Get the Latest on Health Care Bill and White House Budget. Join AARP Today at 4 p.m. ET for a Live Discussion

Reply
Respected Social Butterfly
Posts: 5,770
Registered: ‎11-18-2009

Re: The Progressive Movement

Message 81 of 396 (90 Views)

rk9152 wrote:

As I posted earlier, lengthy chain-letter exchanges get pretty far afield so I said I would post on individual elements of Marxism that have a place in current politics.

 

Marx stated that the goal of getting people ready for the "workers paradise" required that there by strict State control over education. Today, Marxists insist that there be only State schools. They attempt to restrict private schools. They are opposed to anything such as charter schools that might loosen the hold of the State.

 

In our schools students learn dependence on the State resulting in the "snowflake effect". They learn that they must not hear any views beyond the "approved" ones and are encouraged to attack the free speech of any opposing voice. They are provided with "safe spaces" where they will not hear anything other than the "approved" view of issues.

 

In our area, schools are accepting students at six am and keeping them until six pm - providing for all their needs for more hours than the parents teaching them dependence on the State. The concept of educations has expanded well beyond actual education. 

 

Twenty-two (or more) years of such indoctrination sends them into the world with a favorable view of the teachings of Karl Marx with respect to the power of the State.


WHo insists there be no private schools?

 

So it begins.
Valued Social Butterfly
Posts: 24,934
Registered: ‎02-21-2014

Re: The Progressive Movement

Message 82 of 396 (88 Views)

rker321 wrote:

It has become an impossibility in our society and in many posters to actually want to see the foolishness of their concept. I guess that it is appropriate for them to simply believe the easier explanation than actually delve into the the truth of their statements
We have been discussing this thread with over 300 posts and proven without any doubt that the Progressive Movement  and the Marxist platform are in no way similar.
But as we all have seen, the futility to have the dissenters actually move into any kind of comprehension  or to the admission that they could be incorrect.
In my view, it proves the inflexibility of their minds. 
I am now of the belief that we can be here till the end of creation, and will never see the gleam of a light shinning thru their heads in regards to this subject.
Unless we want to simply beat on a dead horse. I guess that this thread has reached its ending.


We have not actually been discussing the topic for 300 posts. The vast majority have been like your most current effort and the three most recently responded to.

 

As an example, I said I would break it down into it's parts. Most recently I posted about the Marxist concept of education. The next response had to do with Bill O'Reilly (go figure) - and your contribution to that discussion was???

Valued Social Butterfly
Posts: 24,934
Registered: ‎02-21-2014

Re: The Progressive Movement

Message 83 of 396 (77 Views)

alferdpacker wrote:

ChasKy53 wrote:

rk9152 wrote:

umbarch64 wrote:

I don't want to get in between you guys, BUT....what rk said was NOT accurate. The 'wisdom of the Founding Fathers' left us with documents which say why the Founders did what they did, what they intended to put in place of what they got rid of and how that new 'thing' was supposed to work. 

 

The Declaration of Independence came first, the Constituton followed.  The true meaning is set forth in each and every word used in the documents precisely as written. ALL else,....all the pamphlets, papers, treatises, that preceded and followed those memorialized words are irrelevant if, in any way, they contradict those words. 

 

A monarchy, a dictatorship IS "trust' placed in an individual as rk infers is the 'right' thing to do. There is no need to expound further on what rk said.  His own words establish how it is he and his cohorts view what they intend this Nation to be AFTER they are through molding it to their mindset.

 

The Preamble to that thing called the Constitution starts out with the precise phrase "We, the People of the United States, in order to form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the generatl welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America. 

 

That's the IDEA....the CONCEPT....the GOAL. It's WE, THE PEOPLE who establish this government.  It is WE, THE PEOPLE that government is to serve, and it is only WE, THE PEOPLE who can say otherwise. There IS no further discussion possible about that. Contest that and we fight.

 

 


There is a distinct difference between putting trust in THE individual and having rule by AN individual. I can't believe that was missed.

 

So, it appears that rk and "his cohorts" are not in error.

 

I have not checked with my cohorts, but I personally can't see anything in the words cited to support, "From each.....to each...." (my point). That actually comes from a different document.


Funny, but this doesn't discount anything that Umbarch 64 posted.


Nope - it never came anywhere close, did it?

