Of marxists, socialists, eco-terrorists and other Neo-Coms

reply to post by Skyfloating


In case you did not notice I was being very sarcastic. It may help if you now go back and then read it again. All of these evils I deliberately referred to are the effect of your beloved capitalism. I can give you a good deal on a bridge

Originally posted by tiger5
In case you did not notice I was being very sarcastic. It may help if you now go back and then read it again. All of these evils I deliberately referred to are the effect of your beloved capitalism. I can give you a good deal on a bridge

Yup, the sarcasm was not lost on me...I recall you and your stance from another thread on socialism

reply to post by tiger5

Our banks have yet again acted responsibly so the last two years was just vile lies.

THAT was by far not the result of capitalism or mistake of banks, but socialist FED falsifying currency and defrauding the market because it has socialist monopoly on setting the price of money, and government manipulating mortgage market.

With the rest I agree on, capitalism must be regulated (on the right spots) to function properly. Abolishing the FED and restricting free trade with countries like China would be a good start.

reply to post by Maslo


You can not blame socialism for the financial crisis. socialists arn't bankers. They deal in capital for god sake.

reply to post by Maslo


Er China is my biggest fear. The are hell bent on destroying the west and have absolutely nothing to do with socialism to those that actaully know anything about politics. Yet America has played into there hands big time.

reply to post by woodwardjnr

You can not blame socialism for the financial crisis. socialists arn't bankers. They deal in capital for god sake.

I can blame them, because regulating or directly setting the price of a commodity (money is also a commodity like any other) is socialist policy. Average bankers were not responsible for the crisis. The FED and mortgage market regulation by the state (again, socialists setting the price of houses and forcing banks to lend to insolvent persons) were responsible.

reply to post by tiger5


Yes, this is where wise regulation of capitalism must step in and make outsourcing to China illegal. At least till they dont start to respect the environment and rights of the workers (which would naturally drive the price of chinese products up, and the problem would disappear).

reply to post by Maslo


Actually the banks set their mortgage rates a few percent above base rate. THe Banks also set the lending criteria. All for profit which then blew up in their faces. Until the governmetn bailed them out. America simply is not a socialist country. It is a socially democratic country.

reply to post by Skyfloating

This is one of the best selling leftist books of our time: The Empire. It is required reading in Universities across the Nation and a book on which many others are based on.

This is a single book – not the majority of leftist material, as you so blatantly based your claims upon. This is not proof positive that the “majority of leftist literature” states that America is the world’s center of oppression. Nice try, though.

When George Bush pointed out that N.Korea, Iran and Libya are the most oppressive regimes in the world, leftists went crazy and villified him to be the most evil President of all time.

George W. Bush was not vilified for making a single remark regarding the “axis of evil.” If he has been vilified, it is due to a culmination of his words and actions over the course of his political career. Remember, this is the president that waged war on Iraq for non-existent weapons of mass destruction.

But that is neither here or there. I’m not here to bash Bush or other neo-conservatives, but to simply point out a few of your more ludicrous claims and sensationalist statements.

The deeds of people such as Stalin, Lenin, Pol Pot, Chavez, Mugabe, Castro, Kim Ill Sung and their socialist philosophies that drive those deeds are a historical fact. Their hatred of America/Europe/Isreal is a documented fact. Leftists also openly admit this, as you can read almost every day on this very site.

I refuse to defend those that are undeserving of defense. There is no doubt that these dictators have allowed terrible acts to be carried out against humanity. However, such acts are not limited to the followers of communism. The Contras – an anti-communist group funded by the Reagan administration – declared guerrilla warfare against a mostly unarmed civilian population resulting in some of the most horrendous wartime atrocities to take place in modern times. And that is just a single example.

It also bears mentioning that hate groups exist in America that do not adhere to socialist philosophies in any way or form. The white supremacist and separatist movements come forth to mind, and many of their ideals are based not only on race, but upon a twisted amalgamation of conservative core values. Their decidedly militant approach to attaining their goals is considered in their minds as nothing short of patriotic.

In fact, this is something you can read almost every day on this very site.

As theOP points out, for the Neo-Com there is no truth...everything is merely a "matter of perspective".

Everything is a “matter of perspective” whether or not it is based in truth or merely figments of our imagination. Conservatives view the world from their perspective, as well, and are not necessarily the purveyors of truth. To assert as much is not only misleading but grandstanding.



Regarding your decidedly distorted view of feminism…

In most cultures women have just as much say on things as men....just in different areas.

