Calling spades, spades - time to use the word Communist again

I read what the Op wrote, and there are a few things that can be stated:
If we are to ignore ideas cause they are distasteful and unpopular, and just blindly follow along, then why is this an independent country?

The op has pointed out that some of the politicians who are running or have gotten elected into office, on the side of the Democrats, have many strong socialist ideas, and has concluded that it is from the communist. And that is wrong and that it is giving the country no end of problems.
The Op has brought up the history of McCarthy and Vietnam, how it was McCarthy that sounded the alarm about communism and how it was the communist that lead to the defeat of Vietnam.

Both parties, the Democrats and the Republicans have extremists in it. While yes the Unions tend to support the Democrats, the Republicans have been in bed with the religious right in the country. To be the moral leaders of the country, at the expense of the rights of the people. And many of the ideas that the Republicans are floating are highly dangerous to the entire country, where it would strip rights from all citizens.

Now how about we look at Vietnam. What is not mentioned by the Op, is that after World War II, many of the colonial powers were giving up their colonies and territories. Even at the request of the US to allow for those countries to start to be on their own. It was at that time frame that Ho Chi Mihn, asked the US to support that the country of Vietnam be let go as a colony and become its own independent country on its own. It was known that the US was asking this, of other countries, and saw that Great Britain and other European countries were letting go of their colonies. The country of Vietnam wanted its freedom. But the US did not intercede in this, and it started a civil war that the US got dragged into. And the main reason why the US got involved in the Vietnam conflict, was that the USSR was not present to vote against the US in the UN security council. Now what was being seen at the time in the US, is that more and more troops were being sent to Vietnam, and more coffins coming back. It was shown that children of the rich and the affluent, and the politicians were not going to Vietnam, but it was the middle class and the poor were going and dying for a cause that they did not believe in or see a need for. Added to a government lying to the people, and an endless war that kept, on and then the pictures of what all was going on was enough to turn the people against the government and say enough.



McCarthy, an interesting character, however, one that was too ambitious to the point where it was his actions, not laws, his words that brought this country very close to being a dictatorship. People lost their livelihood, they lost their positions, and their homes all cause they were accused of being a communist. The rule of law was violated, on hearsay. It was the media that exposed how far this man had gone, showing the error of his ways to the public, showing a different ideas. And when the media showed what a bully the man was, and this was aired, how he was going after anyone and everyone, the public turned on him, and he ceased to be a person of importance and an embarrassment.

There have always been extremist in politics. It comes about from people not voting, and a government that is not being truthful with the people. It comes from reaction and fear, and apathy on the part of the public that chooses not to vote or participate, or don’t see a reason for such.

a reply to: strongfp

OK, so what's your solution to steer people away from communism?

Send them a plane ticket to Venezula.

a reply to: DigginFoTroof

Nope. Communism lost. Capitalism won. Socialism lost. Capitalism won. There now will be no world of socialism because the world is entirely capitalist. Sure there are places where capitalism is modified by the needs of the people and the availability of resources but they are capitalist.

Where do we see any place where the work force owns the factory or the plant where they produce? Name it and we can call that socialist. But if the owner of the means of production is not the workers but instead a single owner or investment group then it is not socialism but capitalism.

What we see today that is called socialism by so many is not socialism. It is that aspect of the capitalist system that needs to keep poor people poor so that they can continue to be preyed upon.

a reply to: DigginFoTroof

oh, i'm sorry, I guess I never realized we stopped calling a commie a commie.

Guess I'll fit right in then, .....

a reply to: AboveBoard

Yet it is you who brought all this into one comment going of a tangent because you read the word communism.

So the question is that if anyone has a liberal ideal, are they communists?

You can go all the way to the other side and strict libertarian and Anarchism. No or very limited government. That's a good ideal, but it doesn't work. That's a utopia and we know that utopias don't exist in the real world.

Plus how would we take America all the way to that Ideal? If you just right now, cut all medicare, all medicade, all food stamps, all social security benefits, all public school funding, All federal aid to police, all federal aid for the court system, all federal prisons, all federal infrastructure projects, all dollars for hospitals (they get federal money to compensate for when they treat homeless and indigent people). We'd kind of collapse.

What is a liberal ideal? safety nets, public education, medical attention when you need it, even if you're too poor to afford it, not polluting the environment.

Does that make one a communist? I think not. I'm no commmunist, of course I'm not a democrat either. So maybe that's why I'm not a communist?

a reply to: amazing

Does that make one a communist? I think not.

No it does not, you are correct. The term, as most political terms are used very careless nowadays. Real communism is -besides some other things- the complete and equal distribution of all wealth and goods on all levels.

A social system is a social system, it´s called like that for a reason. Socialism and communism share some thoughts and values but it´s not the same.

Same as capitalism does not need to be anti-socialist in every case. I´m not trying to berate or teach you, this is for others to read.

a reply to: Lumenari

Because what you believe doesnt fit what socialism actually means?

a reply to: neo96

Venezuela wasnt communist... they had more of a dictatorship and greedy government taking massive loans they couldn't pay back.

