Marxist posters can't assure us that THEIR version will work or be tried next time

[Ross Dolan]

Americans, REAL AMERICANS disagree with you.

Lots of real Americans DO AGREE with me. Some traitorous Americans do not.

Obviously you are one of the traitorous ones...and apparently you do not.

Okay...that happens.

Your opinion doesn't count.

My opinion does count...just as yours does and just as the opinions of everyone else posting here count.

Capisce?

Do you?

Or are you still confused.

 

[Ross Dolan]

Dummie123 is totally lost!

It's sad to know people so misinformed and confused actually exist.

It would be humorous and entertaining if it weren't so terribly sad.

It must be really really sad for them personally.

I wish him well with his continued struggles with reality.

Yup.

And I am very, very sad for him.

 

[Drummie123]

So, no answer to the question about what Marxist policy America has enacted?

If you are trying to use the (if they indeed are) Marxist ideas of Social Security or other indispensable aspects of our current government system to advocate that we should swallow more Marxist concepts until we become a Marxist state, you are barking up the wrong tree.

If a person develops a physical ailment and a doctor prescribes a remedy which has been developed from poisonous substances but has been refined to make it effective in treating that ailment, how foolish would it be to just wildly assume that swallowing the unrefined poisonous substance would be at all healthy?

Or how about another faulty assumption that if 250mg's of the remedy is effective in combating the ailment, that 2,500 mgs would be even more effective?

Or another stupid assumption, that because the poison, when refined and at any dosage, would cure ALL AND EVERY ache, pain or malady?

People like you have the unreasonable idea that if we just get Marxism installed, that all the messy, complicated details can be worked out and everything will be fine.

And that is not true.

History and common sense tells us that, but SOME people are not mentally or emotionally equipped to recognize or understand all of that.

Like I said before, you are barking up the wrong tree.

Do a Ben Franklin side by side comparison of the pros and cons of Marxism.

If you are able to think of all of the pros and all the cons, there will be no chance you would still want Marxism.

If you are honest and want what's best for America and the most number of people, that is.

 

[Drummie123]

Or are you still confused.

Or are you still confused.

ON HIS WORST DAY, JOE BIDEN IS A BETTER PRESIDENT THAN TRUMP WAS ON HIS BEST DAY!

(Laugh and Point)

 

[NiftyNiblick]

https://www.nps.gov/liho/learn/historyculture/housedivided.htm

To split the United States and have two hostile nations trying to exist side by side would not be to anyone's long term benefit.

Google the contentious histories of Israel/Palestine or Iraq/Iran to become familiar with what might be in store for US if we were dim witted enough to voluntarily lobby for such a state.

Those who oppose America as it has been for most of its 250 years have nothing good to point to as an inducement except smoke, mirrors, snake oil and emotional manipulation.

Show us what we could look forward to with Marxist America. Or a Sharia ruled America. Or a Soros constructed America.

All would be poor substitutes for what we have already.


The only thing that allows critics of America to even exist is America's tolerance of their self defeating folly.


And under all of those replacement ideologies, that tolerance would be eliminated.


Make Mine Freedom (1948)

America's problems have mostly to do with disagreement over laws and tax codes.

If we split up, we wouldn't be writing each others laws and tax codes.

With that, there's no real reason why we would be in conflict unless we culturally want to be,
and if the latter is the case,
staying together is just as great of a problem.

 

[Ross Dolan]

(Laugh and Point)

Obviously you are still very confused.

That accounts for your opinion about the value of Trump.

 

[Flash]

If you are trying to use the (if they indeed are) Marxist ideas of Social Security or other indispensable aspects of our current government system to advocate that we should swallow more Marxist concepts until we become a Marxist state, you are barking up the wrong tree.

If a person develops a physical ailment and a doctor prescribes a remedy which has been developed from poisonous substances but has been refined to make it effective in treating that ailment, how foolish would it be to just wildly assume that swallowing the unrefined poisonous substance would be at all healthy?

Or how about another faulty assumption that if 250mg's of the remedy is effective in combating the ailment, that 2,500 mgs would be even more effective?

Or another stupid assumption, that because the poison, when refined and at any dosage, would cure ALL AND EVERY ache, pain or malady?

