Ok Dems' do you want Communism or not?

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: Justoneman

It's nice to see that I'm not the only one who sees a desperate attempt by DC politicians to bring about communism.


And to be clear, I'm not talking about the awesome communism that many seem to talk about. This isn't the great communism that exists in think tanks and classrooms. This isn't the awesome communism of rainbows and unicorns.

This is the communism of the authoritarian state.

This is the communism of dictatorial government. The antithesis of freedom.

I accuse both republicans AND democrats of trying to make government the sole arbiter of all of life's decisions and directions.


Everything from state run healthcare to guaranteed incomes to jobs for everyone provided by and for the government is being brought up now.


They don't even hide it any more.

Yes and I happen to see your points so much better than the folks challenging you with total bull cocci. Well, they see them too. They are here to obfuscate as tools of the self appointed leadership who don't have to get elected or even try.

a reply to: Justoneman

One world governance?

Talk about confusing and conflating unlike issues.

First of all, the one world government idea as it stands, and looks at the moment, is a corporate structure, a money tree, a structure which has no benefit nor holds any interest for a communist. Communism is not about the size of a structure, but the purity of its convictions, something which is destroyed utterly by even a fleeting interest in amassing great wealth, since the desire to do so is not right or just according to communist philosophy.

Second, it is impossible for those who have jumped onto the bandwagon you are describing, to be communist in approach, because their entire reason for wanting that one world government idea to come to pass in reality, is about preventing anyone from challenging their status. Actual communism however, holds that the people are the power, that their word is law, that none come before or above them, that their will is enacted in all things, and at all times, without fail or exception.

That, I can assure you, is nothing to do with a one world government, run by the owners of corporate structures and their paid for puppets in the governments of the world currently. Such a thing would be a corporatist structure, not a communist one.

originally posted by: TrueBrit
a reply to: Justoneman

One world governance?

Talk about confusing and conflating unlike issues.

Oh TB, you are much smarter than the average person and you still miss it? ATS has shown ad infinitum that there is a definite play on to have a UN type gov control the planet.

a reply to: Justoneman

A government big enough to give you everything you want, is strong enough to take everything you have.
-Thomas Jefferson

I'm amazed at how many people don't know what capitalism actually is.
We haven't had it in the US for over a century except on a small interpersonal scale.
Capitalism is voluntary interactions and trade with no government interference.
Since the Civil War the federal government has become a functionary of big business.
(which is what the war was about)

a reply to: Asktheanimals

Yes.

The chilling part was that I had a debate going with a leftist who was otherwise fairly coherent who made the position that he saw no reason why the government shouldn't be able to take full control over any aspect of the market in which they had some interest and compel/control our activity fully.

The discussion at that point was over health care, and it's market. He felt the commerce clause should fully give the government that right to basically nationalize/socialize on that basis.

At that point, I pointed out that based on public assistance he was then opening the door for the government to step into housing, clothing, food and bunch of other areas if he felt that health care should be fully controlled because the government offers assistance in all those areas via specialized programs which meant under his argument, he felt that full government control/command economy was more or less constitutional.

He didn't even miss a beat before replying that he felt it was.

a reply to: Justoneman

That may be so, but I am referring specifically to your assertions about how the make up of such a thing is shaped. And once again I state, there is no one world governance system which is in the offing either privately or otherwise, which is aligned in any small way to a communist principle, because all of them are about the further centralisation of financial power in one bloc of elite figures, rather than being about decentralising wealth.

I am not arguing that there is no effort being made to create a one world government, but I am insistent that you pay attention to the logical fallacy in what you are saying about its specific nature, and the reasons it is being set up.

they want to take all of your freedom and impose a tyrannical communist system that doesn't allow you to thrive or own private property or defend yourself from the government

and according to some ATS members if you disagree you deserve to die in jail

originally posted by: TrueBrit
a reply to: Justoneman

How far left do you THINK they have gone?

I wonder, because it seems to me that there is far too much private money involved in both Republican and Democrat Party politics, which, incidentally, disqualifies any of the players in either group, from being or advocating for Communist principles or policy.

Seems to me that the last thing a bunch of corporatist swine like those in the American political system, on any side would want, is a communist system. They are too crooked and in love with their own wealth, all of them, to care much for a system whose logical conclusion is the destruction of all currency, and a return to a simple barter/trade system.

wrong, the more government expands the more influence these "corporatist" have over the system, the less the government gets involved the more the competitive forces of the free market are able to level the playing field

oh don't even try to convince me that centralizing world power into a global government is a good idea, NOT

and a return to a simple barter/trade system.

totally ridiculous, barter trade system? no.... we need an exchange medium that allows for the transfer of goods in the form of currency in order for everyone to have what they have

a reply to: toysforadults

Its not a good idea, its an awful one.