Oh, really? o_O

Hands down, that has got to be one of the most misogynistic things I have read in a long while. Thank you for setting my feeble female brain straight, as I was decidedly out of line to even think *gasp* that women should have just as much say on things as men in ALL areas.

Really, women are asking for too damn much. Please accept my apologies on behalf of women everywhere.

Men going out to work more than woman comes from stone-age habits of men going out hunting while women take care of children. This is how things naturally developed over time.

Hence, the term patriarchal society…

That may be the case in some cultures. But in our culture the days when women could not have sex with more than one partner without causing a scandal are long gone.

This might be true to a certain degree, but by and large, men are still considered virile and women whores, regarding sex outside of marriage. The times may have changed, but, alas, the sentiment remains the same.

Yes, some gender bias exists. But thats not what the OP was referring to. It was referring to the feminist theory that gender is not biological but rather "socially constructed.

You are referring to an extremely narrow viewpoint touted by the postmodern feminist movement. However, not only you have chosen to portray this concept as widely embraced by feminists (which it is not), but you have the audacity to place this “social construct” on par with pedophilia – and by default “leftist” views. For shame!

Your argument in this regard is nothing short of an ad hominem attack. It is saddening to see that you are willing to sink to such low handed tactics.

There are about 1.5 Billion white people in a world of 6.5 Billion people. Hence whites are a minority.

So, in your mind there is no such thing as an ethnic minority. How quaint.

Let’s do a small breakdown of who holds the reins of power in American politics (since that’s where you seem determined to focus):

The current United States Congress is composed of 541 members in both the Senate and House of Representatives.

The Senate has 100 total members:
17 members are women
13 members of Jewish descent
1 member of Hispanic descent
1 member of Japanese descent
1 member of Native Hawaiian descent
1 member of African descent

The House has 435 members and six non-voting delegates:
75 members are women
31 members of Jewish decent
27 members of Hispanic decent
6 members of Asian decent
42 members of African decent
1 member of Native American decent

This quick perusal proves that the U.S. Congress is predominantly composed of white males.

Nice try at obfuscation, amigo!

No it doesnt. Ive been judged, laughed at or required to undergo special examination due to my own foreigness throughout my life and I never felt "oppressed". It is my choice how I feel.

Just because you don’t feel oppressed doesn’t mean oppression doesn’t exist. Nor does this have any bearing on the problems facing ethnic minorities in America regarding the very real issues of immigration.

If were a ruler of this world my motto would be "prosperity for all". Everyone should have plenty of food and housing. Homosexuals should be able to do whatever they want. But thats apparently not the way it is in this day and age....yet. But looking at the development of humankind Im optimistic that this is the direction in which we are heading. Until then there is absolutely no use or merit in whining about how "unfair" life is and blaming us "evil Capitalists and Neo-Cons" for all these ills. It is thanks to us that so much prosperity already exists.

Yet you have no problem placing the ills of the world firmly at the feet of those you consider leftist, socialist, commies – or as you’ve phrased it “neo-coms”…

In fact, you have gone to great strides to paint anyone with somewhat left-leaning views as detrimental to the survival of mankind. Again, your entire argument is nothing more than a tired rant based upon negative stereotypes. You’re grasping at straws here.

I had asked you: Is resorting to these kinds of stereotypes truly a necessity to ensure "mankind's survival"?

Yes, it is necessary to expose false information that is running rampant in society and most especially on websits like this one. As can be seen by the deeds of Neo-Coms throughout the 20th Century, the information is harmful on a mass-scale.

The “analysis” you’ve provided in your OP and throughout this thread is your personal opinion that you have attempted to masquerade as fact. Furthermore, your “analysis” is liberally riddled with false information and stereotypes offered as truth. Such stances based on omissions, half-truths and propaganda is in itself harmful on any scale.

Apparently, false information is a ruse touted just as easily by neo-cons as demonstrated by the OP.

ETA: I stand corrected, it was the Contras -- and anti-communist group funded by a conservative U.S. administration -- that waged guerrilla warfare against a mostly unarmed civilian population resulting in horrific atrocities against humanity. Thank you for pointing that out, skyfloating.

reply to post by tiger5

Actually the banks set their mortgage rates a few percent above base rate. THe Banks also set the lending criteria. All for profit which then blew up in their faces. Until the governmetn bailed them out. America simply is not a socialist country. It is a socially democratic country.

What is "base rate"? You mean the FED rate? Then its again, government setting the price of money nad providing banks with cheap money to encourage borrowing. Then suddenly tightening it up, and causing the bubble it caused before to burst.

