The Hidden Threat of Communism in America

[Senter]

Oh jesus - you're playing their fucking game too???

Alright. Here ya go:

https://www.google.com/search?q=socialism&oq=socialism&aqs=chrome..69i57j69i60j69i65.1038j0j7&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8

Cue the equivocation party!

I've asked several times what YOU believe communism is. And I get silence on that question. I guess you don't know but still want to bitch about it anyway.

 

[dblack]

Cornered again, eh?

p.o., t

 

[Mac1958]

I'm fine with the standard dictionary definition. If you're not, if you have a "very special" definition, then you need to produce it.

I don't give a fuck.

Well, now you know.

Okay, never mind.

This just illustrates what I said in post 387. I can never get a straight answer to an important question.

 

[Senter]

I'm fine with the standard dictionary definition. If you're not, if you have a "very special" definition, then you need to produce it.

I don't give a fuck.

Well, now you know.

The dictionary is wrong with their capitalist's definition of socialism and fascism.

 

[Senter]

p.o., t

C O R N E R E D ! LOL!

 

[dblack]

Okay, never mind.

This just illustrates what I said in post 387. I can never get a straight answer to an important question.

What's not "straight" about a fucking dictionary definition? Take off your partisan douchebag hat and come back to the light.

 

[Mac1958]

What's not "straight" about a fucking dictionary definition? Take off your partisan douchebag hat and come back to the light.

Calm down. From Dictionary.com:

noun
a theory or system of social organization that advocates the ownership and control of the means of production and distribution, capital, land, etc., by the community as a whole, usually through a centralized government.
procedure or practice in accordance with this theory.
(in Marxist theory) the stage following capitalism in the transition of a society to communism, characterized by the imperfect implementation of collectivist principles.


Do you think that I advocate the ownership and control of the means of production and distribution, capital, land, etc.?

Can you name a few Democrats who want to take away the means of production and distribution, capital, land, etc.?

 

[dblack]

Calm down. From Dictionary.com:

noun
a theory or system of social organization that advocates the ownership and control of the means of production and distribution, capital, land, etc., by the community as a whole, usually through a centralized government.
procedure or practice in accordance with this theory.
(in Marxist theory) the stage following capitalism in the transition of a society to communism, characterized by the imperfect implementation of collectivist principles.

Yep.

Do you think that I advocate the ownership and control of the means of production and distribution, capital, land, etc.?

Beats me. I don't read all your posts.

Can you name a few Democrats who want to take away the means of production and distribution, capital, land, etc.?

Well, you're equivocating again. I can think of plenty who advocate for "the ownership and control of the means of production and distribution, capital, land, etc., by the community as a whole, usually through a centralized government."

All those who voted for ACA, for example. I think there were "a few".

 

[Senter]

Forums are ostensibly for discussion and exploring different views on diverse subjects, but we have a cult of right wing know-nothings here who refuse to discuss rationally or intelligently, likely due to their own limitations.

In the end they will crash and burn. Socialism is our destiny. Resistance is futile yet these morons don't want to know anything about it because they have their brainwashing propaganda to rely on and it's too complicated to deal with reality. So they are beyond help and my time here would be wasted. I leave them to their own ignorance to wallow in.

 

[Mac1958]

Yep.

Not that I know of.

Everyone who voted for ACA. I think there "a few".

What does voting for the ACA have to do with socialism? The insurance companies -- not socialist -- have made a ton. The providers are free market.

And socialism is TOTAL ownership and control of all means of production and distribution. Not just more influence here and there.

So once again, definitions matter. I've had this same nowhere conversation dozens of times now. The word now means anything. Or nothing.

 

[dblack]

What does voting for the ACA have to do with socialism?

First of all, let's back up. I edited my post because you equivocated. You changed the definition from "a theory or system of social organization that advocates the ownership and control of the means of production and distribution, capital, land, etc., by the community as a whole, usually through a centralized government." to "take away the means of production and distribution, capital, land, etc." - a subtle but important distinction. Let's not play these games.

The insurance companies -- not socialist -- have made a ton. The providers are free market.

It's not a free market and you know it. It's a fixed market controlled by the state.

And socialism is TOTAL ownership and control of all means of production and distribution. Not just more influence here and there.

And here we go with the equivocation. Again, I'm going with the dictionary definition. If, in your world, "socialism" means nothing less than total state ownership, then you need to specify that your definition differs, radically, from the dictionary definition.

So once again, definitions matter. I've had this same nowhere conversation dozens of times now. The word now means anything. Or nothing.

It means "anything" because leftists are always playing games with the definition. I have little patience for this nonsense.

 

[Mac1958]

First of all, let's back up. I edited my post because you equivocated. You changed the definition from "a theory or system of social organization that advocates the ownership and control of the means of production and distribution, capital, land, etc., by the community as a whole, usually through a centralized government." to "take away the means of production and distribution, capital, land, etc." - a subtle but important distinction. Let's not play these games.

It's not a free market and you know it. It's a fixed market controlled by the state.

And here we go with the equivocation. Again, I'm going with the dictionary definition. If, in your world, "socialism" means nothing less than total state ownership, then you need to specify that your definition differs, radically, from the dictionary definition.

It means "anything" because leftists are always playing games with the definition. I have little patience for this nonsense.

Do you agree with me that the size, scope, breadth, cost and influence of government exists on a continuum?

 

[dblack]

Do you agree with me that the size, scope, breadth, cost and influence of government exists on a continuum?

Yes. And we've been around this bush. It goes nowhere. A continuum, fine. Next.

 

[Mac1958]

Yes. And we've been around this bush. It goes nowhere. A continuum, fine. Next.

Great. Then how do you know when we are socialist?

 

[dblack]

Great. Then how do you know when we are socialist?

Listen, you're playing this rhetorical game about whether we should officially label our government as socialist, or not. I just don't give a rat's ass about that debate. It's pointless sophistry. And it evades the question of whether socialism is generally a good thing, that we want more of - or generally a bad thing, that we want less of.

 

[Mac1958]

Listen, you're playing this rhetorical game about whether we should officially label our government as socialist, or not. I just don't give a rat's ass about that debate. It's pointless sophistry. And it evades the question of whether socialism generally a good thing, that we want more of - or generally a bad thing, that we want less of.

Which takes me back to my original question.

In your first post to me, you said, "they know exactly what socialism is and think it sucks".

I can't get them to tell me what "it" is. It's ironic that you use the word "exactly", and I can't get a straight answer.

Is it a secret?

 

[dblack]

Which takes me back to my original question.

In your first post to me, you said, "they know exactly what socialism is and think it sucks".

I can't get them to tell me what "it" is. It's ironic that you use the word "exactly", and I can't get a straight answer.

Is it a secret?

Are you refuting the fact that I have given you a straight answer? Or are you bemoaning the fact that most Trumpsters can't give you one?

 

[BluesLegend]

Is that your best contribution to the discussion? LOL!!!!!! Pathetic

Your post was trash and lies, I summarized.

 

[Mac1958]

Are you refuting the fact that I have given you a straight answer? Or are you bemoaning the fact that most Trumpsters can't give you one?

Trumpsters certainly can't give me one, which was my original point.

I'm still not sure what you meant by "they know exactly what socialism is and think it sucks", though.

 

[dblack]

Trumpsters certainly can't give me one, which was my original point.

I'm still not sure what you meant by "they know exactly what socialism is and think it sucks", though.

I'm saying there's a third option. That surely, some of them, know what socialism is and think it sucks. Call me presumptuous but I think I fall into that category.