"How do you tell a communist? Well, it's someone who reads Marx and Lenin. And how do you tell an anti-Communist? It's someone who understands Marx and Lenin."

...Ronald Reagan

Said by a man who had likely never read Marx or Lenin and certainly didn't understand either of them.

Clue us in, you who are so knowledgable.

In what fantasy does the powerful have your interests at heart?

Under what circumstance does the mob choose what is best for you?

8"Freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction. We didn't pass it to our children in the bloodstream. It must be fought for, protected, and handed on for them to do the same, or one day we will spend our sunset years telling our children and our children's children what it was once like in the United States where men were free."

https://www.heritage.org/report/ronald-reagan-and-the-fall-communism



Communists failed, literally, to deliver the goods to the people. They promised bread but produced food shortages and rationing-- except for Party members and the nomenklatura. They promised the people land but delivered them into collectives. They promised peace but sent young men off to die in foreign wars in distant lands.

Which was a feature of Soviet centralization. Mao's investment of China's future in the peasantry was flawed because a nation's advanced industry can't function when run by labour that fails to understand how it functions. The failure of the Soviet Union and China are due to the poor planning of those particular states.

Where does it say you aren't free under socialism? We sure as fuck ain't free under democracy neither...

We're certainly not free here in America.

“There are two ways to conquer and enslave a nation. One is by the sword. The other is by debt.”- John Adams

Huh??? Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Where does it say you aren't free under socialism?
> We sure as fuck ain't free under democracy
> neither...


Bill of rights, not democracy, is what provides freedom.

Juefn Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Huh??? Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Where does it say you aren't free under
> socialism?
> > We sure as fuck ain't free under democracy
> > neither...
>
>
> Bill of rights, not democracy, is what provides
> freedom.

The state have NEVER violated those.

AllyOfNone Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Which was a feature of Soviet centralization.
> Mao's investment of China's future in the
> peasantry was flawed because a nation's advanced
> industry can't function when run by labour that
> fails to understand how it functions. The failure
> of the Soviet Union and China are due to the poor
> planning of those particular states.

POOR PLANNING? So exactly whom am I to expect will plan better for my family - an unknown govt bureaucrat or me? You are not dealing in reality. Study history. If you love socialism, emigrate to where it has worked so well, work to perfect it there.

Nbmfg Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> AllyOfNone Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Which was a feature of Soviet centralization.
> > Mao's investment of China's future in the
> > peasantry was flawed because a nation's
> advanced
> > industry can't function when run by labour that
> > fails to understand how it functions. The
> failure
> > of the Soviet Union and China are due to the
> poor
> > planning of those particular states.
>
> POOR PLANNING? So exactly whom am I to expect will
> plan better for my family - an unknown govt
> bureaucrat or me? You are not dealing in reality.
> Study history. If you love socialism, emigrate to
> where it has worked so well, work to perfect it
> there.


You confuse Socialism, Communism, Stalinism and Maoism. The two latter differ in their planning. I've studied Marxism, Socialism, Communism, the planning periods of the Soviet Union, the planning of Mao's China, the post-revolution planning of the Cuban economy, and so on. I know well what was feasible and what was destined to fail, or at least cause significant issues, under those systems. There are countries that are heavily socialized and function very well. The problem in those countries is the liberal attitudes that believe the successful system can survive any load.

AllyOfNone Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Nbmfg Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > AllyOfNone Wrote:
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> > -----
> > > Which was a feature of Soviet centralization.
>
> > > Mao's investment of China's future in the
> > > peasantry was flawed because a nation's
> > advanced
> > > industry can't function when run by labour
> that
> > > fails to understand how it functions. The
> > failure
> > > of the Soviet Union and China are due to the
> > poor
> > > planning of those particular states.
> >
> > POOR PLANNING? So exactly whom am I to expect
> will
> > plan better for my family - an unknown govt
> > bureaucrat or me? You are not dealing in
> reality.
> > Study history. If you love socialism, emigrate
> to
> > where it has worked so well, work to perfect it
> > there.
>
>
> You confuse Socialism, Communism, Stalinism and
> Maoism. The two latter differ in their planning.
> I've studied Marxism, Socialism, Communism, the
> planning periods of the Soviet Union, the planning
> of Mao's China, the post-revolution planning of
> the Cuban economy, and so on. I know well what
> was feasible and what was destined to fail, or at
> least cause significant issues, under those
> systems. There are countries that are heavily
> socialized and function very well. The problem in
> those countries is the liberal attitudes that
> believe the successful system can survive any
> load.

