Forgive me I havent been keeping up american politics. Do they accuse Obama of being a communist because of his healthcare reforms? As in, they have confused socialism with communism?
Name:
Anonymous2010-01-17 15:41
Yeah, they're idiots. Just ignore them. Now, I don't like what Obama's been pushing for either and the interventionism that he's doing in the middle east, but I don't call him such ridiculous far-out names.
If I were to label Obama something I'd call him a statist since that's more of an accurate term. I think people in Europe say that he's "center-left" (correct me if I'm wrong), and if he were really communist his political "compass" so to speak would be much much further left.
Name:
Anonymous2010-01-17 20:47
Read the Communist Manifesto, read his party's platform, and read "Rules for Radicals" by Saul Alinski, and get back to us.
>>3
This has been going on for the nearly the last 100 years. Both parties Republican and Democrat are guilty of this. It certainly didn't start because some little man wrote a book in the early 70s after a decade of big social movement.
In number 5 of the planks of communism it says that "5. Centralization of credit in the banks of the state, by means of a national bank with state capital and an exclusive monopoly." is what basically describes the function of the Federal Reserve System, which is neither federal nor does it have reserves.
The fed was founded and chartered in 1913 constantly sucking whatever wealth the United States dollar has, and it's done a damn good job of it since the dollar has already lost 95% of its value.
Meanwhile you get distracted by the now false dichotomy of Republican/Democrat circle jerk, race relations, "liberals", "conservatives", etc. It's all just one big circus show. If going by that, the Republicans are just as "communist", which is a silly label as these are much more accurately statist parties.
If these parties were really for the people they would nominate people thinking 24/7 how to kill this cancer that is the Federal Reserve from government completely, but they control both parties and both parties are bought and paid for.
So yeah, I'm done.
Name:
Anonymous2010-01-17 23:47
Americans, in general, cannot tell the difference between communism and socialism. As a rule, they are unaware of the fact that by their own definition of socialism, every aspect of government is socialist. They ask why they should have to pay when someone else gets a debilitating illness but don't think to question why they have to pay taxes to fund the police even if they haven't been robbed, or pay taxes to fund the fire department when their house hasn't burned, or pay taxes to fund roads they wont drive on, or to fund schools when they don't have kids, or monitor the safety of food they don't eat, or or ensure the air is clean enough to breathe in cities they don't live in, and i could go on, but I think the point is obvious.
Americans, in general, accept what the government provides them as though they were entitled to it, but reject out of hand the notion they they are required to pay taxes to make these things happen. They demand whatever they feel they want, and refuse to pay for it.
They ask why they should have to pay when someone else gets a debilitating illness but don't think to question why they have to pay taxes to fund the police even if they haven't been robbed, or pay taxes to fund the fire department when their house hasn't burned, or pay taxes to fund roads they wont drive on, or to fund schools when they don't have kids, or monitor the safety of food they don't eat, or or ensure the air is clean enough to breathe in cities they don't live in, [...]
Looks like you don't have a fucking clue what socialism means either.
None of what you listed has anything to do with
- dictatorship of the proletariat
- redistribution of wealth
- giving the means of production to the workers
- OR ANYTHING ELSE MARXIST WHATSOEVER
Slapping the label "socialist" on all public services makes you a bigger moron than your strawmen Americans, possibly even the biggest moron on this board yet.
Name:
Anonymous2010-01-20 12:37
There are no people in our country without health care. No doctor can turn someone away because they don't have money.. County hospitals provide healthcare for EVERYONE.. Even those in our country illegally..
Name:
Anonymous2010-01-20 14:03
>>6
Socialism is not Marxism. In fact, Socialists can't agree entirely on exactly what socialism is. Many believe that rather than the nationalization of the means of production, the state should only control capital and employ a market economy. In this context, social services represent an example of "redistribution of wealth". So you're either trolling, or are truly "the biggest moron on this board".
