Can anyone give me a real reason Bernie is bad for America?

a reply to: pexx421

So, you claim one thing meanwhile socialist and communist websites claim differently?...

As for your claim that socialism existed before communism... There were ideas that were similar in the past, but the definition of socialism itself was changed by people like Engels, and Marx, amongst others. Once a state becomes socialist, you cannot stop it from becoming communist unless you exert force to stop political opponents from taking over the state. In some cases the transition is quick, such as Cuba and Venezuela. in other occasions it takes much longer for the transition to occur, but it happens. It's as certain as death and taxes.

originally posted by: ElectricUniverse
a reply to: GodEmperor

When people claim socialism is only an economic system they are showing not to understand what it is. Socialism isn't just an economic system. It is also a political system.

As for "social democracy"... Venezuela is an example of one of the latest "social democracies" implemented, in which socialism was the goal. But Chavez and the Chavistas were not simply socialist, they were/are Marxists.

But Venezuela is doing great right? After all, since the "rationing system" was implemented, which all socialist systems implement, Venezuelans are going hungry, they fight over the last food products, or other basic products in supermarkets meanwhile tons and tons of food were rotting in government warehouses... Crime has surged to levels not seen before, police corruption is more rampant, and political opponents are threatened, or worse. You want to know where Bernie's ideas will lead the U.S.? Look at Venezuela and that's the answer.

Sanders takes Scandinavia as an example... and has clarified that he’s not the kind of Socialist who favors state ownership of anything like the means of production.

So I think your view is a just a little distorted.

a reply to: whatsup86

Scandinavia is a capitalist system.

People should be narrow with the terms they use.

a reply to: GodEmperor youre right, of course. All people who want any kind of social structures to support people in a society obviously are just waiting for their chance to pounce with their communism. And yeah.....cuba and Venezuela are obviously communist as well.

a reply to: pexx421

What are you rambling about?

I have not mentioned Venezuela or Cuba, and I have not made any claims that those nations are communist, nor any assertions towards the idea that social programs lead to communism. Social programs are not a hallmark of socialism, socialism is the state ownership of the means of production. End of story.

originally posted by: pexx421
a reply to: GodEmperor dear god. please you two. There have been, what, 2 countries, in history (ok, maybe 3) that even CLAIMED to be communist. So, in these 2 out of thousands you guys now think that all socialism leads to communism, and that any social programs are socialist, therefore any nations having social programs are on the path to communism. Big tip here guys, too much communism is not the worlds problem.

Two countries only that have been communist?... Have you been living under a rock? China, U.S.S.R., Cuba, Vietnam, Laos, North Korea, Venezuela...

That's no including countries like Burma/Myanmar, and although the CCP of Myanmar is banned they are still operating illegally with insurgents trying to turn Myanmar into communism.

Here is a list of some of the current, and former communist countries, as well as a list of "socialist" and former socialist countries.

en.wikipedia.org...

At least 25 countries have been, or are Marxist-Leninist, Venezuela should be there as well since Chavez admitted to being a communist after denying it for years.

Former marxist-Leninist countries include: Afghanistan, Albania, Angola, Benin, Bulgaria, Cambodia, Congo-Brazzaville, Czechoslovakia, Ethiopia, East Germany, Hungary, Mongolia, Mozambique, Poland, Romania, Somalia, Soviet Union, North Vietnam, South Yemen, Yugoslavia...

Then there are other non-Marxist countries to add to this list.

Notice that communist states also consider themselves "socialist", because in order to be communist you have to be socialist.

Then, there is the list of other similar countries to which communists sent soldiers, or help communist insurgents to implement communist in those nations such as Angola among others.

a reply to: ElectricUniverse

There has never been a communist nation in the history of the world.

Communism is a stateless and classless society. Those nations you mentioned, had a state and a hierarchical structure.

a reply to: GodEmperorthank you. sorry, I got you mixed up with him/her

originally posted by: GodEmperor
a reply to: ElectricUniverse

There has never been a communist nation in the history of the world.

Communism is a stateless and classless society. Those nations you mentioned, had a state and a hierarchical structure.

That stage can never be reached because once you give all power to one branch of the government, the State, there is no turning back.

