Yes, You're A Communist

[Norman]

America is a nation of liberty, brotherhood and intellectual clarity. There is no 'ism' that made or makes it great; it is the people who make it so. If it is not great, it is nevertheless the people who make it so.
The 'founders' were eclectic, not simple ideologues. They accepted and incorporated divergent concepts of theology, politics and economics.
Worshiping 'capitalism' is such a gross error that it seems unthinkable such a thing could happen. 'Capitalism' is merely a tool, something we can use, not something that must be used. It may be appropriate in some cases and not others. Blind faith in something that is not even a faith is inhuman. Capital itself is a mere creation of the mind of man, thus it and all value issue from the same source; human thought, followed by human effort.
"Labor is prior to, and independent of, capital. Capital is only the fruit of labor, and could never have existed if labor had not first existed. Labor is the superior of capital, and deserves much the higher consideration." Abraham Lincoln

Lincoln wasn't an economist. His theory is false.

Capitalism is the system that results when you respect the laws of economics. They are not whims. They are laws.

Lincoln didn't have to be an economist to realize that Capitalism depends on cheap labor, cheap raw materials and cheap energy so that there is enough profit to pay the owners of the means of production far more than they deserve and to pay the workers far, far less than they deserve.

Actually capitalism primarily depends only on one thing: lack of coercion.

Same can't be said about communism, which primarily depends on coercion.

 

[JQPublic1]

As a bitter loser, I would expect Hoover to excoriate the man who soundly beat his ass in a landslide victory. Nash, also a butt hurt RW loser was obliged to use his journalistic skills to join his fellows in nitpicking the new president who was focusing on fixing the economic mess the GOP had left him. Indeed, the Great Depression was a global disaster and the USA, under GOP leadership, was a major contributor to it. That being said, FDR's overtures towards the Kremlin were rational considering the weakened state of affairs in Europe, the rising Nazis in Deutschland and the Japanese ascension in Asia. FDR was an advocate of world peace and was instrumental in jumpstarting the UN. He was aware of the rising power of the Soviets and how crucial that power would be against the Wehrmacht and the Luftwaffe.



The above paragraph encapsulates the second global antebellum period and thankfully, FDR had the insight to reach out to the USSR when he did. But, as you said, previous US administrations refused to recognize the Soviets and Europe followed suit. However, Communism was not the catalysts for the political estrangement of the USSR. No, after the Bolsheviks seized power on 1917 they nationalized foreign assets and confiscated property including that of the USA. Adding insult to injury the new revolutionary government refused to pay back loans the USA had made to the now overthrown TSAR regime. That "betrayed freedom" starts to look like "BS betrayed." It had nothing to do with freedom.



Milestones: 1921–1936 - Office of the Historian



Communism has no more of a homicidal pathology than any other ideology, including Christianity, Islam or capitalistic based entities. All of those mentioned have spilled blood. Besides, FDR was in no position to proselytize to the Bolsheviks about human rights when sheet wearing domestic terrorists were still running rampant and killing innocent people, figuratively speaking, in his own backyard. But any insinuation that FDR was secretly an agent of Communism is patently ridiculous. He recognized Russia because of future strategy considerations and for the sake of his fledgling UN and it payed off big time when the Nazis invaded the USSR.



That is a big leap. Jones' anecdote sounds more like something akin to the tall tales of William B. Laughead. If the tale is true there is something very disturbing about Jones' behavior. Who throws a crust of bread into a Spittoon in the first place, and especially in the presence of starving, emaciated people? Jones is either a sick sadist or a liar or both...take your pick.



A leftist who became a voice against communism? Doesn't that throw a wrinkle in that "leftist are all communists paradigm?" But the book review doesn't do much for me. All that does is show me how well you can cut and paste. The terror famine may or may not be true but Stalin probably was a murdering monster like Mao and Hitler were. Soooo, if FDR's Intelligence operatives couldn't confirm Muggeridge's revelations I would hardly expect him to shape his foreign policy around a private author's claims.



Here you are mixing pre war events with wartime events. I repeat that FDR couldn't base his pre-war foreign policy on Muggeridge's report. And, apparently, allied spies and operatives in Russia hadn't confirmed the report. (pre war).



The Lend Lease was part of a reciprocal agreement that materialized after the Nazis invaded the USSR. ( war time). FDR's bold pre war initiative and foresight payed off big time with this move. The Europeans had rejected the Soviets bid to join the Grand Alliance earlier so in 1939 the Soviets made a pact with (shudder) the Nazis. Fortunately, for Europe and the world, that pact was broken when Hitler ordered his troops into Soviet territory. FDR seized the opportunity to support the Soviets with that Lend Lease deal and the Soviets promised to supply the US with raw materials and commodities as needed.



