Communism, Socialism, and Marxism should be declared Treason:

reply to post by buster2010


Where in the preamble do you see socialism?

When were we about to go socialist.? I presume you are referring to the Carter administration. The one that gave us gasoline rationing. and 18-35% consumer interest rates and 10% unemployment. The most prosperous period in the last 40 years was 94-2000, when there was a republican majority in the house and senate, for the first time in 50 yrs. Yea, Clinton was president, but a lame duck and could not stop balanced budget amendment, welfare reform and PAGO; that congress left us with a surplus,and the next democratic congress proceeded to spend it all and a lot more. Then came 911, and enough democrats voted to go to war [they had the majority and could have stopped it] until they didn't vote for it.???

Show me a socialist financial plan that is sustainable and still allows for innovation, creativity, rewards those who produce something of value, and that provides for the common defense, and I'll consider it..

Another waxed, A$$hole parade

I wonder what the threshold will be used to punish the treasonous persons?

Who will execute the hunt for evil? How large will the state have to grow, in order to find all of the
undesirables? Who will pay for that?

Are the conservatives who voted for Reagan, Bush, Dole, Bush, McPalin who also like their medicare
be put against the wall? Really, where's the sandbox?

I mean you guys grow dumber by the week, the propagation of stupidity here has created a historical dialogue
based upon propaganda. Where is the truth, any shred of it?

Originally posted by sheepslayer247
You do know that ideology opens up a big can of worms that would have unrealized consequenses?

America is part socialism.....

the police are a socialist program

the fire department is a socialist program

interstates and highways are a socialist program

almost all enviromental protection programs are socialist

You see the slippery slope you have created? Now we all have to be tried for treason by your standards!

Damn socialist commies!

You forgot

Miltary - Tax payer pays

Education

Politican/Congress/White House/Public Servants - Tax payer pays
Health Insurance for Public Servants, Politicans/Congress - Tax payer pays

Business/Corporate Companies including:

Recently: Banks, Insurance,

Agriculture: Food: Corn, Wheat. Peanuts, Honey, Dairy.. Non Food: Wool, Cotton,Tobacco,

Transportation: Sea - Domestic and International Ports, Rail - lines, ports, Roads, highways, bridges etc including vehicles: cars, trucks, buses, Air Commerical Airline Industry, including Domestic and International and Ports

Energy Companies:- Oil, Coal, Gas, Nuclear, Renewables: Solar, Wind, Ethanol, Bio diesel

All Public Buildings not excluding libraries and musems, government houses/buildings

ALL receive FUNDS from YOU, The TAXPAYER/THE PUBLIC in the form of SUBSIDISES/PAYMENT/OPERATION from The Government

You call it socialist programs lolol HARDLY

Socialism is EQUAL distribution of resources INCLUDING Public Services such as (but not limited to) healthcare, education, water, power, transportation, affordable housing (yes in some countries this DOES happen) etc

Originally posted by DeReK DaRkLy

The inherent problem is within our own human nature...

A completely capitalist society would eventually end up with an ultra rich 1% controlling class and an ultra poor 99%.

Likewise, a completely socialist society would create the same class system, but it would be governments instead of businesses manipulating the flow of money and resources.

Either way - the few control the many, and greed still wins.

Socialist Society (as you put it) is about Public Ownership, not Government Ownership and Control, but I get your point regarding how Government is the Gatekeeper with said Resources (which totally screws up what Socialist Society is meant to be IMO)

reply to post by sonofliberty1776


Created "equal" in what sense? Physical, mental, intellect? How? Notice how the constitution says "created" and not evolved?

Both extremist capitalism and extremist socialism is against human rights. So either allow both, or ban both.

I agree with above. Any extreme becomes destructive.

I can't help but laugh at the idea of supporting the rights of the individual by suppressing the rights of individual opinion and thought. One smart cookie there!


trea·son
   /ˈtrizən/ Show Spelled[tree-zuhn]
noun
1.the offense of acting to overthrow one's government or to harm or kill its sovereign.
2.a violation of allegiance to one's sovereign or to one's state.

So......if you have any ideologies that violate allegiance to our soveriegn or our state, then you should be condemned or repressed for that?

Yeah....uh......that is a REAL free society, where the individual has the freedom and right to.....do and think as the state says they should.....???????????

Originally posted by nightstalker46
Considering that all three philosophies, as forms of governance, are contrary to the basic intent of personal freedoms, liberties and sovereignty of the individual, as established by the Constitution: Why do we allow anyone, who professes or proselytizes those belief's, to become involved in government at any level. And why should those who openly advocate the overthrow of those Constitutional principals, not be charged and prosecuted as traitors. What greater threat to liberty than that from within. This should be interesting

I'm guessing you're American?

2nd line.

/sigh.

Originally posted by aero56
reply to post by sonofliberty1776

 

Created "equal" in what sense? Physical, mental, intellect? How? Notice how the constitution says "created" and not evolved?

Equal in the sense that we are all human beings. We all have the right to pursue our happiness. Notice it says "pursue" not "achieve". Are we all equal in the ways you listed? Of course not. Neither are we all equally motivated to work. If I do more work, I should receive more compensation, it should not be forcibly taken from me and given to you or anyone else who refuses to get off their a$$ and go to work.

reply to post by intrepid


As an anarchist, I thank you for your interest and understanding of the anarchist ideology, which is, as you state, very different from what most people believe/how society depicts anarchy.