Thats not the point here. The point is, that under such a system, communism would suffer greatly as a concept, therefore, the concept of one world governance is unlikely to be anything to do with communism. And, as previously mentioned, it is also nothing to do with the current Democrat Party, because, like their opposite numbers in the Republican Party and the current administration in the US, they are in love with their wealth too much to surrender it to the use of a communist system, whereby either everyone benefits, or no one does.

a reply to: TrueBrit

Totally wrong, someone always benefits with a massive oppressive non voluntary system, there is power involved and whenever there is power involved that power corrupts

those who benefit from a non voluntary communist system are those at the top of the system and it's always been that way and there are a dozen examples of this historically

anyone can research it

a reply to: TrueBrit

There is no way you can have a society-wide communist system without people at the top overseeing the distribution. That means people at the top wielding power over the means of production, setting production targets, handing stuff out to make sure it's all fair, etc.

Human nature being what it is, you will never have such a system without widespread corruption and abuse. It is impossible.

And the people who are forced to be subject to it will be widely abused by it.

You can say capitalism is no better, but capitalism, being solely a system of economy without government legal control mixed in, is also voluntary. An astute person can avoid the abuse of the unscrupulous by simply choosing not to do business with them whereas corrupt communist aparatchiks are your lords and masters.

originally posted by: gortex
a reply to: Justoneman

What's the difference between Communism or Capitalism ?
The way I see it the rich get richer and the poor stay poorer under both systems.

Does Capitalism take from people? No.
Does Capitalism tax people? No.
Does Capitalism tell people what they can and cannot buy? No.

Capitalism is not a political system. Capitalism has helped more people out of poverty than any other economic system in the history of the planet. Capitalism allows people who are willing to take risks to achieve great things.

a reply to: Teikiatsu

Why anybody in their right mind defend a system that isnt based on voluntary transactions and protects private property rights?

INSANE!!

a reply to: toysforadults

Why anyone in their right mind would endorse a system that is the antithesis to individual freedoms is beyond me.

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: toysforadults

Why anyone in their right mind would endorse a system that is the antithesis to individual freedoms is beyond me.

Reminds me of a commercial that went "do you want to pay to get your money out from and ATM or do you want to be able to get it out for free?"

No one chooses pay but some leftist think something that resembles this option. Do I want freedom and justice to to be for all or just the few at the top?

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: toysforadults

Why anyone in their right mind would endorse a system that is the antithesis to individual freedoms is beyond me.

Freedom is hard for some people but I choose to go that route instead of absolute control. Absolute anarchy is bad but it is what comes of absolute control when it all breaks down.

Democrats are "Democrats" for a reason because they are the same capitalist scum as Republicans, Libertarians etc, to even think they are remotely close to "communist" is showing an ignorance of Democrats and communism and is just reminiscent of the red scare

originally posted by: Justoneman
The Democrats keep going left and are now so far left I am suspecting they have crossed the line for moderate Dems if they exist on ATS. I continue thinking we all have to really stay neutral and watch so that one side doesn't sink too low.
removed bad link

I'm not sure that you understand the difference between communism and socialism.

socialism maintains the concept of personal property ownership, while communism removes it) and personal choice (socialism maintains personal choice in areas like education and religion, while communism removes it).
Source

I think that while you'll find that many Democrats advocate some form of socialism, very few advocate communism.

originally posted by: Justoneman
The Democrats keep going left and are now so far left I am suspecting they have crossed the line for moderate Dems if they exist on ATS. I continue thinking we all have to really stay neutral and watch so that one side doesn't sink too low.

Just as the D's have went off the rails against the US citizens and for every special interest lining their pockets, there are so many RINO's acting as their surrogates. That's sad and scores one for Totalitarian Nanny State where we earn "SOCIAL POINTS". The few rank and file of the R's not RINO, right now even though not perfect, are looking to be "for" protecting our citizens. The exact opposite appears to be true of the D's.

I always vote for a person and never a party and here is why you should give the D's and the RINO's an early retirement.
www.newsweek.com...

www.politifact.com...

West: "It's a good question. I believe there's about 78 to 81 members of the Democrat Party who are members of the Communist Party. ... It’s called the Congressional Progressive Caucus."


Some of those R's have been Tea Party/Libertarians like the Paul's. I prefer Libertarians to any of them and they are not able to beat the Uniparty.
removed bad link

But what's actually closer to communism. Using our own TAx money for social programs like welfare, education and retirement or using our own tax money to spy on us, militerize the police force and control us with more laws Think KGB --like the republicans do and want.

The point being that it's not Dems and Rinos..whatever that means, it's any party that is taking away our freedoms...the republican party, especially those far right except for the libertarians are trying to take away our freedoms....the patriot act comes to mind. TSA for another...homeland security for another. It never ends.