Here is the correspondence between Stalin and FDR facilitating crucial collaboration and material support that probably saved the world from Nazi domination!

Correspondence of Roosevelt and Truman with Stalin on Lend Lease and Other Aid to the Soviet Union, 1941-1945

"Communism has no more of a homicidal pathology than any other ideology,"

Gads. you're a fool.


"The Black Book of Communism: Crimes, Terror, Repression,"
by Jean-Louis Panné (Author), Andrzej Paczkowski (Author), Karel Bartosek (Author), Jean-Louis Margolin (Author), Nicolas Werth (Author), Stéphane Courtois (Author), & 2 more

"Already famous throughout Europe, this international bestseller plumbs recently opened archives in the former Soviet bloc to reveal the actual, practical accomplishments of Communism around the world: terror, torture, famine, mass deportations, and massacres. Astonishing in the sheer detail it amasses, the book is the first comprehensive attempt to catalogue and analyze the crimes of Communism over seventy years."


100 million slaughtered.


Roosevelt facilitated this.

Gads you're a stupid bitch but I won't allow you to DOG me around, heh heh heh! I don't deny the atrocities committed by totalitarian dictators purporting to be communists occurred. Do you deny that the USA, Britain and many of the allied european countries including Australia also committed murderous acts on indigenous populations. We are reluctant to pin a face to US atrocities but that didn't make them any less deadly or less bloody for the men , women and children that perished. Sure, 100 million is a huge number that defies the imagination. I wonder where all those bullets came from. But who was counting? How did the pundits arrive at that estimate? US historians are famous for undercounting casualties of non combatant autochthonous peoples murdered US military campaigns. They are simply written off as collateral damage. But our historians and journalist are quick to point to that combined 100 million killed by Stalin and Mao. I don't care what ideology a charismatic psychopath has be it Capitalist or Communist. I blame the man not the ideology

Watch your language....it gives away how irked you are at being correctly identified as a dunce.

You wrote: ""Communism has no more of a homicidal pathology than any other ideology,"

Then you wrote: "I don't deny the atrocities committed by totalitarian dictators purporting to be communists occurred."



Does that neon light flashing IDIOT over your head keep you awake at night?

Ok, I see you are sensitive so I will refrain from calling you names and focus on the subject matter.

You have identified every person who says something you dislike as a dunce. I guess that puts me in good company...thanks.

Yes I wrote both of the statements you quoted above but one doesn't conflict with the other. communism was NOT the cause of atrocities committed by Mao and Stalin. Those were decisions made by them and was independent of anything Marx stood for or said. Or... at least I haven't heard or read that Marx made homicide and mass murder a tenet of Communism. I could be wrong... am I? If so show me. If not STFU!

"What is wrong with my language? Looking at your vicious insults,....."

I never use language that I wouldn't use in front of children, and still have no problem identifying you correctly.

That's because I have an education, and am not a Liberal....or, is that a redundancy.



'....one would think you wanted a nasty knock down drag out fight."
You catch on quick....I fight ignorance and Leftist oppression at every opportunity.



"communism was NOT the cause of atrocities committed by Mao and Stalin."
I stated that you are an imbecile...and here you are, gilding the lily.

" Among these monstrous crimes, Ukraine stands out as the worst in terms of numbers.Stalin declared war on his own peoplein 1932, sending Commissars V. Molotov and Lazar Kaganovitch and NKVD secret police chief Genrikh Yagoda to crush the resistance of Ukrainian farmers toforced collectivization.

Ukraine was sealed off. All food supplies and livestock were confiscated. NKVD death squads executed "anti-party elements." Furious that insufficient Ukrainians were being shot, Kaganovitch - virtually the Soviet Union's Adolf Eichmann - set a quota of 10,000 executions a week. Eighty percent of Ukrainian intellectuals were shot.



During the bitter winter of 1932-33,25,000 Ukrainians per day were being shot or died of starvation and cold.Cannibalism became common. Ukraine, writes historian Robert Conquest, looked like a giant version of the future Bergen-Belsen death camp.

The mass murder of seven million Ukrainians, three million of them children, and deportation to the gulag of two million more (where most died) was hidden by Soviet propaganda. Pro-communist westerners, like The New York Times' Walter Duranty, British writers Sidney and Beatrice Webb and French Prime Minister Edouard Herriot, toured Ukraine, denied reports of genocide, and applauded what they called Soviet "agrarian reform." Those who spoke out against the genocide were branded "fascist agents."Seven million died in the 'forgotten' holocaust - Eric Margolis




I'm curious....how do imbeciles like you find your way home to that split-level porta-potty each day?
Bread crumbs?
Shiny pebbles?
A string attached to your Depends????

Arbitrary labels abound in the daffy world of RW idiocy as does randomly issued insults made with the thought in mind that such scurrilous conduct makes them look smarter.