Name:
Anonymous2010-01-20 23:59
obama is hitler reborn so he cant be a commi
Name:
Anonymous2010-01-21 10:17
>>8
I already know that the retarded commies have problems with language and especial definitions.
In this context, social services [...]
Yet another great example for the rampant illiteracy among the Left. Even though I correctly pointed out that POLICE, FIRE DEPARTMENT, PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION, EDUCATION ETC are NOT redistributive in nature you go off to tell us that social services are, however, commie bullshit. THANK, YOU CAPTAIN OBVIOUS.
Also, lol @ your arrogance and then failing at basic reading comprehension AHAHAHAHAHA
I'm pretty sure Obama is a hardcore Stalinist at heart, a machiavellian power hungry sociopath who is using socialism as a medieval monarch would use catholicism to inspire fanatical zeal in his followers so they are capable of atrocities beyond reason or morality.
It all boils down to retarded closet racists. Most of them can't come right out and say they don't want a black president, so they desperately latch onto any other slur they can.
Combine that with the fact that the vast majority of people in general are staggeringly ignorant and breathtakingly irrational, mix in politics as usual, and I'm surprised there haven't been MORE failed assassination plots.
I voted for him. But not really because I wanted to. I just really, REALLY didn't want to let McCain and that stupid bitch win. That was the only reason I voted at all.
So, whats wrong with capitalism and socialism, both are great
ideologies with good and bad points, you can't say it sucks just because you don't like someone who used it and may have corrupted it as every ideology is, for instance, in America
its democracy and freedom on paper only, in reality the freedom said is non existent if you open your eyes a little and
grow an individuality. This said i don't bet, i know 80%
of you dont know shit about capitalism/socialism due to being underageb& willing only to proclaim everything shit if it contradicts even one little pathetic thought you have.
And as a last say i will add : Everyone with at least basic education knows that by now Scandinavians have the closest thing to a "Utopia" in this world, one of the best educations
and best lives, and guess what they are, not capitalists
and not socialists, they have the blend of the two, literally
speaking, the used the golden middle line.
Name:
Anonymous2010-01-27 4:13
>>27
Capitalism isn't an ideology, the clinical definition of capitalism itself allows space for a few public services and shit. Capitalism is vastly more preferable to communism for the very reasons you have stated.
and it is at least two times more prone to corruption of the worst silent kind.
that reminds me, why did 1929 repeat itself in the same exact manner ? the answer has nothing to do with socialism, and everything to do with capitalistic ways.
Capitalist countries experience depressions because they were at one point experiencing prosperity, socialist countries are in a perpetual great depression, in capitalist countries corruption results in the poor getting poorer, in socialist countries corruption results in the poor starving. Every flaw in capitalism is on steroids in socialism and covered up with government bureaucracy.
Name:
Anonymous2010-01-27 13:53
>>29
You seem to forget that the economy is already heavily managed by the state, and there's much corporatism; the corporations run the show. Now, if the Federal Reserve were abolished and corporate person-hood and the government didn't give subsidizes to the lobbying corporations, then there wouldn't be this problem.
The problem is not "capitalization" but rather, corporatism and statist stranglehold on the economy. Another thing is also, that this poisonous system hurts people who desire to control the means of their own production.
>>31
Whoops! I meant capitalism, not capitalization. Damn spell checker.
Name:
Anonymous2010-01-28 4:55
>>31
You can go right ahead and point out the corruption in the capitalist system, you're right about corporate welfare and I'm ok with that, that's just the thing though, you can go right ahead because corporation's power doesn't reach as far as the power of politicians in a "people's" republic.
Capitalism in fact reduces corruption, so we need more of it, totally unfettered 19th century style laissez faire, the kind of thing Karl Marx hated.
Name:
Anonymous2010-01-28 5:35
>>33
Capitalism is corruption. Get as much as you can out of everyone you can. Totally unfettered 19th century style laissez faire capitalism failed. Backwards is the wrong direction.