People like you have the unreasonable idea that if we just get Marxism installed, that all the messy, complicated details can be worked out and everything will be fine.

And that is not true.

History and common sense tells us that, but SOME people are not mentally or emotionally equipped to recognize or understand all of that.

Like I said before, you are barking up the wrong tree.

Do a Ben Franklin side by side comparison of the pros and cons of Marxism.

If you are able to think of all of the pros and all the cons, there will be no chance you would still want Marxism.

If you are honest and want what's best for America and the most number of people, that is.

You make several mistaken assumptions that I never said or implied. What is Marxist about Social Security?

What makes you think I want Marxism installed? My point is that unless we are nationalizing major industries there is no socialism involved. Socialism is an economic system and communism a political system, but socialism in an integral part of communism.

Marxism, socialism, fascism have negative connotations in the U. S. So, you think just pinning that label on something you dislike makes it bad.

Again, has the U. S. enacted any Marxist concepts? If not, why the fear of an outmoded concept which has almost disappeared in the real world? You are trying to instill fear based on no real threat. Even China has outgrown Marxist socialist principles.

Fear has become a cottage industry.

 

[NiftyNiblick]

Why do people keep pretending that capitalism and socialism are mutually exclusive when they operate in parallel in almost EVERY national economy globally?

This is the problem with the internet.

It gives clueless people a forum in which to spew total nonsense.

 

[Drummie123]

America's problems have mostly to do with disagreement over laws and tax codes.

If we split up, we wouldn't be writing each others laws and tax codes.

With that, there's no real reason why we would be in conflict unless we culturally want to be,
and if the latter is the case,
staying together is just as great of a problem.

Just as Marxists today aren't satisfied with "JUST" the 40 countries they have already screwed up, Marxists would begin attacking America.

Their goal is global domination.

This is where we can not retreat any further.

America was meant to be free.

Marxism demands people's freedom.

In the early stages, people will cede their freedom because they don't know how they are being buggered.

But when they realize what is really going on, people must be compelled through force, violent or non-violent and/or imprisonment or some other punishment or threat, to make Marxism work.

And even then, it never has.

 

[Drummie123]

Why do people keep pretending that capitalism and socialism are mutually exclusive when they operate in parallel in almost EVERY national economy globally?

This is the problem with the internet.

It gives clueless people a forum in which to spew total nonsense.

How is Socialism better than our current proven system?

250 years of US success vs zero years of success for Socialism.

 

[NiftyNiblick]

How is Socialism better than our current proven system?

250 years of US success vs zero years of success for Socialism.

The Scandinavian nations all enjoy a better standard of living than we do.

We don't enjoy the solidarity that they have and that's needed to do things collectively
because we're a nation of people who seriously dislike one another.

I, for example, don't even consider conservatives to be human. I view you all as devolved mutants. You don't think highly of me either.

If the Red and the Blue went in their own directions, we could BOTH have a nation more in line with what we want.
As we are now, there's NO domestic tranquility in our future for ANYBODY. It's going to blow up big time.

 

[Flash]

The Scandinavian nations all enjoy a better standard of living than we do.

Scandinavian nations are not socialist (which they kept telling Bernie Sanders). The have a large social welfare system which is not socialism. They have a capitalist, private, economic system.

Maybe if you quit hating it might be a start.

 

[Flash]

How is Socialism better than our current proven system?

250 years of US success vs zero years of success for Socialism.

Agreed, but which nation is the second largest economic power?

 

[Flash]

Just as Marxists today aren't satisfied with "JUST" the 40 countries they have already screwed up, Marxists would begin attacking America.

Their goal is global domination.

BS. Who is trying to dominate the world? Cuba, North Korea, Vietnam? China obviously wants to expand its power but it behaves like a major power which isn't affected by the type of political system. Russian foreign policy was essentially the same before, during, and after communism.

Any Marxists in the U. S. are idealistic college students with no power who will become Wall Street brokers.

 

[NiftyNiblick]

Scandinavian nations are not socialist (which they kept telling Bernie Sanders). The have a large social welfare system which is not socialism. They have a capitalist, private, economic system.

Maybe if you quit hating it might be a start.