So these "pro-communist westerners after touring Ukraine denied reports of genocide? How interesting. If you don't see evidence of something, toots, it isn't a denial to say you didn't see it. Is that how Eric Margolis interpreted it or did you just throw that in? Look, I am no apologist for communism, I just don't think Marx would have endorsed Stalin OR Mao, both of whom perverted his ideas of what communism should be. I've made my premise as clearly as I can, yet you persist in connecting Marxist ideology to the atrocities of murderous dictators who would have been just as murderous under any system where they had unlimited power.
I know you have been indoctrinated to blame the ideology rather than the perpetrators but when you grow up, mentally, you will see that I am right!

 

[PoliticalChic]

"Communism has no more of a homicidal pathology than any other ideology,"

Gads. you're a fool.


"The Black Book of Communism: Crimes, Terror, Repression,"
by Jean-Louis Panné (Author), Andrzej Paczkowski (Author), Karel Bartosek (Author), Jean-Louis Margolin (Author), Nicolas Werth (Author), Stéphane Courtois (Author), & 2 more

"Already famous throughout Europe, this international bestseller plumbs recently opened archives in the former Soviet bloc to reveal the actual, practical accomplishments of Communism around the world: terror, torture, famine, mass deportations, and massacres. Astonishing in the sheer detail it amasses, the book is the first comprehensive attempt to catalogue and analyze the crimes of Communism over seventy years."


100 million slaughtered.


Roosevelt facilitated this.

Gads you're a stupid bitch but I won't allow you to DOG me around, heh heh heh! I don't deny the atrocities committed by totalitarian dictators purporting to be communists occurred. Do you deny that the USA, Britain and many of the allied european countries including Australia also committed murderous acts on indigenous populations. We are reluctant to pin a face to US atrocities but that didn't make them any less deadly or less bloody for the men , women and children that perished. Sure, 100 million is a huge number that defies the imagination. I wonder where all those bullets came from. But who was counting? How did the pundits arrive at that estimate? US historians are famous for undercounting casualties of non combatant autochthonous peoples murdered US military campaigns. They are simply written off as collateral damage. But our historians and journalist are quick to point to that combined 100 million killed by Stalin and Mao. I don't care what ideology a charismatic psychopath has be it Capitalist or Communist. I blame the man not the ideology

Watch your language....it gives away how irked you are at being correctly identified as a dunce.

You wrote: ""Communism has no more of a homicidal pathology than any other ideology,"

Then you wrote: "I don't deny the atrocities committed by totalitarian dictators purporting to be communists occurred."



Does that neon light flashing IDIOT over your head keep you awake at night?

Ok, I see you are sensitive so I will refrain from calling you names and focus on the subject matter.

You have identified every person who says something you dislike as a dunce. I guess that puts me in good company...thanks.

Yes I wrote both of the statements you quoted above but one doesn't conflict with the other. communism was NOT the cause of atrocities committed by Mao and Stalin. Those were decisions made by them and was independent of anything Marx stood for or said. Or... at least I haven't heard or read that Marx made homicide and mass murder a tenet of Communism. I could be wrong... am I? If so show me. If not STFU!

"What is wrong with my language? Looking at your vicious insults,....."

I never use language that I wouldn't use in front of children, and still have no problem identifying you correctly.

That's because I have an education, and am not a Liberal....or, is that a redundancy.



'....one would think you wanted a nasty knock down drag out fight."
You catch on quick....I fight ignorance and Leftist oppression at every opportunity.



"communism was NOT the cause of atrocities committed by Mao and Stalin."
I stated that you are an imbecile...and here you are, gilding the lily.

" Among these monstrous crimes, Ukraine stands out as the worst in terms of numbers.Stalin declared war on his own peoplein 1932, sending Commissars V. Molotov and Lazar Kaganovitch and NKVD secret police chief Genrikh Yagoda to crush the resistance of Ukrainian farmers toforced collectivization.

Ukraine was sealed off. All food supplies and livestock were confiscated. NKVD death squads executed "anti-party elements." Furious that insufficient Ukrainians were being shot, Kaganovitch - virtually the Soviet Union's Adolf Eichmann - set a quota of 10,000 executions a week. Eighty percent of Ukrainian intellectuals were shot.



During the bitter winter of 1932-33,25,000 Ukrainians per day were being shot or died of starvation and cold.Cannibalism became common. Ukraine, writes historian Robert Conquest, looked like a giant version of the future Bergen-Belsen death camp.

