. That's not progress that's going backwards.

Liar. Butcher wants to kill babies.

 

[miketx]

The only thing that resembled the Gestapo were your people on January 6th.

Goebbels sez what?

 

[Senter]

Certainly none of what you've described.

You're saying you agree with none of what I described? How is it not true and accurate?

I believe that government is their to protect individual rights, to protect our freedom to run society however we wish, collaboratively and voluntarily.

Is that what our government does? Every violation of what you described here is done to serve corporatocracy.

Anything beyond that should have a) minimal impact on individual rights, and b) broad census support.

Most importantly I can't get behind the notion that government is responsible for making sure society and the economy "run smoothly". I think government should serve as the referee, but you seem to want it to be the coach.

No. Not at all. I neither said that nor was it my meaning. Consider this: The government currently acts to facilitate and protect and even reward (via tax law mainly) the richest, most powerful corporations. At one time (1943) the top tax bracket was over 90%. Actually that was done to benefit our economic system, which I can explain. But today it is under 40%, and that was done to benefit the rich. But here's the result: By the end of 2021 the total US wealth was $142 trillion. The bottom half wealth was $3.73 trillion. The top half wealth was $138.45 trillion. The top half owned 97.45% of the wealth. The top 1% wealth was more than $60 trillion. Income follows a similar storyline.

That is not the economy most of us want but it is the economy government gives us. What I meant was that government IS responsible for how the economy affects us. There are labor laws, pollution laws, regulations on shipping, product safety, banking laws, laws regulating refrigerants and disposal, business licensing, laws relating to the currency, and a few thousand other laws regulating economic activity. And if government withdrew all such management of economic issues, the economy would fall apart in chaos. I'm not saying such issues are managed suitably. I'm not saying I approve. I'm saying that is how it is. And it needs to be changed.

You say you "believe that government is their(sic) to protect individual rights, to protect our freedom to run society however we wish, collaboratively and voluntarily."

Please elaborate on the idea of government being there "to protect individual rights, to protect our freedom to run society however we wish, collaboratively and voluntarily" with special attention to the underlined part. That seems odd.

 

[Senter]

Eat a dick.

You're also a child in need of a spanking.

 

[scruffy]

When an economic system fails to serve a large part of the citizenry it's time to find a better way.

"Serve"? WTF are you bleating about? The nanny state is not here to SERVE your sorry ass.

If capitalism is allowed to continue the planet's construction is eminent.

They keep saying that, but all the infrastructure money gets siphoned off to unions and then donated back to the Demohive.

We can no longer afford it.

lol

And your alternative is ... something even less efficient?

 

[Stann]

"Serve"? WTF are you bleating about? The nanny state is not here to SERVE your sorry ass.



They keep saying that, but all the infrastructure money gets siphoned off to unions and then donated back to the Demohive.



lol

And your alternative is ... something even less efficient?

I don't know what the future will bring, but hopefully it will have less judgmental and ignorant people in it. There's got to be a better way than endless selfish materialism, and a system geared in favor of the ultra-minority super-rich.

 

[scruffy]

I don't know what the future will bring, but hopefully it will have less judgmental and ignorant people in it.

(slaps forehead)

Human nature hasn't changed in ten thousand years.

And it won't change in the next ten thousand either.

There's got to be a better way than endless selfish materialism, and a system geared in favor of the ultra-minority super-rich.

Selfish materialism? You have to eat and pay the rent, it's like a tax for being alive.

 

[Stann]

(slaps forehead)

Human nature hasn't changed in ten thousand years.

And it won't change in the next ten thousand either.



Selfish materialism? You have to eat and pay the rent, it's like a tax for being alive.

You overlooked the inequities.

 

[elektra]

It seems to me that we ALL need to get back to basics in order to understand where we're going and why. And to me, that mean developing consensus regarding the role of the state/government. "Why do we have government?" "What is the highest-level notion of the role(s) of government?"

Once we get that established, the job of determining how to get there should be much easier.

The constitution defines exactly what you speak of.

 

[Senter]

The constitution defines exactly what you speak of.

Then why do both left, right, and center want to change it? But more to the point, you don't know what I speak of, because what I speak of is the basis for any constitution of any nation. A constitution is an elaboration and an application of that which I'm speaking of.

 

[dblack]

Then why do both left, right, and center want to change it?

LOL - because they want more power.

 

[dblack]

You're saying you agree with none of what I described? How is it not true and accurate?

Ah... my bad. I thought you were describing what you think the purpose of government ought to be. If you're just describing the current sorry state of affairs, I suppose it was accurate enough.

You say you "believe that government is their(sic) to protect individual rights, to protect our freedom to run society however we wish, collaboratively and voluntarily."

Please elaborate on the idea of government being there "to protect individual rights, to protect our freedom to run society however we wish, collaboratively and voluntarily" with special attention to the underlined part. That seems odd.

I don't think running society is a valid purpose for government. We can do that ourselves without coercive state mandates.

 

[elektra]

Then why do both left, right, and center want to change it? But more to the point, you don't know what I speak of, because what I speak of is the basis for any constitution of any nation. A constitution is an elaboration and an application of that which I'm speaking of.

I have never ever heard of the center or the right wishing to change the constitution.

I certainly dont understand your comment, explain if you could.

 

[miketx]

I have never ever heard of the center or the right wishing to change the constitution.

I certainly dont understand your comment, explain if you could.

He's just lying like always.

 

[Senter]

Ah... my bad. I thought you were describing what you think the purpose of government ought to be. If you're just describing the current sorry state of affairs, I suppose it was accurate enough.

I was describing what it always is and must be. If you want to live in society with an economy, you must have a government. If you want to live and do anything, you must have breath in your nostrils.

I don't think running society is a valid purpose for government. We can do that ourselves without coercive state mandates.

From the first day people lived in communities whether in caves or in tents of hides, they formed what we can call "governments" to facilitate, protect, and organize their collective lives. So "running society" has always been the main and valid purpose for government. Random individuals can't do it. They would automatically form "vigilante" groups to enforce order of their choice. And how would random individuals prevent or end it as random individuals? The only way they could do it would be to form a counter-organization ...... a "government".

 

[Senter]

I have never ever heard of the center or the right wishing to change the constitution.

LMAO!!!!!!!!

OF COURSE YOU SAY THAT!!!!!! LOL!!!!!