Allow me to add that many people also confuse Libertarians (right wing social darwinists) and Anarchists (left wing social egalitarians).

Star from me.

Originally posted by nightstalker46
reply to post by buster2010

 

Where in the preamble do you see socialism?

When were we about to go socialist.? I presume you are referring to the Carter administration. The one that gave us gasoline rationing. and 18-35% consumer interest rates and 10% unemployment. The most prosperous period in the last 40 years was 94-2000, when there was a republican majority in the house and senate, for the first time in 50 yrs. Yea, Clinton was president, but a lame duck and could not stop balanced budget amendment, welfare reform and PAGO; that congress left us with a surplus,and the next democratic congress proceeded to spend it all and a lot more. Then came 911, and enough democrats voted to go to war [they had the majority and could have stopped it] until they didn't vote for it.???

Show me a socialist financial plan that is sustainable and still allows for innovation, creativity, rewards those who produce something of value, and that provides for the common defense, and I'll consider it..

What part of it don't you understand? Clinton was a lame duck with job growth and a surplus when he left office. Not to mention that unlike Reagan he didn't have to give blanket amnesty to all illegal aliens to create jobs. If Clinton was a lame duck what do you call the failure that followed him? You know the one who turned a surplus into a debt within a year? You probably don't know this but there are many different forms of socialism China is a socialist country and they bankroll most of the world. Their people are rewarded and they provide for the common defense also.

reply to post by nightstalker46


Because "openly advocate" is a long stretch from "actively persue". It's our freedom of speach that allows ATS to exist in the first place. ATS is not treason. I think you were saying that talking out loud about the wrong subject is treasonous... no... that's sedition. Treasonous activities are illegal for a very good reason. Typically lots of people get hurt. Sedition... well that's just people talking when you get right down to it. Don't rent space in your head to anyone.

reply to post by nightstalker46

are you suggesting that "any" political ideology should be allowed to be represented in our governmental affairs???

Yes, yes I am if you believe so strongly in the principles that underpin your political ideology that you so clearly hold dear then you should also recognise that as part of a true democratic process even the National Socialist parties have a right to stand up for election. I am amazed that you do not see the paradox of your own ideology, freedoms with the restriction of law’s are not freedoms. I don’t think you actually understand your own ideology for what I have said in my first post still stands, I don’t really have to add anything to it for it exposes the illogical premise of your OP.

Just remember both Hamas and the Nazi party both gained power in democratic elections despite their extreme views, democracy only works if the guy you want to win, wins.

Its truly amazing how many of you defend communism and socialism. Its an eye opener.

Created "equal" in what sense? Physical, mental, intellect? How? Notice how the constitution says "created" and not evolved?

Originally posted by sonofliberty1776
Equal in the sense that we are all human beings. We all have the right to pursue our happiness. Notice it says "pursue" not "achieve". Are we all equal in the ways you listed? Of course not. Neither are we all equally motivated to work. If I do more work, I should receive more compensation, it should not be forcibly taken from me and given to you or anyone else who refuses to get off their a$$ and go to work.

Your argument is for your country (is ATS discussion for ONLY for the american way american way is only the right way?) It doesnt work like that in many other countries though

Interesting though with the US "pursue happiness" and how that happiness it seems is often defined, in many cases happiness = large amounts of capital/assets

So to use your own argue, ONE would have the right and able to pursue physical health, mental health and educate = intellect but its not really equally

The difference in the US all this is measured/placed regarding income levels whether one can pursue happiness accordingly

Income status should NOT determine accessibility or be of disadvantage to: ie pursue physical health, mental health and well being and access reasonable good education it should be EQUALLY provided for EVERYONE

Originally posted by Gannicus
Its truly amazing how many of you defend communism and socialism. Its an eye opener.

edit on 21-8-2011 by Gannicus because: (no reason given)

maybe because it works in countries outside the USA perhaps?

You know... older, wiser countries?

reply to post by mr-lizard


I see no evidence that either of those systems works. I'd fight to the death to remove them from my society. You are not nearly as wise as you think you are.

reply to post by mr-lizard

maybe because it works in countries outside the USA perhaps? You know... older, wiser countries?

Communism, and true socialism works nowhere. The only thing that works is social capitalism, and better than pure capitalism or socialism. Best of both worlds.

reply to post by Ismail

Allow me to add that many people also confuse Libertarians (right wing social darwinists) and Anarchists (left wing social egalitarians). Star from me.

Libertarians are not true anarchists.

There are two kinds of anarchism: leftwing social anarchists (which is IMHO a contradiction in terms) and rightwing anarchocapitalists (which is temporarily possible but inherently very unstable).

Both of these ideologies are utopian, unreal and against human rights.

reply to post by Maslo


Don’t you mean state capitalism, I do agree with you it is a very good economic ideology that worked well for some former soviet states, some argue that it’s the system that China are currently utilising with fantastic results. I would rather argue that China is now a capitalist state with communist characteristics rather than utilising a state capitalist economic model but there are some compelling arguments.

But yes state capitalism is the way to go.