The mass murder of seven million Ukrainians, three million of them children, and deportation to the gulag of two million more (where most died) was hidden by Soviet propaganda. Pro-communist westerners, like The New York Times' Walter Duranty, British writers Sidney and Beatrice Webb and French Prime Minister Edouard Herriot, toured Ukraine, denied reports of genocide, and applauded what they called Soviet "agrarian reform." Those who spoke out against the genocide were branded "fascist agents."Seven million died in the 'forgotten' holocaust - Eric Margolis




I'm curious....how do imbeciles like you find your way home to that split-level porta-potty each day?
Bread crumbs?
Shiny pebbles?
A string attached to your Depends????

Arbitrary labels abound in the daffy world of RW idiocy as does randomly issued insults made with the though in mind that such scurrilous conduct makes them look smarter.

So these "pro-communist westerners after touring Ukraine denied reports of genocide? How interesting. If you don't see evidence of something, toots, it isn't a denial to say you didn't see it. Is that how Eric Margolis interpreted it or did you just throw that in? Look, I am no apologist for communism, I just don't think Marx would have endorsed Stalin OR Mao, both of whom perverted his ideas of what communism should be. I've made my premise as clearly as I can, yet you persist in connecting Marxist ideology to the atrocities of murderous dictators who would have been just as murderous under any system where they had unlimited power.
I know you have been indoctrinated to blame the ideology rather than the perpetrators but when you grow up, mentally, you will see that I am right!

Now....see that: 'daffy,' and 'world of RW idiocy,' and 'toots'......

Much better.
So....you are capable of learning!


You've earned further instruction:
"Look, I am no apologist for communism, I just don't think Marx would have endorsed Stalin OR Mao,..."

Wrong.

1. "Early socialists publically advocated genocide, in the 19th and 20th centuries. It first appeared in Marx's journal, Rheinishe Zeitung, in January of 1849. When the socialist class war happens, there will be primitive societies in Europe, two stages behind- not even capitalist yet- the Basques, the Bretons, the Scottish Highlanders, the Serbs, and others he calls 'racial trash,' and they will have to be destroyed because, being two stages behind in the class struggle, it will be impossible to bring them up to being revolutionary."
George Watson, Historian, Cambridge University.

a. "The classes and races, too weak to master the new conditions of life, must give way...they must perish in the revolutionary holocaust."
Karl Marx, People's Paper, April 16, 1856, Journal of the History of Idea, 1981

b. "Before Marx, no other European thinker publically advocated racial extermination. He was the first." George Watson.


Same was the source for Hitler's views, as well.



See the education you've missed out on?

 

[bripat9643]

Gravity is a law of the universe.
Economics is a totally relativistic human creation and exercise.

Hmmm, wrong. Those who believe they can ignore the laws of economics are heading their society to ruin. Price controls are a classic example. They never work, no matter how may times ignorant turds like you impose them on us.

 

[bripat9643]

America is a nation of liberty, brotherhood and intellectual clarity. There is no 'ism' that made or makes it great; it is the people who make it so. If it is not great, it is nevertheless the people who make it so.
The 'founders' were eclectic, not simple ideologues. They accepted and incorporated divergent concepts of theology, politics and economics.
Worshiping 'capitalism' is such a gross error that it seems unthinkable such a thing could happen. 'Capitalism' is merely a tool, something we can use, not something that must be used. It may be appropriate in some cases and not others. Blind faith in something that is not even a faith is inhuman. Capital itself is a mere creation of the mind of man, thus it and all value issue from the same source; human thought, followed by human effort.
"Labor is prior to, and independent of, capital. Capital is only the fruit of labor, and could never have existed if labor had not first existed. Labor is the superior of capital, and deserves much the higher consideration." Abraham Lincoln

Lincoln wasn't an economist. His theory is false.

Capitalism is the system that results when you respect the laws of economics. They are not whims. They are laws.

Lincoln didn't have to be an economist to realize that Capitalism depends on cheap labor, cheap raw materials and cheap energy so that there is enough profit to pay the owners of the means of production far more than they deserve and to pay the workers far, far less than they deserve.

Capitalism doesn't depend on cheap anything. The fundamental law of economics is that all resources are scarce, including labor.

LIke every Marxist, you don't understand the first thing about economics.

 

[bripat9643]

1. . FDR came into office March 4th of 1933. On November 16, 1933, President Roosevelt rushed to embrace....recognize...the USSR. If this act, based on FDR's additional pro-Soviet endeavors, was rational....then these folks must have been irrational:

"Four Presidents and their six Secretaries of State for over a decade and a half held to this resolve," i.e., refusal to recognize the Soviet government. That was written by Herbert Hoover, one of those four Presidents. He wrote it in his "Freedom Betrayed: Herbert Hoover's Secret History of the Second World War and Its Aftermath" by George H. Nash, published posthumously, obviously, in 2011, pg 24-29.