 

 

 


Funny, another poster missed the refutation of, "A monarchy, a dictatorship IS "trust' placed in an individual as rk infers is the 'right' thing to do".

 

Ya gotta wonder if some posters read the posts they are theoretically responding to.

Valued Social Butterfly
Posts: 24,934
Registered: ‎02-21-2014

Re: The Progressive Movement

Message 84 of 396 (65 Views)

ChasKy53 wrote:

rk9152 wrote:

umbarch64 wrote:

I don't want to get in between you guys, BUT....what rk said was NOT accurate. The 'wisdom of the Founding Fathers' left us with documents which say why the Founders did what they did, what they intended to put in place of what they got rid of and how that new 'thing' was supposed to work. 

 

The Declaration of Independence came first, the Constituton followed.  The true meaning is set forth in each and every word used in the documents precisely as written. ALL else,....all the pamphlets, papers, treatises, that preceded and followed those memorialized words are irrelevant if, in any way, they contradict those words. 

 

A monarchy, a dictatorship IS "trust' placed in an individual as rk infers is the 'right' thing to do. There is no need to expound further on what rk said.  His own words establish how it is he and his cohorts view what they intend this Nation to be AFTER they are through molding it to their mindset.

 

The Preamble to that thing called the Constitution starts out with the precise phrase "We, the People of the United States, in order to form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the generatl welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America. 

 

That's the IDEA....the CONCEPT....the GOAL. It's WE, THE PEOPLE who establish this government.  It is WE, THE PEOPLE that government is to serve, and it is only WE, THE PEOPLE who can say otherwise. There IS no further discussion possible about that. Contest that and we fight.

 

 


There is a distinct difference between putting trust in THE individual and having rule by AN individual. I can't believe that was missed.

 

So, it appears that rk and "his cohorts" are not in error.

 

I have not checked with my cohorts, but I personally can't see anything in the words cited to support, "From each.....to each...." (my point). That actually comes from a different document.


Funny, but this doesn't discount anything that Umbarch 64 posted.


Funny, but the poster seems to have missed the refutation of, "A monarchy, a dictatorship IS "trust' placed in an individual as rk infers is the 'right' thing to do.

Valued Social Butterfly
Posts: 21,003
Registered: ‎03-04-2009

Re: The Progressive Movement

Message 85 of 396 (57 Views)

It has become an impossibility in our society and in many posters to actually want to see the foolishness of their concept. I guess that it is appropriate for them to simply believe the easier explanation than actually delve into the the truth of their statements
We have been discussing this thread with over 300 posts and proven without any doubt that the Progressive Movement  and the Marxist platform are in no way similar.
But as we all have seen, the futility to have the dissenters actually move into any kind of comprehension  or to the admission that they could be incorrect.
In my view, it proves the inflexibility of their minds. 
I am now of the belief that we can be here till the end of creation, and will never see the gleam of a light shinning thru their heads in regards to this subject.
Unless we want to simply beat on a dead horse. I guess that this thread has reached its ending.

Treasured Social Butterfly
Posts: 22,716
Registered: ‎07-11-2013

Re: The Progressive Movement

Message 86 of 396 (66 Views)

ChasKy53 wrote:

rk9152 wrote:

umbarch64 wrote:

I don't want to get in between you guys, BUT....what rk said was NOT accurate. The 'wisdom of the Founding Fathers' left us with documents which say why the Founders did what they did, what they intended to put in place of what they got rid of and how that new 'thing' was supposed to work. 

 

The Declaration of Independence came first, the Constituton followed.  The true meaning is set forth in each and every word used in the documents precisely as written. ALL else,....all the pamphlets, papers, treatises, that preceded and followed those memorialized words are irrelevant if, in any way, they contradict those words. 

 

A monarchy, a dictatorship IS "trust' placed in an individual as rk infers is the 'right' thing to do. There is no need to expound further on what rk said.  His own words establish how it is he and his cohorts view what they intend this Nation to be AFTER they are through molding it to their mindset.

 

The Preamble to that thing called the Constitution starts out with the precise phrase "We, the People of the United States, in order to form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the generatl welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America. 

 

That's the IDEA....the CONCEPT....the GOAL. It's WE, THE PEOPLE who establish this government.  It is WE, THE PEOPLE that government is to serve, and it is only WE, THE PEOPLE who can say otherwise. There IS no further discussion possible about that. Contest that and we fight.

