Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Soros has said that the biggest obstacle to the system of government he wants, socialism, is the United States. Now if that is not a threat I don't know what is.
It seems I have to keep asking this question. If socialism and Marxism are so wrong and destructive against America, then when why the hell aren't Republicans advocating abolishing government welfare? When Republicans fail to do this are they also embracing Marxism? Ron Paul wasn't quite like that, yet Republicans treated him as little more than a joke.
You present this question in an obviously rhetorical manner, as if I am the chairman of the republican party. I can assure you I'm not ... and if you knew anything about my position on politics, you'd realize that I operate under no illusions about there being some big difference between these two groups of criminals calling themselves democrats and republicans. They are all members of the same gang, and so obviously so, I find it inexplicable and inexcusable why so many fail to realize it.
As for socialism/Marxism being so wrong for America, there is no "if" about it. That you, or anyone else would have a moment of confusion about that suggests one of only two possibilities ... you don't actually understand what it represents and ultimately delivers time after time .... or you are one of the less enlightened, parasitic types that choose it for it's anticipated benefits. There really is no other possibility.
Aside from the deep structural, mechanistic flaws for which I have previously outlined, there are insidious elements of socialism-Marxism hiding underneath it's mask of self righteousness that are supremely inhumane, and represent a despicable assault on basic human dignity. Marxism implants in the minds of all it's followers that the stronger and more capable and smarter types have a personal obligation to provide for the weaker, less capable and less intelligent ones, all for the greater benefit of the whole. And naturally, socialists readily promote that philosophy as some form of high minded, enlightened wisdom. But in reality, it is just an elitist mindset which compels them to embrace a system which supports their delusions of "superiority" to others, by building a structure that encourages dependence on them. That feeling of superiority and power is like a narcotic to these egomaniacal leftist types for which the costs of taking care of those weaker and inferior ones who are being trained to serve as perpetual dependents, is an acceptable price to pay for this servicing of their narcissism.
Another negative aspect of socialism-Marxism which is insidiously counterproductive to it's promises of an ideal society, is that this philosophy of providing for the needs of those weaker, inferior types, eliminates the need for addressing the inequities and problems that may be responsible for these individuals inability to be more self sufficient. Instead, their dependence is continuously reinforced by providing an endless hand out, similarly counterproductive to what an "all you can eat buffet" might be to person struggling with obesity. It is the degradation of the human spirit under the guise of idealism, relegating other human beings to the status of perpetual children, incapable of taking care of themselves.
But probably the most overlooked or misunderstood consequence of socialism-Marxism is it's "soul" stealing aspects of literally robbing human beings of the opportunity to express their highest natures, while encouraging them to express their lowest. The system literally forces people to participate in charity, both in providing AND accepting assistance. It feeds the egos of the so called "stronger", and marginalizes those assigned as the "weaker" types, which destroys their own sense of self worth. The truth is, the very nature of charity must be voluntary in order to realize charity's true benefits, which does not come to the receiver, but to the selfless giver who chooses to exercise compassion and generosity for the pure satisfaction they receive in assisting others less fortunate. Forcing that charity only ensures the conflict and resentment that will ultimately result between the recipient, and those forced to provide for them. It's an assault on the dignity of those convinced to be dependent, and trains the rest to look upon them as inferior, and an undesirable, but forced burden.
Guess where this ultimately leads? It leads to the eventual mass purging of those unfortunate inferior types from society, based on the overwhelming burden they eventually become, all for the best interests of the collective, of course! And you'll see little opposition from those who have become resentful of their role in being forced to sacrifice to take care of them. Lenin, Stalin, Mao, and all the rest of the socialist-communist regimes of the 20th century have instituted such mass purges to the tune of hundreds of millions of human beings, and far more than all of the major wars combined. How enlightened such a philosophy of taking care of the needy.
But that's the very nature of socialism-communism. And the moment you accept the fundamental dehumanizing premise that the individual's interests must be sacrificed for the best interests of the collective .... you have destroyed the concept of individual liberty, including the basic right to life. That opens the door wide to the pure evil inherent in the mass extermination of large segments of populations that mark the the pages of history by ALL such psychopathic and murderous regimes.
But, they always say ... this time, things will turn out differently .... though it never, NEVER does.
Last edited by GuyNTexas; 09-22-2012 at 02:37 PM..
Although its origin is older, I like this quote frequently attributed to Marx:
From each according to his abilities, to each according to his needs.
I never had that hysterical American fear of Marxism and everything associated with it. I guess your horizon is simply different and more open when you grow up outside the US.
If I were allowed to vote here, I would vote for either the Communist party or the animal rights party. They are the only two parties here that have my idea of justice, fairness, etc. And believe me, I would not be ashamed of voting for those parties at all, I would not try to hide it or anything, like people in the US are almost forced to do.
All communists are shameless. Tell us something we don't already know, won't you?