Go there.

I take you're also unaware of the long and successful history of socialism, socialist and communist organisations, and labour movements within the US?

"Government's view of the economy could be summed up in a few short phrases: If it moves, tax it. If it keeps moving, regulate it. And if it stops moving, subsidize it."

No matter who you are, that is an amazing and powerful line

from an historic and incredible moment in the American experience.

We all remember where we were when he said that.

> You confuse Socialism, Communism, Stalinism and Maoism. The two
> latter differ in their planning. I've studied Marxism, Socialism,
> Communism, the planning periods of the Soviet Union, the planning
> of Mao's China, the post-revolution planning of the Cuban economy,
> and so on. I know well what was feasible and what was destined to
> fail, or at least cause significant issues, under those systems.
> There are countries that are heavily socialized and function very
> well. The problem in those countries is the liberal attitudes that
> believe the successful system can survive any load.

Intelligencia: the problem is that, at the root, these "systems" deny the human spirit, devalue individual life and choice, attempt to impose on society virtues attainable only by free individuals' introspection and desire. You cannot force or coerce happiness, regardless of your thoughtful societal design.

Trump has broken the democrats.

They are now the party of war and socialism and red scare. They can't get out of the box Trump has led them into. Now they hate Russia but love Russian socialism? Bernie honeymooned in the USSR. The dems are going to get run over in 2020.

You idiots are on your last leg facing immediate extinction. About 20 months or so? You're in no position to dictate anything.

Not to mention you offer nothing but corruption, inequality and bankruptcy.

Corruption: like faking a dossier to get a warrant to spy on your political opponent, erasing your tracks, taking millions from russia and other foreign entities into your pocket?

Inequality: like hating white heterosexual males because of their skin and genetailia? Or dressing in klan outfits? Or is it Trump's Global Women’s Empowerment Initiative that you disdain?

Bankruptcy is a Congressional problem not DJT's. If you care about it, you may want to vote for a representative that cares about it, too.

Nazi's and Hitler came to power by throwing out the Communists.

Nice try: Nazis were antisemitic socialists: National Socialist German Workers' Party.

Ccwt6 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Nice try: Nazis were antisemitic socialists:
> National Socialist German Workers' Party.


Yet the first people the Nazi Party expelled, incarcerate or executed were intellectuals and leftists. While the Nazi Party may have adopted socialist policies they incorporated them into an ideology that is contradictory to left-wing principles.

Hitler wanted big government, he wanted big eductation, he wanted thought control. He hated political dissidents. He loathed free-speech. He feared an armed citizenry.

https://www.louderwithcrowder.com/myth-busted-actually-yes-hitler-was-a-socialist-liberal/

Hitler said: "We are socialists, we are enemies of today’s capitalistic economic system for the exploitation of the economically weak, with its unfair salaries, with its unseemly evaluation of a human being according to wealth and property instead of responsibility and performance, and we are determined to destroy this system under all conditions.”

Lip service to the working class. Hitler knew he needed the disgruntled, impoverished working class to build adequate support for his movement, he appealed to them by delivering a tailored message.

AllyOfNone Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Lip service to the working class. Hitler knew he
> needed the disgruntled, impoverished working class
> to build adequate support for his movement, he
> appealed to them by delivering a tailored message.

Sounds like left wing principles to me.

I should also point out that his propaganda efforts, upon recommendation from Goebbels, were shifted from appealing to the left to inciting the left. He then dispatched the SA to engage the leftists and subsequently red-baited them.

Hhuey Wrote:

> Sounds like left wing principles to me.


His message fell upon deaf ears. His efforts failed.

