The House Bill Would Mean a Tax Hike for Millions of Seniors. Learn More

Reply
Valued Social Butterfly
Posts: 31,631
Registered: ‎02-21-2014

Re: Communism

Message 31 of 104 (67 Views)

phyllisc6781 wrote:

@alferdpacker—It is always easier to deal with the what ifs than to deal with present day reality.  

China has been America’s biggest economic threat for years.  I was writing papers about it when I was in college.  No news there.

Here's News! We have a president who is incredulously incompetent, but who continues to be supported by cowardly Senators and Congressmen, an uninformed, often, radical base, given to ridiculous conspiracy theories and racist beliefs.

That’s reality; that is a very clear and present danger.  That is relevant. So, for those who want to play the “what If” game, what if trump supporters quit blowing smoke and start dealing with the greatest threat to all Americans, “liddle” dumb, dangerous  donnie?

 

Gee, I miss having a real president!

 

 


Does that mean that you think that Karl Marx spelled out a viable model for government - or do you have no thoughts on the topic and just like typing "liddle"?

Valued Social Butterfly
Posts: 31,631
Registered: ‎02-21-2014

Re: Communism

Message 32 of 104 (67 Views)

MIseker wrote:

rk9152 wrote:


The constitutional amendment process is the way to effect change. 

 


That argument begs the question..were any civil rights laws post womens sufferage constitutional because they werent amendments? See where you want to take this? In essence, what you are against is CULTURE CHANGE. see what "I" did there? I pointed out what you are doing. hey..accuse away..where do all your arguments lead to? By golly a feudal society of sorts, with a master class and an underclass..which is what happens without culture change..we dont want the south to lose its culture by merely passing laws do we? The alt right and its cohorts dont mind tossing middle class culture under the bus for that feudal society.

 

 Constitutional laws are a way to affect change also. have you forgotton the founders wanted a NATION OF LAWS? As you said to me on another post..."how do i know you are not making this up" . Liberal posters here provide all kinds of links to facts that debunk conservative/alt right opinion, yet conservative posters reply with opinions, alternative facts, sophistry, gaslighting, fallacial arguments, circular argument, hollow ideas and hollow words. Facts please.


I'm not sure what you are advocating - your point got lost in all the extraneous words.. I said that the constitutional amendment process is the way to change the constitution. But you seem to be challenging that.

 

If not the constitutional amendment process - how would you see the constitution being changed?

Treasured Social Butterfly
Posts: 8,174
Registered: ‎11-18-2009

Re: Communism

Message 33 of 104 (71 Views)

rk9152 wrote:

gruffstuff wrote:

My point was that the Constitution does not address our economic system. Period.

 

No question about it, it does not.

 

Though I will say slavery is an example of a free market mentality, and slavery is in the Constitution.

 

I will also say we fought a war to correct that injustice, and amended the Constitution to correct the bad judgement and greed that allowed slavery.

 

Thank the wisdom of the founding fathers for allowing an amendment process, it's almost like they anticipated that conflict and tried to avoid it by freeing slaves on their deaths.

 

Still slavery was always wrong, the drive to reduce the cost of labor was to much,  even for the founding fathers.

 

 


True - the Constitution does not address the economy, only the freedom of the people. On the other hand Communism does address the economy in that the State controls it. 


The Constitution doesnt prevent us from electing communists, just totlitarians. As far as that goes, it doesnt prevent wealth redistribution to the poor  and working class either. 

 

So it begins.
Gold Conversationalist
Posts: 369
Registered: ‎09-26-2017

Re: Communism

Message 34 of 104 (70 Views)

@alferdpacker—It is always easier to deal with the what ifs than to deal with present day reality.  

China has been America’s biggest economic threat for years.  I was writing papers about it when I was in college.  No news there.

Here's News! We have a president who is incredulously incompetent, but who continues to be supported by cowardly Senators and Congressmen, an uninformed, often, radical base, given to ridiculous conspiracy theories and racist beliefs.