I know that many here read that title and say there is no such thing as Marxism in America. Well no matter whether you are just a left leaner or an all the way left believer who is here working for the very thing that I most fear, you can afford to watch this video and maybe realize that you are very wrong. Yes we have made some outstanding headway toward the Marxist system in the last few years but we can stop it and many of us want that to happen.
Alright, the man in the video has been castigated many times by leaners of all kinds but why is that? He has trained and served in the Green Beret many years and part of his training involved hard study of Marxism, socialism and on and most of you have never studied them as deeply as he and his buddies did. Oh well, many of you will shut it down as soon as you see who he is. Of course, there are many people in our nation who have to want him gone because he is exposing hard left thinking. Watch the video and then tell me all the things you found wrong with what the man said.
All communists are shameless. Tell us something we don't already know, won't you?
Not so in the US, there has been and still is a kind of witch hunt. It is a bit like in Iran, where everyone not sharing the majority views is considered suspicious...
You present this question in an obviously rhetorical manner, as if I am the chairman of the republican party. I can assure you I'm not ... and if you knew anything about my position on politics, you'd realize that I operate under no illusions about there being some big difference between these two groups of criminals calling themselves democrats and republicans. They are all members of the same gang, and so obviously so, I find it inexplicable and inexcusable why so many fail to realize it.
As for socialism/Marxism being so wrong for America, there is no "if" about it. That you, or anyone else would have a moment of confusion about that suggests one of only two possibilities ... you don't actually understand what it represents and ultimately delivers time after time .... or you are one of the less enlightened, parasitic types that choose it for it's anticipated benefits. There really is no other possibility.
Aside from the deep structural, mechanistic flaws for which I have previously outlined, there are insidious elements of socialism-Marxism hiding underneath it's mask of self righteousness that are supremely inhumane, and represent a despicable assault on basic human dignity. Marxism implants in the minds of all it's followers that the stronger and more capable and smarter types have a personal obligation to provide for the weaker, less capable and less intelligent ones, all for the greater benefit of the whole. And naturally, socialists readily promote that philosophy as some form of high minded, enlightened wisdom. But in reality, it is just an elitist mindset which compels them to embrace a system which supports their delusions of "superiority" to others, by building a structure that encourages dependence on them. That feeling of superiority and power is like a narcotic to these egomaniacal leftist types for which the costs of taking care of those weaker and inferior ones who are being trained to serve as perpetual dependents, is an acceptable price to pay for this servicing of their narcissism.
Another negative aspect of socialism-Marxism which is insidiously counterproductive to it's promises of an ideal society, is that this philosophy of providing for the needs of those weaker, inferior types, eliminates the need for addressing the inequities and problems that may be responsible for these individuals inability to be more self sufficient. Instead, their dependence is continuously reinforced by providing an endless hand out, similarly counterproductive to what an "all you can eat buffet" might be to person struggling with obesity. It is the degradation of the human spirit under the guise of idealism, relegating other human beings to the status of perpetual children, incapable of taking care of themselves.
But probably the most overlooked or misunderstood consequence of socialism-Marxism is it's "soul" stealing aspects of literally robbing human beings of the opportunity to express their highest natures, while encouraging them to express their lowest. The system literally forces people to participate in charity, both in providing AND accepting assistance. It feeds the egos of the so called "stronger", and marginalizes those assigned as the "weaker" types, which destroys their own sense of self worth. The truth is, the very nature of charity must be voluntary in order to realize charity's true benefits, which does not come to the receiver, but to the selfless giver who chooses to exercise compassion and generosity for the pure satisfaction they receive in assisting others less fortunate. Forcing that charity only ensures the conflict and resentment that will ultimately result between the recipient, and those forced to provide for them. It's an assault on the dignity of those convinced to be dependent, and trains the rest to look upon them as inferior, and an undesirable, but forced burden.
Guess where this ultimately leads? It leads to the eventual mass purging of those unfortunate inferior types from society, based on the overwhelming burden they eventually become, all for the best interests of the collective, of course! And you'll see little opposition from those who have become resentful of their role in being forced to sacrifice to take care of them. Lenin, Stalin, Mao, and all the rest of the socialist-communist regimes of the 20th century have instituted such mass purges to the tune of hundreds of millions of human beings, and far more than all of the major wars combined. How enlightened such a philosophy of taking care of the needy.
But that's the very nature of socialism-communism. And the moment you accept the fundamental dehumanizing premise that the individual's interests must be sacrificed for the best interests of the collective .... you have destroyed the concept of individual liberty, including the basic right to life. That opens the door wide to the pure evil inherent in the mass extermination of large segments of populations that mark the the pages of history by ALL such psychopathic and murderous regimes.
But, they always say ... this time, things will turn out differently .... though it never, NEVER does.
Quote:
Originally Posted by GuyNTexas
All communists are shameless. Tell us something we don't already know, won't you?
Ha, isn't American government welfare largely based on this Marxist principle:
"From each according to his ability, to each according to his need."Karl Marx
No, it is not.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Of course he doesn't have a link. The request will be ignored.
