Three of A Kind: Environmentalism, Communism, and Failure

[Billy_Bob]

"For the thousands of people who might get cancer from that water supply, they have a collective interest in making sure i don't do that."

Yet, you poison the civil discourse every day, and conservatives have no intention of depriving you of your right.

Okay, that was just bizarre. Seriously, just bizarre. You do get the difference between a metaphor and reality, right? That if chemicals are dumped into the water table,t hey really cause cancer. Not just hurt the feelings of twits who don't like certain views.

I strongly recommend you review the French Revolution's theme of the 'general will,' and what should happen to show who do not subscribe to same.

If only you had studied, and learned from, history.

The French Revolution was awesome. It was the birth of modern democracy. More than our own pathetic, "We don't want to pay our taxes" revolution.

Chopping the heads off of rich parasites. totally awesome.

"The French Revolution was awesome. It was the birth of modern democracy."
Aha!

So that's how you define "democracy".....the same way Stalin, Hitler, and Mao defined "democracy."


Too bad you never studied nor understood, history.

Sadly this is the state of our public school system. they teach agenda and propaganda instead of facts and their effects on people.

 

[PoliticalChic]

9.Kaufman makes the point that, sans force, penalties, and extortion of various kinds, environmentalist endeavors fall short?


"If doing what environmentalists think is good for nature always paid off, only stupid or masochistic businesspeople would do anything else.

Environmentalist groups would not have opposed the 1993 North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), because Mexico would have seen the dollar signs and adopted all the regulations that environmentalists insist on.

All the farmers in Kansas would be growing organic wheat.

The men's shops in Washington, D.C., would be selling natural tan cotton dress shirts instead of bleached white dress shirts.

Owners of woodlands would be bidding madly for the privilege of hosting the spotted owl, the red-cockaded woodpecker, or the grizzly bear.

Homeowners intent on improving their investment would be installing composting toilets."
Kaufman, Op. Cit.

 

[mamooth]

So the usual hard-right-wing extremists are trying to rewrite history again, and then crying because nobody outside of their cult is paying any attention to their fantasy history.

The ultimate goal of the righties here is to create their version of utopia, a kind of marxist-fascist corporate oligopoly. Those righties believe they'll be rewarded with crumbs from their masters' tables for their help in destroying democracy and capitalism. If the corporations own the production and the corporations are the government, then the government will own all means of production, and the right-wing communist dream will have been fulfilled.

As it was with FDR, it's up to the liberals now to save both capitalism and democracy. These righties here have never forgiven FDR for saving capitalism.

 

[PoliticalChic]

"For the thousands of people who might get cancer from that water supply, they have a collective interest in making sure i don't do that."

Yet, you poison the civil discourse every day, and conservatives have no intention of depriving you of your right.

Okay, that was just bizarre. Seriously, just bizarre. You do get the difference between a metaphor and reality, right? That if chemicals are dumped into the water table,t hey really cause cancer. Not just hurt the feelings of twits who don't like certain views.

I strongly recommend you review the French Revolution's theme of the 'general will,' and what should happen to show who do not subscribe to same.

If only you had studied, and learned from, history.

The French Revolution was awesome. It was the birth of modern democracy. More than our own pathetic, "We don't want to pay our taxes" revolution.

Chopping the heads off of rich parasites. totally awesome.

"The French Revolution was awesome. It was the birth of modern democracy."
Aha!

So that's how you define "democracy".....the same way Stalin, Hitler, and Mao defined "democracy."


Too bad you never studied nor understood, history.

Sadly this is the state of our public school system. they teach agenda and propaganda instead of facts and their effects on people.

I'm afraid it goes beyond the public schools system, and continues right up through college.

Imagine, a fool who believes that the French Revolution gave birth to 'democracy.'

There is no way he understands that the French and the American Revolutions were diametric opposites.