As a bitter loser, I would expect Hoover to excoriate the man who soundly beat his ass in a landslide victory. Nash, also a butt hurt RW loser was obliged to use his journalistic skills to join his fellows in nitpicking the new president who was focusing on fixing the economic mess the GOP had left him. Indeed, the Great Depression was a global disaster and the USA, under GOP leadership, was a major contributor to it. That being said, FDR's overtures towards the Kremlin were rational considering the weakened state of affairs in Europe, the rising Nazis in Deutschland and the Japanese ascension in Asia. FDR was an advocate of world peace and was instrumental in jumpstarting the UN. He was aware of the rising power of the Soviets and how crucial that power would be against the Wehrmacht and the Luftwaffe.



The above paragraph encapsulates the second global antebellum period and thankfully, FDR had the insight to reach out to the USSR when he did. But, as you said, previous US administrations refused to recognize the Soviets and Europe followed suit. However, Communism was not the catalysts for the political estrangement of the USSR. No, after the Bolsheviks seized power on 1917 they nationalized foreign assets and confiscated property including that of the USA. Adding insult to injury the new revolutionary government refused to pay back loans the USA had made to the now overthrown TSAR regime. That "betrayed freedom" starts to look like "BS betrayed." It had nothing to do with freedom.



Milestones: 1921–1936 - Office of the Historian

2. Here is the question:was Roosevelt aware of the homicidal pathology of communism, and if so, shouldn't he have considered same as a reason to put off recognition until he persuaded a change in those policies?

Communism has no more of a homicidal pathology than any other ideology, including Christianity, Islam or capitalistic based entities. All of those mentioned have spilled blood. Besides, FDR was in no position to proselytize to the Bolsheviks about human rights when sheet wearing domestic terrorists were still running rampant and killing innocent people, figuratively speaking, in his own backyard. But any insinuation that FDR was secretly an agent of Communism is patently ridiculous. He recognized Russia because of future strategy considerations and for the sake of his fledgling UN and it payed off big time when the Nazis invaded the USSR.

a.He knew.

Eight months earlier, journalist Gareth Jones had exposed Stalin's Terror Famine:

"In the train a Communist denied to me that there was a famine. I flung a crust of bread which I had been eating from my own supply into a spittoon. A peasant fellow-passenger fished it out and ravenously ate it."

Gareth Jones journalist - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

That is a big leap. Jones' anecdote sounds more like something akin to the tall tales of William B. Laughead. If the tale is true there is something very disturbing about Jones' behavior. Who throws a crust of bread into a Spittoon in the first place, and especially in the presence of starving, emaciated people? Jones is either a sick sadist or a liar or both...take your pick.

b. Malcolm Muggeridge "was the first writer to revealthe true nature of Stalin s regime when in 1933he exposed the terror famine in the Ukraine. "

Amazon.com Time and Eternity The Uncollected Writings of Malcolm Muggeridge 9781570759055 Malcolm Muggeridge Nicholas Flynn Books



c. So FDR knew of the Terror Famine...designed and perpetrated by 'Uncle Joe,'...yet heenveloped Joe Stalin in " the cloak of his popularity..."Time Magazine, December 17, 1934.

A leftist who became a voice against communism? Doesn't that throw a wrinkle in that "leftist are all communists paradigm?" But the book review doesn't do much for me. All that does is show me how well you can cut and paste. The terror famine may or may not be true but Stalin probably was a murdering monster like Mao and Hitler were. Soooo, if FDR's Intelligence operatives couldn't confirm Muggeridge's revelations I would hardly expect him to shape his foreign policy around a private author's claims.

OK....so Roosevelt knew the nature of the other side when he offered the partnership....entry into the accepted world community.

There can be no doubt that Roosevelt knew.....and then, as per Stalin's plan, he gave Lend Lease materials that Allies needed, to Stalin.

Here you are mixing pre war events with wartime events. I repeat that FDR couldn't base his pre-war foreign policy on Muggeridge's report. And, apparently, allied spies and operatives in Russia hadn't confirmed the report. (pre war).



The Lend Lease was part of a reciprocal agreement that materialized after the Nazis invaded the USSR. ( war time). FDR's bold pre war initiative and foresight payed off big time with this move. The Europeans had rejected the Soviets bid to join the Grand Alliance earlier so in 1939 the Soviets made a pact with (shudder) the Nazis. Fortunately, for Europe and the world, that pact was broken when Hitler ordered his troops into Soviet territory. FDR seized the opportunity to support the Soviets with that Lend Lease deal and the Soviets promised to supply the US with raw materials and commodities as needed.



Here is the correspondence between Stalin and FDR facilitating crucial collaboration and material support that probably saved the world from Nazi domination!

Correspondence of Roosevelt and Truman with Stalin on Lend Lease and Other Aid to the Soviet Union, 1941-1945

"Communism has no more of a homicidal pathology than any other ideology,"

Gads. you're a fool.