AllyOfNone Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Ccwt6 Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Nice try: Nazis were antisemitic socialists:
> > National Socialist German Workers' Party.
>
>
> Yet the first people the Nazi Party expelled,
> incarcerate or executed were intellectuals and
> leftists. While the Nazi Party may have adopted
> socialist policies they incorporated them into an
> ideology that is contradictory to left-wing
> principles.


The nazis started out as a worker's socialist party. They always despised capitalists which they thought were all jews or working for jews. They were socialists from start to finish.

Hitler said: "We are socialists, we are enemies of today’s capitalistic economic system for the exploitation of the economically weak, with its unfair salaries, with its unseemly evaluation of a human being according to wealth and property instead of responsibility and performance, and we are determined to destroy this system under all conditions.”

Bullshit yourself if you want, facts:
Free health care
Gun confiscation
State-run education from toddlers up
Blame the 1% jews
Pro-abortion

https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2017/09/01/exclusive-dsouza-the-hitler-sanger-connection/

Hanz Franz Wrote:

> The nazis started out as a worker's socialist
> party. They always despised capitalists which
> they thought were all jews or working for jews.
> They were socialists from start to finish.


Yet they struggled and failed to garner support from the left, to the point of resorting to eliminating them from the equation. I'm also interested in the evidence supporting your claim that socialism, an economic concept, requires the social concept of antisemitism.

Cjxdc Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Hitler said: "We are socialists, we are enemies of
> today’s capitalistic economic system for the
> exploitation of the economically weak, with its
> unfair salaries, with its unseemly evaluation of a
> human being according to wealth and property
> instead of responsibility and performance, and we
> are determined to destroy this system under all
> conditions.”
>
> Bullshit yourself if you want, facts:
> Free health care
> Gun confiscation
> State-run education from toddlers up
> Blame the 1% jews
> Pro-abortion
>
> https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2017/09/01/excl
> usive-dsouza-the-hitler-sanger-connection/


Healthcare was not free, it was paid for but the collective public, as it is everywhere.

While firearms were confiscated from those not toeing the party line, firearms control was stiffer under Weimar.

State-run education is moot point.

Demonizing the Jews was, as it is in every socially right-wing country, almost a necessity in order to rally support for a broader cause.

Under Nazi Party's laws pertaining to abortion, Aryan women were granted abortions if they could adequately argue that whatever hereditary defect a parent had would be passed on to the child. Non-Aryan women were encouraged to control or terminate births. The latter makes sense since the Nazi Party ideology was one of eliminating those deemed racially inferior.

AllyOfNone Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Hanz Franz Wrote:
>
> > The nazis started out as a worker's socialist
> > party. They always despised capitalists which
> > they thought were all jews or working for jews.
>
> > They were socialists from start to finish.
>
>
> Yet they struggled and failed to garner support
> from the left, to the point of resorting to
> eliminating them from the equation. I'm also
> interested in the evidence supporting your claim
> that socialism, an economic concept, requires the
> social concept of antisemitism.


I never made that claim. And the nazis eliminated all kinds of people, to the left or the right. Just like the communists in Russia slaughtered millions of leftists.

Hanz Franz Wrote:

> I never made that claim. And the nazis eliminated
> all kinds of people, to the left or the right.
> Just like the communists in Russia slaughtered
> millions of leftists.


You are, consciously or unconsciously, drawing a correlation between an economic ideology and a social ideology. You are, again consciously or unconsciously, stating that the Nazi Party's antisemitism was a result of its socialist policies.

It is not surprising that America is seeing a push for greater socialism. What is surprising is that conservatives did not see it coming, or see it as the probable consequence of their economic policies. The New Deal was based on the idea that if hard working Americans would buy into the system if they thought their hard work would result in a comfortable life. In 1968 a liberal historian-philosopher predicted if America pursued policies conservatives were starting to push that favored the well off at the expense of the less well off the result would be a loss of faith in the system and greater attacks on wealth and income inequality. Conservatives did not want to believe it. They instead chose to believe the drift towards socialism that FDR halted with The New Deal was dead rather than just dormant.