1. A very solid argument can be made that, while the American Revolution was created by and for ‘classical liberals,’ the French Revolution was by and for what those now called ‘liberals’ or progressives.
   1. “The American intellectual class from the mid 19th century onward has disliked liberalism (which originally referred to individualism, private property, and limits on power) precisely because the liberal society has no overarching goal.” http://fff.org/freedom/fd0203c.asp
   2. The French Revolution is the godless antithesis of the founding of America.
2. Unlike the American version, the French Revolution was a revolt by the mob, and was the primogenitor of the Bolshevik Revolution, Hitler’s Nazi Party, Mao’s Cultural Revolution, Pol Pot’s killing fields, and the dirty waifs smashing Starbucks’ windows whenever bankers come town. Those with the gift of irony see similar actions in the ‘Cradle of Democracy,’ Greece. Coulter, "Demonic"

3. Contrary to the assertions of Liberals, who wish our founding fathers were more like the godless French peasants, skipping around with human heads on a pike, our founding fathers were God-fearing descendants of Puritans and other colonial Christians.

4. The reason our revolution was so different from the violent, homicidal chaos of the French version was the dominant American culture was Anglo-Saxon and Christian. “52 of the 56 signers of the declaration and 50 to 52 of the 55 signers of the Constitution were orthodox Trinitarian Christians.” David Limbaugh Believers in the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, or, as they would be known today, “an extremist Fundementalist hate group.”

 

[JoeB131]

"The French Revolution was awesome. It was the birth of modern democracy."
Aha!

So that's how you define "democracy".....the same way Stalin, Hitler, and Mao defined "democracy."


Too bad you never studied nor understood, history.

Uh, yeah. Democracy means exactly that. Majority rule.

Here's the dirty little secret. ALl those mean old dictators you want to use as bad examples.

They'd have won elections in landslides and often did.

 

[PoliticalChic]

So the usual hard-right-wing extremists are trying to rewrite history again, and then crying because nobody outside of their cult is paying any attention to their fantasy history.

The ultimate goal of the righties here is to create their version of utopia, a kind of marxist-fascist corporate oligopoly. Those righties believe they'll be rewarded with crumbs from their masters' tables for their help in destroying democracy and capitalism. If the corporations own the production and the corporations are the government, then the government will own all means of production, and the right-wing communist dream will have been fulfilled.

As it was with FDR, it's up to the liberals now to save both capitalism and democracy. These righties here have never forgiven FDR for saving capitalism.

Anyone with an education understands that everything you've posted is the very reverse of the truth.
Anyone who has any familiarity with The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM) recognizes you.

 

[westwall]

Yes, Stalin died peacefully, but 60 to 80 million of his subjects died horribly in the gulags.

Probably nowhere near that number... but shit happens after a civil war.

Mao likewise died peacefully, however 100 to 150 million of his subjects were murdered to appease his blood lust.

Again, these numbers were kind of amusing during the Cold War, but a Chinese or Russian would look at you funny if you tried to pass these off to them.

Hitler was, like the previous two, an atheist. You atheists try and disown him, but the evidence is very clear as to what he was. He used religion as a tool, nothing more.

Except Hitler was an Atheist who continually invoked the name of Jesus and God.

So I'm not sure what the "Clear evidence" of Hitler's Atheism was.

Hitler s Christianity

Just as the Jew could once incite the mob of Jerusalem against Christ, so today he must succeed in inciting folk who have been duped into madness to attack those who, God's truth! seek to deal with this people in utter honesty and sincerity.

-Adolf Hitler, in Munich, 28 July 1922

It will at any rate be my supreme task to see to it that in the newly awakened NSDAP, the adherents of both Confessions can live peacefully together side by side in order that they may take their stand in the common fight against the power which is the mortal foe of any true Christianity.

-Adolf Hitler, in an article headed "A New Beginning," 26 Feb. 1925

Okay, so let's play along, and pretend Hitler was a secret atheist.

The point is, he didn't do this shit by himself. He had thousands of Catholics and Protestants who waged his wars and carried out his will. And they happily did so.

Of course he did. He lived in a Europe that was predominantly Catholic or Protestant. Thus he had to adopt religion to get them to do his bidding. Back then people still paid attention to that sort of thing. He was however, still an atheist who wished to destroy Christianity as well as all religions

This passage and the evidence released by the OSS tells anyone who wishes to know Hitlers, and the Nazi's true views on religion.