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: DigginFoTroof

Why mince words?

I agree.




*** Picture edited out for the sake of the poor angels***

It is said that when Chuck Norris gives a thumbs up, all of heaven gets their wings. For the sake of the poor angels who can no longer walk because of all the multiple wings they now are forced into having to bare, stop posting this GIF.
Thank you as a public service announcement.

***BACK ON TOPIC***

One of the true issues of democratic crisis that we now are dealing with started during the first red scare in the 1920's-30's. People like FDR used the communist philosophies in his "New Deal" and later with his "League of Nations" idea. While some governmental assistance can be helpful too much of it can lead to dependence. This was understood and ignored by FDR and later Truman. The introduction of the 1947 National Security Act was nothing more then a removal of our rights as Americans and a massive step towards communism.

As long as you played the game the promoted the National Security State you were fine, and got rewarded. Ever wonder why many long term governmental employees (which includes members of congress) are worth so much even though they can't justify their value? Then along comes Trump. He isn't a member of the "National Security State", nor is he profiting from the National Security Act, but yet he did get into power by the will of the people. This makes him the enemy of many of the people that have suckled off the tit of the National Security State.

Now these people don't really want communism, but what they do want is for the average person to want communism. If everyone is dependent on the state, and the people at the state are dependent of seemly no one, then what's really getting pushed is Nationalized Imperialism. Calling it "progressive", "liberalism", or "communism" is all just a red herring to Imperialism.

For further reading, I made a thread about it:
LINKY HERE

Nobody wants to admit they were taken in, lied to and deceived.
No patient wants to admit they have cancer either.
2 good reasons for denial of Communist infiltration of every segment of our society.
If we don't admit to it and address it no future generation will enjoy what we have.

It started right after the Russian revolution, those who instigated that have used Marxism as a poison dart against free countries throughout the world. Why? To make them easier to control of course. They packed academia, the media and the state department. It metastasized through the rest of the country from that base.

Btw, those McCarthy publicly accused of communism were in fact party members.

I'm with you in spirit but the fact is that the real problem isn't really communism. It's collectivism. And communists are not the only people who worship at that alter. Communism is just one of the more blatantly harsh forms of collectivism. But most of them are essentially the same when you think about it.

Essentially, you can't beat them at their own game without playing their game. And then when you play their game trying to beat them, they win by default because they have converted you without your knowledge. One person is no match for a tidal wave unless he can find a way to distance himself from it. But even if he joins an opposing wave, the bigger wave is always going to win anyway. And then he's back to square one because he just gave his "soul" to collectivism and they will take him along with them wherever they feel like taking him.....whether he wants to go there or not.

Might be a smooth ride for a while but it always gets bumpy when the arguing starts. And the arguing will start when the majority inevitably demands for the minority to sacrifice something they refuse to give up "for the greater good".

You see? It's not a socialist problem or a communist problem. It's an age old problem. It comes down to math and human nature. The worst aspects of human nature find their hiding place in plain sight in the crowd. So, if you attack the greed or envy or immorality or unscrupulous nature of someone who's wearing a big blue hat, you'll have to argue with all their friends who are also wearing the same big blue hat.

a reply to: strongfp

However, contrary to Western usage, these states do not describe themselves as "communist" nor do they claim to have achieved communism—they refer to themselves as Socialist or Workers' states that are in the process of constructing socialism.

en.wikipedia.org...

Coke or pepsi.

Same GD thing.

a reply to: neo96

What are you trying to get at here?

Venezuela isn't communist. And socialism isn't communism, because it's not a form of government.

originally posted by: Lumenari
a reply to: AboveBoard

~sigh~

What is the difference between Socialism and Communism?

Socialism and communism are alike in that both are systems of production for use based on public ownership of the means of production and centralized planning. Socialism grows directly out of capitalism; it is the first form of the new society. Communism is a further development or higher stage of socialism.

No need to talk to you about it... I already knows where it goes.

Read a lot about it in fact... from Plato to France to the now.

Interesting side note... in Plato's version of communism, wives and children were community property too...

But no.. simply changing the actual meanings of the words around to somehow make it more palatable to modern society doesn't actually change how it ends.

Again, see History.

Communism = government owns all means of production and enterprises, then doles our jobs and shares of wealth and services.

Explain to me how shoring up social security that I’ve paid into my whole working life, Or even Medicare for All, with its basic level of care and the purchasing of private supplemental policies for certain categories of care that are above the basic = a Comminist Hellscape.

*sigh*

You can’t. Because it isn’t, and it wouldn’t be.

You think you are the only “side” who appreciates democracy and the Constitution? Good Lord. Sell me something else because you ain’t got nothing but irrational fears based in a selective interpretation of “history.”

I repeat. The United States will not become a communist country ever. Period. This is not a rational fear.

Now to be clear, I do understand the fear of living under communist control. Not debating that. Nor would I want to live under a right wing fascist totalitarian government or dictator. Both would be equally scary.