"The Black Book of Communism: Crimes, Terror, Repression,"
by Jean-Louis Panné (Author), Andrzej Paczkowski (Author), Karel Bartosek (Author), Jean-Louis Margolin (Author), Nicolas Werth (Author), Stéphane Courtois (Author), & 2 more

"Already famous throughout Europe, this international bestseller plumbs recently opened archives in the former Soviet bloc to reveal the actual, practical accomplishments of Communism around the world: terror, torture, famine, mass deportations, and massacres. Astonishing in the sheer detail it amasses, the book is the first comprehensive attempt to catalogue and analyze the crimes of Communism over seventy years."


100 million slaughtered.


Roosevelt facilitated this.

Gads you're a stupid bitch but I won't allow you to DOG me around, heh heh heh! I don't deny the atrocities committed by totalitarian dictators purporting to be communists occurred. Do you deny that the USA, Britain and many of the allied european countries including Australia also committed murderous acts on indigenous populations. We are reluctant to pin a face to US atrocities but that didn't make them any less deadly or less bloody for the men , women and children that perished. Sure, 100 million is a huge number that defies the imagination. I wonder where all those bullets came from. But who was counting? How did the pundits arrive at that estimate? US historians are famous for undercounting casualties of non combatant autochthonous peoples murdered US military campaigns. They are simply written off as collateral damage. But our historians and journalist are quick to point to that combined 100 million killed by Stalin and Mao. I don't care what ideology a charismatic psychopath has be it Capitalist or Communist. I blame the man not the ideology

Watch your language....it gives away how irked you are at being correctly identified as a dunce.

You wrote: ""Communism has no more of a homicidal pathology than any other ideology,"

Then you wrote: "I don't deny the atrocities committed by totalitarian dictators purporting to be communists occurred."



Does that neon light flashing IDIOT over your head keep you awake at night?

What is wrong with my language? Looking at your vicious insults, one would think you wanted a nasty knock down drag out fight. Ok, I see you are sensitive so I will refrain from calling you names and focus on the subject matter.

You have identified every person who says something you dislike as a dunce. I guess that puts me in good company...thanks.

Yes I wrote both of the statements you quoted above but one doesn't conflict with the other. communism was NOT the cause of atrocities committed by Mao and Stalin. Those were decisions made by them and was independent of anything Marx stood for or said. Or... at least I haven't heard or read that Marx made homicide and mass murder a tenet of Communism. I could be wrong... am I? If so show me. If not STFU!

Communism made it possible. Absolute power is possible only under communism. Where private property is in force, people have means other than the government to get food or other necessities.

 

[jillian]

Funny thread. It should be in satire.

And the cut and paste queen should still learn the definition of communism and get at least a modicum of understanding about political theory.

 

[there4eyeM]

As with Hitler, those guilty of the crimes attributed to Stalin are the people who fired the bullets and personally executed 'orders'. Whether it's ideology, religion, greed or whatever other excuse, murder is murder and individual choice and responsibility are the base.
The enemy is ignorance. So, the cultural culpability is in failing to inculcate this precept in offspring.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Funny thread. It should be in satire.

And the cut and paste queen should still learn the definition of communism and get at least a modicum of understanding about political theory.

Now....here's a little quiz that will make you run and hide....and will reveal how truly ignorant you are.

Ready?

Let's begin with definitions.
Nazism, communism, socialism..Liberalism, Progressivism,.and fascism....

1. Which stem from the works of Karl Marx?
2. Which is a form of command and control big government?
3. Which has no problem with genocide, actual or figurative, as an accepted procedure on its political enemies?
4. Which is based on the collective over the individual?
5. Which oppresses and/or slaughters its own citizens as pro forma (including depriving them of a living)....?

6. Which represents totalitarian governance?
7. Which believes that mandating/dictating every aspect of their citizen's lives is their prerogative?

8. Which aims for an all-encompassing state that centralizes power to perfect human nature by controlling every aspect of life

9. Which restricts free speech and thought?

10. Which can be summed up in Hegel's “The state says … you must obey …. The state has rights against the individual; its members have obligations, among them that of obeying without protest”



And, of course, they all are do...they are all consubstantial.

Nazism

Communism

Socialism

Fascism

Progressivism

Liberalism






How about pointing out which of them are defenders of religious, political, and economic freedom, and recognize the individual as the most important element of society?
Right....none of 'em.
Only right wing philosophies...i.e., conservatism.