"The National Reich Church of Germany categorically claims the exclusive right and the exclusive power to control all churches within the borders of the Reich: it declares these to be national churches of the German Reich.

"The National Church is determined to exterminate irrevocably...the strange and foreign Christian faiths imported into Germany in the ill-omened year 800...

"The National Church has no scribes, pastors, chaplains or priests, but National Reich orators are to speak in them.

"The National Church demands immediate cessation of the publishing and dissemination of the Bible in Germany...'"

"On the altars there must be nothing but 'Mein Kampf' (to the German nation and therefore to God the most sacred book) and to the left of the altar a sword.

"On the day of its foundation, the Christian Cross must be removed from all churches, cathedrals and chapels...and it must be superseded by the only unconquerable symbol, the swastika."
(The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich, by William L. Shirer, p. 240 in some editions, p. 332 in others. Chapter headed "Triumph and Consolidation", subsection "The Persecution of the Christian Churches")


So, there you go JoeB, Hitler and all the collectivist murderers out there had one thing in common. They were all atheists.

You're welcome.

 

[PoliticalChic]

"The French Revolution was awesome. It was the birth of modern democracy."
Aha!

So that's how you define "democracy".....the same way Stalin, Hitler, and Mao defined "democracy."


Too bad you never studied nor understood, history.

Uh, yeah. Democracy means exactly that. Majority rule.

Here's the dirty little secret. ALl those mean old dictators you want to use as bad examples.

They'd have won elections in landslides and often did.

"Uh, yeah. Democracy means exactly that. Majority rule."

You should stick to words you understand, such as "Duuuuhhh."


Let's examine the sort of majority rule of the French Revolution:

1. For Rousseau, the “Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen” proclaimed that the ‘general will’ of the people had to be correct, because it was the ‘general will,” the true interest of what everyone wants whether they realize it or not, and he ‘determined’ the ‘general will,’ so, anyone who deviated from same deserved no rights!

a. Although he had written a ‘constitution,’ it became malleable for Robespierre: “How did Robespierre actually interpret these principles? He said: “[W]e must exterminate all our enemies with the law in our hands”; “the Declaration of Rights offers no safeguard to conspirators”; “the suspicions of enlightened patriotism might offer a better guide than formal rules of evidence.” Ibid. Notice the echo in the actions of the early Progressives who suggested that the US Constitution may be shed, ‘like a garment.’ Their views surpassed those of the Founders. http://www.nationalaffairs.com/docl...hvsthefrenchenlightmentgertrudehimmelfarb.pdf

Could there be a better description of the collective totalitarian statist?

 

[westwall]

mammy and JoeB are operatives for the progressives. They will never listen to reason for they are unreasonable.

 

[JoeB131]

There is no way he understands that the French and the American Revolutions were diametric opposites.

you're right.

The French Revolution was justified.

The American Revolution really wasn't.

The Bourbons horribly mismanaged France. They pissed away money on wars and palaces while people were LITERALLY STARVING IN THE STREET. The "mob" as you say were women who watched their children die in their arms while their leaders said, "Let them Eat Cake". Okay, maybe that wasn't actually said, but the sentiment was there. It was such a disconnect between the rulers and the ruled that the people revolted angrily, as they should have.

Meanwhile, the American Revolution. That was a bunch of Slave-owners who didn't want to pay their taxes. The thing was, the United Kingdom had already banned slavery in the England proper and were looking to do it in the colonies. They had representative, parlimentary democracy. They had a notion of civil rights. It was hardly a "noble cause".

Do you know what we've have been if they lost? Canadians. I've been to Canada, it's kind of nice except the sucky weather.

 

[JoeB131]

You should stick to words you understand, such as "Duuuuhhh."

Maybe you should turn off the hate radio once in a while.

Here's the thing. The French STILL Celebrate Bastille Day. They know the revolution was the making of the modern French State. They know it was the begining of modern European Democracy.

Did they have a few false starts? Yup. They had revolutions in 1830, 1848 and 1870 before they finally got it somewhat right. But the match had been struck, and it was a good thing.