Name:
Anonymous2010-01-28 5:48
>>33
Oh I know, I agree. In an ideal society, corporations wouldn't exist as they do today. Most people would be in control of the means of their own production. I agree with a complete laissez faire, free market economy. But you can't seriously propose that without talk of abolishing the Federal Reserve, and the entire "corporate welfare", and lobbying the government for subsidies that we have today. That's where most of the corruption that anti-capitalists rag on about comes from.
>>34
It didn't fail. People eventually just lost faith in it. It seems to be a flaw in an aging republic that after a while, the state must start to control the lives of the people that it governs.
Name:
Anonymous2010-01-28 14:49
>>35
And the government must also fear it's people, for without people
there isn't a government, and since capitalist government
is the most prone to corruption and escalating the control over
its people to militaristic levels, you get to the point of mistrust, face it capitalism, socialism, nationalism, communism
despite having all god points fail miserably due to human nature.
Communism may have fallen earlier, but let's face it, give too much freedom and you are bound to start misusing it.
Freedom by which you think you live, and which you strive for
will never happen due to nature. The only reason USA didn't fall
earlier is the fact that freedom sounding nice prolongs the hope
, yet effects of everything falling apart can be seen the moment you
step on the streets and take a good look around.
Obama = Communist ? pfffffft so tell me, what is wrong with communism that isn't already wrong with the western ways ?
Both have good and bad points equally, you have to be stupid to focus on only one thing while blindly and fanatically not seeing
whats first wrong with yourself.
Name:
Anonymous2010-01-28 18:07
>>give too much freedom and you are bound to start misusing it.
Speak for yourself, troll.
Name:
Anonymous2010-01-28 23:28
if anything obama's a righty.
then again, i'm a communist so he's not going to seem very liberal to me.
but his state of the union address? lame. the only sort of progressive thing he did was when he said he'd end Don't Ask Don't Tell, and maybe forgiveness for student loans.
but anybody who OKs offshore drilling is definitely not a commie.
>>36
The only people who advocate for communism are the ones who will rule over the population they were suppose to equalize with their crazy Utopian ideas. Either that, or they're complete morons.
But of course the USSR proved us all wrong and they're still going strong...oh wait.
Name:
Anonymous2010-01-29 7:28
tell that to Cuba lol
Name:
Anonymous2010-01-29 19:03
>>38
What does offshore drilling have to do with Marxist-Leninist scientific socialism, comrade? If the people require the resources, then the state, acting in its capacity as guardian of the people's revolution, must seize and exploit them.
Name:
Anonymous2010-01-29 21:03
They call him a communist because he's the other party. It's similar to the bush is a fascist stuff, a smear that has no basis in the reality of either the person or what you are calling them.
I don't, however, remember any Democratic leaders touting the fascist stuff, the way the GOP throws around socialist.
People keep talking about a Public Health Care Option like its a socialist idea or a movement towards socialism, however i see the introduction of a public option a move towards competition between insurance companies, and i thought that competition between companies was one of the key aspects of Capitalism. And in the end it works out only benefiting the people right because of competitive prices between Insurance and the Government? Could someone please explain how it is a Socialist movement not a Capitalist one.
Name:
Anonymous2010-01-31 16:59
>>44
Okay, fine. It isn't an outright nationalization and seizure of 1/6 of the nation's economy, it isn't a plan in which all Americans who do have insurance aren't going to be forced to use "the government option" in five years or less, it isn't going to fund coverage for illegal aliens by taxing existing private insurance coverage, it isn't going to be a massive transfer of wealth from the productive to useless eaters, it isn't designed with the intent of creating the largest possible bloc of voters who will be dependent upon this new government program forevermore and who will therefore dependably vote the straight Democrat ticket. Fine.
If we say these things enough times over and over, will that make any of it true? Nope.