THe Banks also set the lending criteria. All for profit which then blew up in their faces

I beg to differ:

spectator.org...]http://spectator.org/archives/2009/02/06/the-true-origins-of-this-finan

www.nytimes.com...]http://www.nytimes.com/1999/09/30/business/fannie-mae- eases-credit-to-aid-mortgage-lending.html

findarticles.com...]http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1571/is_n47_v11/ai_1783940 0/?tag=content;col1

This, coupled with cheap money from the FED led to the housing bubble.

America simply is not a socialist country. It is a socially democratic country.

In this sense, every country which has a central bank setting interest rates is socialist. Directly manipulating and setting the price of a commodity is the most socialist thing I can think of.

you're right compotition is necissery but the more laissez faire a capitilism becomes the less compotion you get since corporations form monopolys which go uncontroled and they can eliminate any competitors easily at this scale makeing more profit is easier by paying employees less and cutting corners on products than inovating. Why bother if you no people will have to buy your products anyway as in the case of supermarkets & energy/water companys??? capitalism can work if responcibly regulated but in the end the perfect capitalism is dwarfed by a perfect comunism and faced in chosing between the two ideals I aspire for perfect not almost perfect.

reply to post by AnonymousJ

capitalism can work if responcibly regulated but in the end the perfect capitalism is dwarfed by a perfect comunism and faced in chosing between the two ideals I aspire for perfect not almost perfect.

Explain "perfect communism" and why it should not have the big issues communism has inherent in itself, therefore not being perfect.

reply to post by Maslo


So the socialists then promote home ownership? And capitalists promote state Ownership? Therefore Thatcher is a socialist as is Bush. Well that is all mental gymnastics to me. Did Marx lenin or trotsky promote private ownership??? I think you are mistaken. Bush promoted homeownership to build a voterbase of grateful homeowners.

what im saying is that if you could solve all the isues and problems of comunism and create a socity that represents a perfect working example of the theorys ideals and also did the same for capitalism of the two paradises communism would be better by far, capitilism still requires some at the top and some at the bottom even if we handwave away the issue of monopolys however if you instead handwave away human greed/shortsightedness in a comunist socity the are no problems i could percive whatsoever. If you see fault in this reasononing im open too debate but in my mind id rather fight for perfection not one step away.

Once again sorry for my poor spelling.

Originally posted by maria_stardust


This is a single book – not the majority of leftist material, as you so blatantly based your claims upon. This is not proof positive that the “majority of leftist literature” states that America is the world’s center of oppression. Nice try, though.

Noam Chomsky - Hegemony or Survival

Barbara Ehrenreich - Nickel and Dime, On not getting by in America and How Positive Thinking is Undermining America.

Michael Moore / Stupid White Men

Among a few thousand others... (some of which Ive actually read)

Leftist literature generally claims that America is an imperialist agressor and THE most evil thing on earth. This vocabulary was originally created by the Soviet KGB and implanted into the impressionable youth of the West who have then taken over those concepts and made ideologies out of them.

The Sandinistas – an anti-communist group

The Sandinista National Liberation Front is a socialist political party in Nicaragua

Wikipedia

Add to that about 100 Million deaths as a direct result of socialism in the 20th Century.

Hands down, that has got to be one of the most misogynistic things I have read in a long while. Thank you for setting my feeble female brain straight, as I was decidedly out of line to even think *gasp* that women should have just as much say on things as men in ALL areas.

I dont know what world you live in, but in mine my partner makes three times as much money than I do. So workwise and money-wise she has the say. Nothing unusual in this day and age.

This might be true to a certain degree, but by and large, men are still considered virile and women whores, regarding sex outside of marriage. The times may have changed, but, alas, the sentiment remains the same.

Are you sure you live in a western country and not, perhaps, in Iran?

Your argument in this regard is nothing short of an ad hominem attack. It is saddening to see that you are willing to sink to such low handed tactics.

Fa-left thinking begins with "its all just a social construct" - which eventually leads to "well, then adult--child seperations are also only a social construct and we must "break free" of these "oppressive restrictions".

Its funny you say that I am sinking low - I think the people who argue in this manner are the ones sinking low - I am merely pointing out what their philosophy is based on.

This quick perusal proves that the U.S. Congress is predominantly composed of white males.

Im sure you`lll find a different situation in Asia or Africa. Why oh why? Maybe because thats where those ethnicities are primarily located?

As to women - there are today more women in Government than ever before in History, and the numbers are growing. Thats something to celebrate, not bemoan.

Just because you don’t feel oppressed doesn’t mean oppression doesn’t exist. Nor does this have any bearing on the problems facing ethnic minorities in America regarding the very real issues of immigration.