 

[mamooth]

PC and Westwall, what payment have you been promised for your work in destroying capitalism and democracy?

I'm just curious about what the going rate for a soul is these days.

 

[JoeB131]

mammy and JoeB are operatives for the progressives. They will never listen to reason for they are unreasonable.

My problem is I DID listen to the Republicans.

And when Bush left office I had an underwater mortgage, a busted 401K and job that paid 15% less than what I had been making.

I do better when Democrats are in office. THat's a good enough reason for me.

 

[Billy_Bob]

"The French Revolution was awesome. It was the birth of modern democracy."
Aha!

So that's how you define "democracy".....the same way Stalin, Hitler, and Mao defined "democracy."


Too bad you never studied nor understood, history.

Uh, yeah. Democracy means exactly that. Majority rule.

Here's the dirty little secret. ALl those mean old dictators you want to use as bad examples.

They'd have won elections in landslides and often did.

"Uh, yeah. Democracy means exactly that. Majority rule."

You should stick to words you understand, such as "Duuuuhhh."


Let's examine the sort of majority rule of the French Revolution:

1. For Rousseau, the “Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen” proclaimed that the ‘general will’ of the people had to be correct, because it was the ‘general will,” the true interest of what everyone wants whether they realize it or not, and he ‘determined’ the ‘general will,’ so, anyone who deviated from same deserved no rights!

a. Although he had written a ‘constitution,’ it became malleable for Robespierre: “How did Robespierre actually interpret these principles? He said: “[W]e must exterminate all our enemies with the law in our hands”; “the Declaration of Rights offers no safeguard to conspirators”; “the suspicions of enlightened patriotism might offer a better guide than formal rules of evidence.” Ibid. Notice the echo in the actions of the early Progressives who suggested that the US Constitution may be shed, ‘like a garment.’ Their views surpassed those of the Founders. http://www.nationalaffairs.com/docl...hvsthefrenchenlightmentgertrudehimmelfarb.pdf

Could there be a better description of the collective totalitarian statist?

Seems JoeB has issues with the differences between what a Representative Republic is vs a Democracy.. The US by its founding made sure mob rule would not become the law of the land. Progressives and liberals have made it possible.. And its destructive means is apparent in the socialist hand out mentality..Or should I call it BRIBE mentality.. Useful idiots are the first to go when they are no longer useful.. See what Hitler did to those who gave him power...

When Other Peoples Money runs out it becomes ugly..

 

[JoeB131]

Seems JoeB has issues with the differences between what a Representative Republic is vs a Democracy.. The US by its founding made sure mob rule would not become the law of the land. Progressives and liberals have made it possible.. And its destructive means is apparent in the socialist hand out mentality..Or should I call it BRIBE mentality.. Useful idiots are the first to go when they are no longer useful.. See what Hitler did to those who gave him power...

When Other Peoples Money runs out it becomes ugly..

No, Billy-Boob, I htink you are the one who is confused. You actually think you live in a representative Republic.

But the point is, we don't elect anyone Wall Street doesn't approve of any more than the Iranians elect anyone the Ayatollahs don't approve of.

 

[Derideo_Te]

If only you had studied, and learned from, history.

Ironic!

 

[Derideo_Te]

The liberal spirit of collectivism is the same thing Hitler used to gain consensus against the Jewish people. The Ends then justified the means, any means to rid itself of these people they deemed unfit or a problem in their grand scheme of global control. And just like many collectivists before him they came to violent ends. Stalin, Marx, Mao, all of these individuals murdered millions of people before the people took them out at great cost.

Marx never had political power, and Stalin and Mao died peacefully in their beds.

As for Hitler, Hitler was just the end result of a major religion who said, "The Jews Killed our God-Man".

Yes, Stalin died peacefully, but 60 to 80 million of his subjects died horribly in the gulags. Mao likewise died peacefully, however 100 to 150 million of his subjects were murdered to appease his blood lust. Hitler was, like the previous two, an atheist. You atheists try and disown him, but the evidence is very clear as to what he was. He used religion as a tool, nothing more.

Assumes facts not in evidence!