 

[JQPublic1]

America is a nation of liberty, brotherhood and intellectual clarity. There is no 'ism' that made or makes it great; it is the people who make it so. If it is not great, it is nevertheless the people who make it so.
The 'founders' were eclectic, not simple ideologues. They accepted and incorporated divergent concepts of theology, politics and economics.
Worshiping 'capitalism' is such a gross error that it seems unthinkable such a thing could happen. 'Capitalism' is merely a tool, something we can use, not something that must be used. It may be appropriate in some cases and not others. Blind faith in something that is not even a faith is inhuman. Capital itself is a mere creation of the mind of man, thus it and all value issue from the same source; human thought, followed by human effort.
"Labor is prior to, and independent of, capital. Capital is only the fruit of labor, and could never have existed if labor had not first existed. Labor is the superior of capital, and deserves much the higher consideration." Abraham Lincoln

Lincoln wasn't an economist. His theory is false.

Capitalism is the system that results when you respect the laws of economics. They are not whims. They are laws.

Lincoln didn't have to be an economist to realize that Capitalism depends on cheap labor, cheap raw materials and cheap energy so that there is enough profit to pay the owners of the means of production far more than they deserve and to pay the workers far, far less than they deserve.

Actually capitalism primarily depends only on one thing: lack of coercion.

Same can't be said about communism, which primarily depends on coercion.

I am not sure your premise is correct. Coercion doesn't necessarily have to be violent. All social systems have laws and those laws restrict us all in some way. In our free market system, places where Christianity is most ubiquitous have the most strict laws and ordinances.. Violate them enough and you will end up being penalized in some way. Anti miscegenation laws kept people of different races from marrying in many southern states.. here were Jim Crow laws. There were laws to facilitate the health and welfare of one group at the expense of another....

Millions in our capitalist system find themselves trapped in a 9 to 5 job they hate. They have a spouse they can't stand, are plagued by a host of social ills and are overburdened by so much debt that many will never be able to pay off. Feeling trapped? Hows that for coercion? And noooo, you can't just walk away. They'll come after you for child support and alimony...as they should if you don't take care of your kids. Still, it is a trap...and many of you are miserable....

 

[bripat9643]

I marvel at all these people defending communism who all claim they aren't communists.

 

[PoliticalChic]

As with Hitler, those guilty of the crimes attributed to Stalin are the people who fired the bullets and personally executed 'orders'. Whether it's ideology, religion, greed or whatever other excuse, murder is murder and individual choice and responsibility are the base.
The enemy is ignorance. So, the cultural culpability is in failing to inculcate this precept in offspring.

"As with Hitler, those guilty of the crimes attributed to Stalin are the people who fired the bullets and personally executed 'orders'."

Amazing, the stupidity that comes from your keyboard.....


Know this phrase?
"The buck stops here."

Have someone with an education explain it to you.

 

[there4eyeM]

Where the buck stops is precisely stated in the post. It was written in English. Is another language preferred?

 

[Norman]

America is a nation of liberty, brotherhood and intellectual clarity. There is no 'ism' that made or makes it great; it is the people who make it so. If it is not great, it is nevertheless the people who make it so.
The 'founders' were eclectic, not simple ideologues. They accepted and incorporated divergent concepts of theology, politics and economics.
Worshiping 'capitalism' is such a gross error that it seems unthinkable such a thing could happen. 'Capitalism' is merely a tool, something we can use, not something that must be used. It may be appropriate in some cases and not others. Blind faith in something that is not even a faith is inhuman. Capital itself is a mere creation of the mind of man, thus it and all value issue from the same source; human thought, followed by human effort.
"Labor is prior to, and independent of, capital. Capital is only the fruit of labor, and could never have existed if labor had not first existed. Labor is the superior of capital, and deserves much the higher consideration." Abraham Lincoln

Lincoln wasn't an economist. His theory is false.

Capitalism is the system that results when you respect the laws of economics. They are not whims. They are laws.

Lincoln didn't have to be an economist to realize that Capitalism depends on cheap labor, cheap raw materials and cheap energy so that there is enough profit to pay the owners of the means of production far more than they deserve and to pay the workers far, far less than they deserve.

Actually capitalism primarily depends only on one thing: lack of coercion.

Same can't be said about communism, which primarily depends on coercion.

I am not sure your premise is correct. Coercion doesn't necessarily have to be violent. All social systems have laws and those laws restrict us all in some way. In our free market system, places where Christianity is most ubiquitous have the most strict laws and ordinances.. Violate them enough and you will end up being penalized in some way. Anti miscegenation laws kept people of different races from marrying in many southern states.. here were Jim Crow laws. There were laws to facilitate the health and welfare of one group at the expense of another....

Millions in our capitalist system find themselves trapped in a 9 to 5 job they hate. They have a spouse they can't stand, are plagued by a host of social ills and are overburdened by so much debt that many will never be able to pay off. Feeling trapped? Hows that for coercion? And noooo, you can't just walk away. They'll come after you for child support and alimony...as they should if you don't take care of your kids. Still, it is a trap...and many of you are miserable....