Flash, you still don't understand that nations are socialist and capitalist at the same time because you don't understand what either word means.
If you don't think that Scandinavia is socialist, then you shouldn't be as opposed to adopting successful Scandinavian approaches.

Republicans are only matched by Evangelical Christians for circular logic, so it's no wonder the groups overlap so much.
We'd be a far greater nation with the absence of both. We'd also have higher average SAT scores.

 

[zymurgy]

Why do people keep pretending that capitalism and socialism are mutually exclusive when they operate in parallel in almost EVERY national economy globally?

This is the problem with the internet.

It gives clueless people a forum in which to spew total nonsense.

capitalism was eradicated. we don't practice anything remotely resembling it any longer.

trying to pin fat cats making policy in smokey back rooms as capitalism is a crock of shit. future generations of unborn - or slaves in china did not agree to loan us trillions of dollars - nothing is voluntary - it is forced on them

 

[Flash]

Flash, you still don't understand that nations are socialist and capitalist at the same time because you don't understand what either word means.
If you don't think that Scandinavia is socialist, then you shouldn't be as opposed to adopting successful Scandinavian approaches.

Republicans are only matched by Evangelical Christians for circular logic, so it's no wonder the groups overlap so much.
We'd be a far greater nation with the absence of both. We'd also have higher average SAT scores.

You confuse socialism with social programs. Major industries in Scandinavian countries are privately owned--that is capitalism.
If we are going to talk about economic systems we should use economic terms to describe them, not the misuse of the term used in American politics today.

Having an expansive social welfare program has nothing to do with socialism--those are government programs. If we label all government programs as "socialist" then all nations are socialist.

For example, Scandinavian healthcare systems are not socialist (nor is Medicare) because the healthcare systems are still privately run. Doctors, nurses, hospitals, medical suppliers, are not government operated.

If you don't think that Scandinavia is socialist, then you shouldn't be as opposed to adopting successful Scandinavian approaches.

What they are called has nothing to do with favoring or opposing adopting successful approaches.

What American industry would you nationalize as an example of a successful Scandinavian approach?

 

[Ross Dolan]

Just as Marxists today aren't satisfied with "JUST" the 40 countries they have already screwed up, Marxists would begin attacking America.

Their goal is global domination.

This is where we can not retreat any further.

America was meant to be free.

Marxism demands people's freedom.

In the early stages, people will cede their freedom because they don't know how they are being buggered.

But when they realize what is really going on, people must be compelled through force, violent or non-violent and/or imprisonment or some other punishment or threat, to make Marxism work.

And even then, it never has.

It is beyond comprehension how anyone can say that "America was meant to be free"...

...and still think that "Trump is mankind's last hope to preserve Liberty."

Trump is the greatest threat to America's freedom we have ever faced...and by extension, the greatest universal threat to freedom in general.

 

[NiftyNiblick]

What American industry would you nationalize as an example of a successful Scandinavian approach?

All healthcare related industries from pharma to nursing homes.
All public utilities and public transportation except for taxis and limos.
Most types of insurance.
Possibly all energy sources.
All multiple unit housing except for hotels.
I wouldn't ban private education but it would have to compete with tax supported education at every level.

Want to make shoes, shirts, cars, golf clubs, and vinyl disc turntables?
Want to run a fancy restaurant?
That's the place for free enterprise, but labor should be unionized.

America is socially regressive and rapidly approaching third world status.
Time to partition.

 

[Flash]

All healthcare related industries from pharma to nursing homes.
All public utilities and public transportation except for taxis and limos.
Most types of insurance.
Possibly all energy sources.
All multiple unit housing except for hotels.
I wouldn't ban private education but it would have to compete with tax supported education at every level.

Want to make shoes, shirts, cars, golf clubs, and vinyl disc turntables?
Want to run a fancy restaurant?
That's the place for free enterprise, but labor should be unionized.

America is socially regressive and rapidly approaching third world status.
Time to partition.

Those proposals are the reason socialists cannot win in the U. S. They would have very little public acceptance even among progressive Democrats. You have just switched profits from private companies to government. How does it improve the healthcare system for the government to own it?

How is this like Scandinavian successes?