"Oppression" is a subjective label given by the inner child who longs for pity. Ive been through tough times myself but I do not choose to blame "those evil capitalists". I simply tell myself the world is a tough place and move on.

In fact, you have gone to great strides to paint anyone with somewhat left-leaning views as detrimental to the survival of mankind. Again, your entire argument is nothing more than a tired rant based upon negative stereotypes. You’re grasping at straws here.

100 Million deaths speak for themselves. Sadly, the philosophy these deaths are based upon continues on as if nothing ever happened.

Your statement that I paint anyone with somewhat left-leaning views this way is completely false. My own views on homosexuality, race, immigration, arbortion, and religion are all liberal/left, as evidenced by my posting here in the last few years. Nice try

reply to post by tiger5

So the socialists then promote home ownership? And capitalists promote state Ownership? Therefore Thatcher is a socialist as is Bush. Well that is all mental gymnastics to me. Did Marx lenin or trotsky promote private ownership??? I think you are mistaken. Bush promoted homeownership to build a voterbase of grateful homeowners.

All I said is people who directly set prices of commodities and manipulate and bend free markets in very unresponsible way are socialists, at least those actions of them are socialist. If you think it includes Bush or Thatcher, then so be it.

reply to post by AnonymousJ


I think the capitalist ideal; would be better. There is nothing wrong with moderate inequality if noone is very poor (can be fixed with social programs). It is actually better, because it encourages progress and acts as a work incentive.
On the other end, communistic ideal would not work so well, because absolute equality kills work incentive, and you cannot wave away human greed/shortsightedness, which is inherent in our nature (lets be realistic here). The greed will always be here - capitalist society turns it into fuel for progress, communistic one turns a blind eye to it until the greed of certain individuals coupled with lack of incentive to work destroys it from within.

Right this is getting on my nerves now would people stop judging communism on the actions of stalin and co. for starters as far as I know non of the self declared communist countrys of the 20th century atualy followed marxist ideology and even that is besideds the point. an argument should be judged on its merits not the personality or actions of its advocates - a good argument is a good argument weather it comes from hittler or ghandi. Leftist politics varys over a broaud spectrum no one aspect should be critisised based on the cherry picked worst aspects of the rest.

My personal politics I earlier described combine elements from various theorys combining common ownership of resources and an element of compotition to ensure progress, one day we will all live in the post capitalist wonder of startrek just wait and see. hehehe

reply to post by Maslo


please read my earlier post I recognise the issues of stagnation and the necessity of compotition but hope to implement compotition in a way that encourages work and inovation but prevents inequalitys in political power I am not adverced to minor inequalitys in ownership/use of goods the offer of a new blueray home cinima over an old CRT does wonders for motivation but equaly no one individual should be as powerfull as Rupert Murdoch or the like in detrmining public opininon or election results. In my quest to ensure both I advocate direct democracy and the, earlier detailed, veriation of participatory economics' nontransferable currency.

reply to post by Skyfloating

Among a few thousand others... (some of which Ive actually read)

Leftist literature generally claims that America is an imperialist agressor and THE most evil thing on earth. This vocabulary was originally created by the Soviet KGB and implanted into the impressionable youth of the West who have then taken over those concepts and made ideologies out of them.

Claiming that America is an “imperialist aggressor” is one thing, stating that” focus on America being the center of world Oppression” is quite another.

It is also disingenuous of you to attempt to lump anyone or any group with liberal views as “neo-coms” whose viewpoints are “totalitarian and collectivist garbage” which seek to manipulate reality.

You realize that is exactly what you are doing with this thread. You are presenting false information through misrepresentation and manipulation. You sly devil, you!

The Sandinista National Liberation Front is a socialist political party in Nicaragua

Add to that about 100 Million deaths as a direct result of socialism in the 20th Century.

I stand corrected it was the Contras who were the anti-communist group funded by the Reagan administration to fight against the Sandinistas.

The 8 years Reagan was in office represented one of the most bloody eras in the history of the Western hemisphere, as Washington funneled money, weapons and other supplies to right wing death squads. And the death toll was staggering–more than 70,000 political killings in El Salvador, more than 100,000 in Guatemala, 30,000 killed in the contra war in Nicaragua. In Washington, the forces carrying out the violence were called "freedom fighters." This is how Ronald Reagan described the Contras in Nicaragua: "They are our brothers, these freedom fighters and we owe them our help. They are the moral equal of our founding fathers."

source

The point remains that right-wing death squads have existed. War time atrocities and human rights abuses are not strictly the domain of neo-coms. Evil may be derived from across the entire political spectrum including those conservative in nature.