That’s reality; that is a very clear and present danger.  That is relevant. So, for those who want to play the “what If” game, what if trump supporters quit blowing smoke and start dealing with the greatest threat to all Americans, “liddle” dumb, dangerous  donnie?

 

Gee, I miss having a real president!

 

 

Treasured Social Butterfly
Posts: 8,174
Registered: ‎11-18-2009

Re: Communism

Message 35 of 104 (64 Views)

rk9152 wrote:

Panjandrum wrote:

rk9152:  I believe that our Founders had seen the potential disaster of the all powerful government and our Constitution was the result - our Constitution, not a "living document" that can change at the current whims of the day.

 

 

 

Here's what Thomas Jefferson thought about that. Lol

 

 

“I am not an advocate for frequent changes in laws and Constitutions. But laws and institutions must go hand in hand with the progress of the human mind. As that becomes more developed, more enlightened, as new discoveries are made, new truths discovered and manners and opinions change, with the change of circumstances, institutions must advance also to keep pace with the times. We might as well require a man to wear still the coat which fitted him when a boy as civilized society to remain ever under the regimen of their barbarous ancestors.”

https://www.goodreads.com/quotes/94629-i-am-not-an-advocate-for-frequent-changes-in-laws


The constitutional amendment process is the way to effect change. 

 


That argument begs the question..were any civil rights laws post womens sufferage constitutional because they werent amendments? See where you want to take this? In essence, what you are against is CULTURE CHANGE. see what "I" did there? I pointed out what you are doing. hey..accuse away..where do all your arguments lead to? By golly a feudal society of sorts, with a master class and an underclass..which is what happens without culture change..we dont want the south to lose its culture by merely passing laws do we? The alt right and its cohorts dont mind tossing middle class culture under the bus for that feudal society.

 

 Constitutional laws are a way to affect change also. have you forgotton the founders wanted a NATION OF LAWS? As you said to me on another post..."how do i know you are not making this up" . Liberal posters here provide all kinds of links to facts that debunk conservative/alt right opinion, yet conservative posters reply with opinions, alternative facts, sophistry, gaslighting, fallacial arguments, circular argument, hollow ideas and hollow words. Facts please.

So it begins.
Valued Social Butterfly
Posts: 31,631
Registered: ‎02-21-2014

Re: Communism

Message 36 of 104 (64 Views)

ChasKy53 wrote:

rk9152 wrote:

ChasKy53 wrote:

rk9152 wrote:

ChasKy53 wrote:

 


How is it an insult to point out (very accurately) that a poster  "continues to label  any cooperative economic effort as Marxism which wither shows a profound ignorance or a blatant disregard of the facts." ????


1) If you have to ask, you are suffering the maladies described in that post;

2) Do you have no interest in the topic beyond something to fight about?


Any one who continually labels any cooperative economic effort as Marxism or "neo-Marxism" truly does display either ignorance or a blatant disregard for facts. This is simply factual and if someone takes offense, so be it.

It is, by definition. As you may recall we had a topic about Mandragon. it was a totally freely organized coop that offered a Marxist economy - but not society.

It is by your own definition. Any cooperative economic effort is not Marxism.

True - as in the case of Mondragon. However, a government regulated system is not "cooperative".

 

As far as the topic:  Communism has the same end result as unbridled and unregulated capitalism - - - - - - - - a very small percentage of society ends up with 90% or more of the total wealth and income.

Which is why I prefer a free enterprise economic system controlled by the consumer with the government assuring it's freedom (anti-trust laws e.g.).

You are confusing Stalinist Communism with Marxist Communism. Is that intentional or simply a case of being uninformed?

Do you prefer communism or a Democracy?

I believe the answer is obvious - don't play games.

 

What is with your apparent obsession with Marxism and Communism?

It is a powerful force in the world and has been for over a century and a half. Certainly at least as worth discussing alt-right which you define as "Read your posts".