Hitler was raised as a devout catholic. Stalin was educated in a seminary to become a priest. Mao was raised as a Buddhist and is quoted as saying that it is wrong to be opposed to religion.

Now why don't you erroneously accuse me "derailing this thread" because you introduced the red herring of atheism in order to slander it without any factual basis.

BTW I am taking an image of this post so that I will have the evidence if you attempt to delete it instead of addressing your falsehoods.

 

[Billy_Bob]

Seems JoeB has issues with the differences between what a Representative Republic is vs a Democracy.. The US by its founding made sure mob rule would not become the law of the land. Progressives and liberals have made it possible.. And its destructive means is apparent in the socialist hand out mentality..Or should I call it BRIBE mentality.. Useful idiots are the first to go when they are no longer useful.. See what Hitler did to those who gave him power...

When Other Peoples Money runs out it becomes ugly..

No, Billy-Boob, I htink you are the one who is confused. You actually think you live in a representative Republic.

But the point is, we don't elect anyone Wall Street doesn't approve of any more than the Iranians elect anyone the Ayatollahs don't approve of.

like I said, MORONS who think it should be mob rule have ruined it... They have not however changed the US Constitution and it therefore can be returned to it former state once we give these commies the boot.

 

[BULLDOG]

There is no way he understands that the French and the American Revolutions were diametric opposites.

you're right.

The French Revolution was justified.

The American Revolution really wasn't.

The Bourbons horribly mismanaged France. They pissed away money on wars and palaces while people were LITERALLY STARVING IN THE STREET. The "mob" as you say were women who watched their children die in their arms while their leaders said, "Let them Eat Cake". Okay, maybe that wasn't actually said, but the sentiment was there. It was such a disconnect between the rulers and the ruled that the people revolted angrily, as they should have.

Meanwhile, the American Revolution. That was a bunch of Slave-owners who didn't want to pay their taxes. The thing was, the United Kingdom had already banned slavery in the England proper and were looking to do it in the colonies. They had representative, parlimentary democracy. They had a notion of civil rights. It was hardly a "noble cause".

Do you know what we've have been if they lost? Canadians. I've been to Canada, it's kind of nice except the sucky weather.

Actually, the help the French gave us helped to deplete the already strained coffers making things harder for the starving French citizens. The help we were given didn't cause the French revolution, but it did make it more likely to happen.

 

[Statistikhengst]

Yes, Stalin died peacefully, but 60 to 80 million of his subjects died horribly in the gulags. Mao likewise died peacefully, however 100 to 150 million of his subjects were murdered to appease his blood lust. Hitler was, like the previous two, an atheist. You atheists try and disown him, but the evidence is very clear as to what he was. He used religion as a tool, nothing more.

Vis a vis Hitler:

a little true, mostly false.

He was raised Catholic, he never formally left the Church and he was not excommunicated before his death. In fact, he signed the Concordiat with Pius XII. So, you can claim that he used religion as a tool, but in reality, the Church used him as well.

This does not mean that he did not have great disdain for Christianity, for surely he did. But it does not make him an atheist, either. In fact, still in the 1930s, he made a number of speeches proclaiming that he was fullfilling the "wisdom of god".

Of course, it should be apparent to any thinking human being how much I hate Adolph Hitler, but I think it is also irrelevant whether you want to call him an atheist or not. However, to use that tactic to bash atheists on the head is just plain old stupid, as with so many of the bullshitty, nonsensical things you write here in USMB, lacking in fact, lacking in gravitas, lacking in sensibility.

Better luck next time. It's amazing how you think that Lord Westwall is somehow totally omniscent. Well, you are not.

Now, to the pile of shit that is supposed to be the OP:

Three of A Kind: Environmentalism, Communism, and Failure

Ok, any OP that starts with:

"Every Leftist is, essentially, a Marxist"


is surely destined for the trash bin of history. It's also pretty damned funny when you consider that a Republican, Theodore Roosevelt, was the father of environmentalism in many regards...

Or, I can just go around saying, for the rest of my life:

Every Rightist is, essentially, a fascist.


But that would be ridiculous and just as stupid as politicalshit's opening salvo.

Oh, and politicalshit, nice copy and paste job!