I dont know what world you live in, but in mine my partner makes three times as much money than I do. So workwise and money-wise she has the say. Nothing unusual in this day and age.

That’s wonderful! There are quite a few women that make more than their male counterparts. Unfortunately, that is the exception – not the rule. As I have stated previously, men tend to be paid more than women for the same jobs and job skills. A distinctive wage gap based strictly upon gender bias does indeed exist in the workplace. To claim otherwise is folly.

This might be true to a certain degree, but by and large, men are still considered virile and women whores, regarding sex outside of marriage. The times may have changed, but, alas, the sentiment remains the same.

Are you sure you live in a western country and not, perhaps, in Iran?

I’m positive. While women may not be stoned for adultery in America, they are generally looked upon in a less than pristine light. All one has to do is read any one of the gender-based threads on this site and you will see that women are portrayed more often times than not as both gold-diggers and whores, and this is a predominately male perspective.

Fa-left thinking begins with "its all just a social construct" - which eventually leads to "well, then adult--child seperations are also only a social construct and we must "break free" of these "oppressive restrictions".

Its funny you say that I am sinking low - I think the people who argue in this manner are the ones sinking low - I am merely pointing out what their philosophy is based on.

Yes, you did in fact sink to a low by comparing an extremely narrow view of a small contingent of feminists to pedophilia. What other purpose could that possibly serve other than to falsely contrive guilt-by-association. That is what makes your particular argument an ad hominem attack.

Furthermore, social constructs are not limited to left-leaning agendas, as you have seemed to imply. Social constructs can be applied to nearly any group and are not necessarily negative in nature. For example, the institution of marriage may be construed as one such construct.

This quick perusal proves that the U.S. Congress is predominantly composed of white males.

Im sure you`lll find a different situation in Asia or Africa. Why oh why? Maybe because thats where those ethnicities are primarily located?

Your previous assertion was that the notion of ethnic minorities was contrived. Or, perhaps that’s another liberal social construct.

As culturally and racially diverse as America is, one would think that the government body would be an accurate reflection of that diversity. By this reasoning, the actual make up of Congress shows ethnicities other than Caucasian are indeed minorities. Hence, ethnic minorities do exist.

As to women - there are today more women in Government than ever before in History, and the numbers are growing. Thats something to celebrate, not bemoan.

According the 2008 U.S. Census, there are approximately 300,000,000 people in America. Of that number, the population breaks down evenly to 50% men and 50% women. No big surprise there.

However, women comprise only of 92 out of a total of 541 members of Congress. That’s only 17%. This only adds credence to the fact that, at least in the U.S., it’s a white man’s world.

"Oppression" is a subjective label given by the inner child who longs for pity. Ive been through tough times myself but I do not choose to blame "those evil capitalists". I simply tell myself the world is a tough place and move on.

Oppression can be viewed in terms of both subjective and objective. It is not necessarily one or the other. If one chooses to consider themselves as being oppressed, then yes, that is a subjective label. By the same token, oppression does exist in the world and therefore may also be considered as objective.

Regarding my earlier example of illegal immigration, an objective state of oppression does indeed take place every time a person of Hispanic descent is pulled aside and demanded to show proof of their citizenship on no other basis than appearance and race. That is not merely a label, it is a sad reality.

100 Million deaths speak for themselves. Sadly, the philosophy these deaths are based upon continues on as if nothing ever happened.

Any death as a result of any political ideology is a sad thing. As I pointed out earlier, right-wing death squads waging warfare under the guise of “freedom fighters” do exist. War time atrocities are not limited to leftist ideologies.

Your statement that I paint anyone with somewhat left-leaning views this way is completely false. My own views on homosexuality, race, immigration, arbortion, and religion are all liberal/left, as evidenced by my posting here in the last few years.

On the contrary, you did state as much in the very first sentence of your opening paragraph.

The Neo-Coms (leftists, socialists, marxists, communists - which are all different degrees of the same mentality) are like a sectarian cult that use their own Vocabulary to spread their totalitarian and collectivist garbage under the guise of being warm-hearted and idealistic.

Not only did you lump together various leftist groups – and by default, those individuals with left-leaning views – you state that they are merely “different degrees of the same mentality” and that their viewpoints/ideologies are “totalitarian and collectivist garbage.”

Those are your words, not something I magically conjured from thin air.

So, no, I have not presented your views in any type of false light, nor have I been less than sincere in discussing these issues with you.