Reading many of your postings simply shows a lot about what the Alt-Right is about. Erroneously accusing others of being Marxist is an example of what the the Alt-Right does. Marxism seems to be a "powerful force" in you mind, but don't you prefer fascism instead?

The alt-right is all about white supremacy - totally unrelated to this discussion except for your need to use it inaccurately as a lame insult. 

 

Why would you think I prefer fascism? If you knew it's definition, you would know it is the antithesis of the free market.


 


 


 

Valued Social Butterfly
Posts: 21,645
Registered: ‎11-07-2009

Re: Communism

Message 37 of 104 (72 Views)

gruffstuff wrote:

Agreed. The Constitution can be changed via the amendment process - only.

 

Any thoughts on the viability of Communism as laid out by Marx?

 

The Constitution can be changed by the amendment process, but the rights of the people are not limited to the rights enumerated in the Constitution.

 

Is communism viable?

 

China will overtake the USA as the world's largest economy by 2018, so yes communism is viable.

 

Is it viable as laid out be Marx ?  Who cares?

 

The point being an economy can be capitalist and communist at the same time, or capitalist and socialist, or capitalist and sort of socialist, or any combination there of.

 

I think a more important issue is the ability of a government to address the issues that threaten it, or plague it, or hamper it, like the health and well being of it's population, it's debt, it's ability to perform and provide services, it's ability to feed itself, it's ability to defend itself, it's ability to provide health care, it's ability to shelter it's population and keep the population fed and warm.

 

Cold and hungry people are the stuff revolts are made of,  people who are ill can't work and provide for themselves, people who are ignorant can't function in the modern world.

 

So as a practical matter government has to provide all of those things, directly or indirectly, in order to survive as government. People need food, shelter, health care, and a education that is competitive or better with the rest of the world in order to do work and provide for themselves, and to support the government and it's functions.

 

Free market baloney is just that, baloney. 


Gruffstuff, very well put, a well put together description of the responsibilities of government. Our General Welfare clause covers some of that. Some who want to talk about communism and Marxism so much seem to prefer an unbridled economy with government so limited that 1% of our society will hold over 90% of our total earnings and wealth, thereby controlling our society and government.


"The only thing man learns from history is man learns nothing from history"
Valued Social Butterfly
Posts: 21,645
Registered: ‎11-07-2009

Re: Communism

Message 38 of 104 (71 Views)

rk9152 wrote:

Do you have any thoughts on the topic?

Sure ......... it's a topic that you posted where you can post fallacies and practice Sophistry.


"The only thing man learns from history is man learns nothing from history"
Valued Social Butterfly
Posts: 5,620
Registered: ‎05-16-2009

Re: Communism

Message 39 of 104 (64 Views)

rk9152 wrote:

nctarheel wrote:

rk9152 wrote:
 

And yet, that is the topic. 


And yet, Singapore was NEVER spun off by China.

 

A point that you clearly stated to be a fact.

 

But that figment of your imagination calls into question your thesis, your talking points, and your other "supposed" facts that you have used throughout the thread rendering the topic null and void.


Right you are - I was thinking of Shanghai. Now that we have dealt with my figment - back to Communism.....


I am wondering who wrote the history book that you are using to reference your material.

 

Based in the faux facts throughout your posts; it must be a resource from the Alt-Right.

 

Once again, you have posted an absolutely erroneous fact in that Shanghai was NEVER SPUN OFF by China.

 

Your willingness to distribute faux facts on a wholesale basis, again, renders your other posts questionable as to their factual basis; and thus, unbelievable.

Valued Social Butterfly
Posts: 21,645
Registered: ‎11-07-2009

Re: Communism

Message 40 of 104 (67 Views)

rk9152 wrote:

umbarch64 wrote:

 

 

Classic Sophistry?  You bet.


 


Say wot?????


You sure seem to practice it a lot for someone suggesting that they don't know what it is:

 

http://www.yourdictionary.com/sophistry


"The only thing man learns from history is man learns nothing from history"