There can never be a country in which "all people own everything, and they are directly responsible for the government". More so when according to socialism no person can own the means of productions. Which means only the State owns it, and not the people...

Even Senators, and Representatives do not always agree. Do you know what happens when millions of people try to implement their own form of "socialism"?... Chaos... Millions of people disagreeing with each other. Telling each other how the government should run, what to do with the means of production... Nothing will ever be done, and the nation will become bankrupt. Not to mention all the crime that will occur because you are also giving these liberties to all criminals.

Only representative governments, in which the power of the government is divided amongst different branches through representatives can achieve a viable form of government. The claims of communism reaching a stateless state is nothing more than a fairy tale to lure people into believing it is "an attainable paradise"...

Do you know how there is peace in a socialist/communist state?...

The meaning of peace is the absence of opposition to socialism.
Karl Marx

www.brainyquote.com...

This is why true socialist, and finally communist countries turn oppressive, because they have to repress all opposition to socialism which can only happen by force.

a reply to: deadlyhope Look at the old Soviet Union in the 50s and 60s where you wait in line to enter an empty grocery store. That"s uncle Bernie"s dream for this country.Maybe he likes the cuban model of communism. We have had 7 years of socialism from the commander in thief. Its a failed system.

a reply to: CharlieSpeirs

Simple. He denies basic human nature. He is rooted in marxism, and the young only view socialism as it reads on paper. but then we go back to the whole human nature part.

free everything wont change the minds of complacent people to begin with. if states want to adopt socialist property, im ok with it. but other than defense and infrastructure, keep it out of the fed.

originally posted by: deadlyhope
Can anyone give me a real reason Bernie is bad for America?

Yes. I can.

Congress spending money under Bernie's $18 trillion dollar plan for America.

Congress is corrupt. Money disappears by the millions and billions when Congress doesn't bid out contracts and misappropriates money....and Bernie has not made government spending oversight and accountability central to his campaign. Sure he is 'going after big banks,' but he really should be going after Congress.

Bernie may be anti-establishment, but I do believe the establishment loves Bernie and his spending plan.

(See Obama's stimulus plan spending and the ACA for an example.)

a reply to: menehune I think yall have a flawed view of human nature. Probably because the society you all come from is so sick that the natural state of a human with no work to do is self medicating, through alcohol, drugs, and sleep. In actuality, I think the natural state of a human at rest, who is not subject to the ridiculous stressors of todays cutthroat society, is creativity and expression, and work towards self actualization. But instead you all would rather glamourize a society that venerates nothing but greed, where consumption is the highest virtue, and most people are consumed with pathologies due to the stressors of the "modern life".

a reply to: pexx421

Id give you multiple stars if I could, I very much agree with your sentiment. People underestimate the effects of long term conditioning & how it has tragically influenced us all.

I'm a man without a candidate. As a Democrat I don't see myself voting for either HIlary or Bernie.

a reply to: TestudoAubreii

You are not alone.

a reply to: MotherMayEye

Bernie claims to be going after big banks, but it is always the same claim. It is how other "social democrats" in the past got not only control, but transferred that control to a more socialist state. These days the state under the Obama administration is going after conservatives, and other Americans who lean to the right. Bernie, as well as Hillary will continue the pace that the Obama administration has been taking.

Obama has gone around Congress on several instances, implementing policies he knew Congress would not approve of. He has disobeyed his oath not only to the people of the United States, but forgetting his oath to protect and follow the United States Constitution. Obama is very socialist.

Some in here claim Obama is a corporatist...But to this day very left leaning people in power have learned, just like Hitler and Mussolini, that they need money and a stable economy. Mussolini and Hitler used corporatists just like Obama is using them, because without these people the economy will crumble just like it happened to the U.S.S.R.
But make no mistake, Obama leans as heavily towards socialism as Bernie does. Obama's mentors include Frank Davis, a known communist, and if you look at the Czars, and the people Obama has put in power, they all lean heavily towards socialism.

This is the goal the global elites want. To turn the United States into socialism. Only then can they implement a One World Socialist Government under corporate rule.