AllyOfNone Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Hanz Franz Wrote:
>
> > I never made that claim. And the nazis
> eliminated
> > all kinds of people, to the left or the right.
> > Just like the communists in Russia slaughtered
> > millions of leftists.
>
>
> You are, consciously or unconsciously, drawing a
> correlation between an economic ideology and a
> social ideology. You are, again consciously or
> unconsciously, stating that the Nazi Party's
> antisemitism was a result of its socialist
> policies.


No, sorry. I'm not saying that at all. I'm just telling you that the nazis started out as socialists. You said they incorporated socialist policies, but the fact is they were founded on socialist policies. I've only used the name Hanz Franz here.

Hanz Franz Wrote:

> No, sorry. I'm not saying that at all. I'm just
> telling you that the nazis started out as
> socialists. You said they incorporated socialist
> policies, but the fact is they were founded on
> socialist policies. I've only used the name Hanz
> Franz here.


Yet history refutes your claim.

"Whoever is prepared to make the national cause his own to such an extent that he knows no higher ideal than the welfare of the nation; whoever has understood our great national anthem, “Deutschland ueber Alles,” to mean that nothing in the wide world surpasses in his eyes this Germany, people and land — that man is a Socialist."

The above quote, made by Hitler himself, prove my point that he neither understood what socialisms societal tenets nor particularly cared. The quote below also refutes the argument that Hitler was a socialist and he admits that, to him, socialism is whatever HE defines it as.

"Socialism! What does socialism really mean? If people have something to eat and their pleasures, then they have their socialism."

-------------------------------------------------------
> Hitler said: "We are socialists, we are enemies of
> today’s capitalistic economic system for the
> exploitation of the economically weak, with its
> unfair salaries, with its unseemly evaluation of a
> human being according to wealth and property
> instead of responsibility and performance, and we
> are determined to destroy this system under all
> conditions.”
>
>
> Bullshit yourself if you want, facts:
> Free health care
> Gun confiscation
> State-run education from toddlers up
> Blame the 1% jews
> Pro-abortion

Lines up pretty tidily.

And those screaming "fascism" at djt seem to fall silent when government aligns with solendra, alphabet, facebook, amazon. Unbelievable. So much smarter than everyone else. Not. No different than military industrial complex, except they are operating here at home and extending tentacles worldwide.

Tmj4d Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> And those screaming "fascism" at djt seem to fall
> silent when government aligns with solendra,
> alphabet, facebook, amazon. Unbelievable. So much
> smarter than everyone else. Not. No different than
> military industrial complex, except they are
> operating here at home and extending tentacles
> worldwide.


I take issue with those cases as well.

AllyOfNone: please become an ally of your countrymen.

These two parties are our demise. We the people have more that unite us than divide us. The politicians incent division for their own benefit, then agree to ridiculous concessions which indebt us and the yet unborn (ultimate taxation without representation), and do not benefit us.

> "Socialism! What does socialism really mean? If
> people have something to eat and their pleasures,
> then they have their socialism."


Yes a socialist believes it is the proper role of the state to provide these things. A capitalist believes it is the responsibility of the individual.

We can quibble whether Hitler was a "good socialist" but at the very heart he was a statist authoritarian and this is also diametrically opposed to the American way of life and Constitution, which is based on personal liberty/responsibility, limited government, separation of powers and federalism.

All good Americans love freedom and reject statist ideologies and Trump loves America and does not want to see us make the same terrible mistakes of the last century.

Hanz Franz wrote:
>
> Yes a socialist believes it is the proper role of
> the state to provide these things. A capitalist
> believes it is the responsibility of the
> individual.
>
> We can quibble whether Hitler was a "good
> socialist" but at the very heart he was a statist
> authoritarian and this is also diametrically
> opposed to the American way of life and
> Constitution, which is based on personal
> liberty/responsibility, limited government,
> separation of powers and federalism.
>
> All good Americans love freedom and reject statist
> ideologies and Trump loves America and does not
> want to see us make the same terrible mistakes of
> the last century.


Yet the history of America is one stained with countless instances of the state imposing on the individual, their liberty, and when it suits, picking winners and losers. America is no more free than many of the countries it looks down upon. What America is superior at it convincing it's populace that the violations were either necessary or never occurred.

True and who is the state and what do you do about it?