Coercion doesn't have to be violent indeed, never said that. Usually it's done by putting a gun on one's head and demanding they do what thy desire. And that is exactly what communists believe in, and capitalists don't.

No one coerces anyone to take any debt in capitalism. It's ridiculous to state that you should be able to steal the wealth of others because you chose a crappy profession. You commie apologist regressives are laughable, did you not hear... 100 million dead? You don't have to apologize, FUCK communism.

Meanwhile, in an American universities, where the commie apologists (or rather the full blown Marxists) decided to host a meeting, expressing their true views and methods:


Let me tell you how this discussion would go if we were talking about Nazism. Everyone would deem it racist and state "Fuck Nazism", perhaps that is what the course of action should be in this case as well? Absent the indoctrination presented above, that would be the reasonable course to take...

 

[there4eyeM]

Capitalism doesn't specify coercion. Many capitalists have used coercion.

 

[JQPublic1]

America is a nation of liberty, brotherhood and intellectual clarity. There is no 'ism' that made or makes it great; it is the people who make it so. If it is not great, it is nevertheless the people who make it so.
The 'founders' were eclectic, not simple ideologues. They accepted and incorporated divergent concepts of theology, politics and economics.
Worshiping 'capitalism' is such a gross error that it seems unthinkable such a thing could happen. 'Capitalism' is merely a tool, something we can use, not something that must be used. It may be appropriate in some cases and not others. Blind faith in something that is not even a faith is inhuman. Capital itself is a mere creation of the mind of man, thus it and all value issue from the same source; human thought, followed by human effort.
"Labor is prior to, and independent of, capital. Capital is only the fruit of labor, and could never have existed if labor had not first existed. Labor is the superior of capital, and deserves much the higher consideration." Abraham Lincoln

Lincoln wasn't an economist. His theory is false.

Capitalism is the system that results when you respect the laws of economics. They are not whims. They are laws.

Lincoln didn't have to be an economist to realize that Capitalism depends on cheap labor, cheap raw materials and cheap energy so that there is enough profit to pay the owners of the means of production far more than they deserve and to pay the workers far, far less than they deserve.

Capitalism doesn't depend on cheap anything. The fundamental law of economics is that all resources are scarce, including labor.

LIke every Marxist, you don't understand the first thing about economics.

Your brilliance is stunning. But dontcha think 7 billion people might be enough of a labor pool to do any jobs on this planet?
Sure when we colonize other planets or even the moon that number might seem paltry..but right now..heh heh heh...I don't think we have a labor shortage...

 

[there4eyeM]

What can people be thinking?

The basis of economics is what people value.

 

[Norman]

Capitalism doesn't specify coercion. Many capitalists have used coercion.

Please specify the capitalists that have used coercion, so we can drag their asses to prison, where they belong.

Just to remind you of the definition:

Coercion
the practice of persuading someone to do something by using force or threats.

So "he didn't give me unlimited free shit" doesn't count.

 

[bripat9643]

America is a nation of liberty, brotherhood and intellectual clarity. There is no 'ism' that made or makes it great; it is the people who make it so. If it is not great, it is nevertheless the people who make it so.
The 'founders' were eclectic, not simple ideologues. They accepted and incorporated divergent concepts of theology, politics and economics.
Worshiping 'capitalism' is such a gross error that it seems unthinkable such a thing could happen. 'Capitalism' is merely a tool, something we can use, not something that must be used. It may be appropriate in some cases and not others. Blind faith in something that is not even a faith is inhuman. Capital itself is a mere creation of the mind of man, thus it and all value issue from the same source; human thought, followed by human effort.
"Labor is prior to, and independent of, capital. Capital is only the fruit of labor, and could never have existed if labor had not first existed. Labor is the superior of capital, and deserves much the higher consideration." Abraham Lincoln

Lincoln wasn't an economist. His theory is false.

Capitalism is the system that results when you respect the laws of economics. They are not whims. They are laws.

Lincoln didn't have to be an economist to realize that Capitalism depends on cheap labor, cheap raw materials and cheap energy so that there is enough profit to pay the owners of the means of production far more than they deserve and to pay the workers far, far less than they deserve.

Capitalism doesn't depend on cheap anything. The fundamental law of economics is that all resources are scarce, including labor.

LIke every Marxist, you don't understand the first thing about economics.

Your brilliance is stunning. But dontcha think 7 billion people might be enough of a labor pool to do any jobs on this planet?
Sure when we colonize other planets or even the moon that number might seem paltry..but right now..heh heh heh...I don't think we have a labor shortage...

There are 7 billion people on the planet available to perform labor, but all those same people need the services and products that labor produces.

You really don't think these things out, do you?

 

[bripat9643]

Capitalism doesn't specify coercion. Many capitalists have used coercion.

For example?