“The governments of Europe, the United States, and Japan are unlikely to negotiate a social-democratic pattern of globalization – unless their hands are forced by a popular movement or a catastrophe, such as another Great Depression or ecological disaster“

These governments would not accept a "social-democratic pattern of globalization" unless their hands are FORCED by a popular movement (Occupy and Anthropogenic Global Warming movements), another Great Depression (the current GLOBAL economic crisis), or an ecological disaster (Global Warming being blamed on humans)

Democratising Global Governance:

The Challenges of the World Social Forum

by

Francesca Beausang


ABSTRACT

This paper sums up the debate that took place during the two round tables organized by UNESCO within the first World Social Forum in Porto Alegre (25/30 January 2001). It starts with a discussion of national processes, by examining democracy and then governance at the national level. It first states a case for a "joint" governance based on a combination of stakeholder theory, which is derived from corporate governance, and of UNESCO's priorities in the field of governance. As an example, the paper investigates how governance can deviate from democracy in the East Asian model. Subsequently, the global dimension of the debate on democracy and governance is examined, first by identification of the characteristics and agents of democracy in the global setting, and then by allusion to the difficulties of transposing governance to the global level.

www.unesco.org...

The above paper is from 1991 from the UN (UNESCO is a branch of the UN in case you didn't know). This paper shows that these globalists want a global socialist/fascist government derived from corporate governance.

a reply to: MotherMayEye

Do remember this money is disappearing because Congress can't do a thing about the Federal Reserve having the power over the United States' economy. The robbing is being done by the Feds, which happens to be an idea implemented by progressive democrats. Of course politics in the U.S. is mostly completely corrupt. The corruption became more, and more rampant since 1913.

“If the American people ever allow private banks to control the issue of their currency, first by inflation, then by deflation, the banks…will deprive the people of all property until their children wake-up homeless on the continent their fathers conquered…. The issuing power should be taken from the banks and restored to the people, to whom it properly belongs.” – Thomas Jefferson in the debate over the Re-charter of the Bank Bill (1809)

“I believe that banking institutions are more dangerous to our liberties than standing armies.” –Thomas Jefferson
...

www.themoneymasters.com...

But we are now being told that more "socialist" policies will help better the government?... It was "socialist" policies which caused the problems to begin with...

originally posted by: ElectricUniverse
a reply to: MotherMayEye

Do remember this money is disappearing because Congress can't do a thing about the Federal Reserve having the power over the United States' economy. The robbing is being done by the Feds, which happens to be an idea implemented by progressive democrats. Of course politics in the U.S. is mostly completely corrupt. The corruption became more, and more rampant since 1913.

“If the American people ever allow private banks to control the issue of their currency, first by inflation, then by deflation, the banks…will deprive the people of all property until their children wake-up homeless on the continent their fathers conquered…. The issuing power should be taken from the banks and restored to the people, to whom it properly belongs.” – Thomas Jefferson in the debate over the Re-charter of the Bank Bill (1809)

“I believe that banking institutions are more dangerous to our liberties than standing armies.” –Thomas Jefferson
...

www.themoneymasters.com...

But we are now being told that more "socialist" policies will help better the government?... It was "socialist" policies which caused the problems to begin with...

Yes.

Love Bernie Sanders... in a WYSIWYG kind of way. Tells truth about entrenched power, unlike anyone else...

AND... his arithmetic is an utter disaster. Am I a fan of the plutocracy? Not at ALL... not even maybe. But Bernie, and many others on the left, let their own beliefs and envy, dictate the framework they use to determine what "Wealthy" is.

Bernie, UNLIKE most folks... does rightly identify the crap heads that imploded the economy, as a smaller fraction than the "1%". It's really more like the .001% who is responsible for crashing our economy.

The fact remains, we don't have a "rich people" problem as much as we have a spending and Central Banking Warfare Economic Model problem... and until we deal with our spending and bankster/warfare problem, nothing will change.

You can tax the entire "1%" at a rate of 100%, in other words, take every dime they earn every year... and it doesn't solve our debt and deficit problems. The middle class and working poor, can't make up the difference...

So, with this in mind, Bernie has ideas that are popular, given the economic abuse heaped on We the People by the banksters/warmongers... but the math still does NOT work.

The government does not HAVE any money. They only have OTHER PEOPLES money.

So... as much as I love Bernie... if he managed to implement half of what he proposes, it would collapse the economy before his first term was up...