 

 


There is a distinct difference between putting trust in THE individual and having rule by AN individual. I can't believe that was missed.

 

So, it appears that rk and "his cohorts" are not in error.

 

I have not checked with my cohorts, but I personally can't see anything in the words cited to support, "From each.....to each...." (my point). That actually comes from a different document.


Funny, but this doesn't discount anything that Umbarch 64 posted.


Nope - it never came anywhere close, did it?

 

 

 

KAKISTOCRACY
Valued Social Butterfly
Posts: 18,880
Registered: ‎11-07-2009

Re: The Progressive Movement

Message 87 of 396 (64 Views)

rk9152 wrote:

umbarch64 wrote:

I don't want to get in between you guys, BUT....what rk said was NOT accurate. The 'wisdom of the Founding Fathers' left us with documents which say why the Founders did what they did, what they intended to put in place of what they got rid of and how that new 'thing' was supposed to work. 

 

The Declaration of Independence came first, the Constituton followed.  The true meaning is set forth in each and every word used in the documents precisely as written. ALL else,....all the pamphlets, papers, treatises, that preceded and followed those memorialized words are irrelevant if, in any way, they contradict those words. 

 

A monarchy, a dictatorship IS "trust' placed in an individual as rk infers is the 'right' thing to do. There is no need to expound further on what rk said.  His own words establish how it is he and his cohorts view what they intend this Nation to be AFTER they are through molding it to their mindset.

 

The Preamble to that thing called the Constitution starts out with the precise phrase "We, the People of the United States, in order to form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the generatl welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America. 

 

That's the IDEA....the CONCEPT....the GOAL. It's WE, THE PEOPLE who establish this government.  It is WE, THE PEOPLE that government is to serve, and it is only WE, THE PEOPLE who can say otherwise. There IS no further discussion possible about that. Contest that and we fight.

 

 


There is a distinct difference between putting trust in THE individual and having rule by AN individual. I can't believe that was missed.

 

So, it appears that rk and "his cohorts" are not in error.

 

I have not checked with my cohorts, but I personally can't see anything in the words cited to support, "From each.....to each...." (my point). That actually comes from a different document.


Funny, but this doesn't discount anything that Umbarch 64 posted.


"The only thing man learns from history is man learns nothing from history"
Valued Social Butterfly
Posts: 24,934
Registered: ‎02-21-2014

Re: The Progressive Movement

[ Edited ]
Message 88 of 396 (71 Views)

umbarch64 wrote:

I don't want to get in between you guys, BUT....what rk said was NOT accurate. The 'wisdom of the Founding Fathers' left us with documents which say why the Founders did what they did, what they intended to put in place of what they got rid of and how that new 'thing' was supposed to work. 

 

The Declaration of Independence came first, the Constituton followed.  The true meaning is set forth in each and every word used in the documents precisely as written. ALL else,....all the pamphlets, papers, treatises, that preceded and followed those memorialized words are irrelevant if, in any way, they contradict those words. 

 

A monarchy, a dictatorship IS "trust' placed in an individual as rk infers is the 'right' thing to do. There is no need to expound further on what rk said.  His own words establish how it is he and his cohorts view what they intend this Nation to be AFTER they are through molding it to their mindset.

 

The Preamble to that thing called the Constitution starts out with the precise phrase "We, the People of the United States, in order to form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the generatl welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America. 

 

That's the IDEA....the CONCEPT....the GOAL. It's WE, THE PEOPLE who establish this government.  It is WE, THE PEOPLE that government is to serve, and it is only WE, THE PEOPLE who can say otherwise. There IS no further discussion possible about that. Contest that and we fight.

 

 


There is a distinct difference between putting trust in THE individual and having rule by AN individual. I can't believe that was missed.

 

So, it appears that rk and "his cohorts" are not in error.

 

I have not checked with my cohorts, but I personally can't see anything in the words cited to support, "From each.....to each...." (my point). That actually comes from a different document.

Valued Social Butterfly
Posts: 3,002
Registered: ‎01-24-2014

Re: The Progressive Movement

Message 89 of 396 (89 Views)

Hey alferd packer--excellent post! Thank you


politics, cats, kids, and dogs!!
Treasured Social Butterfly
Posts: 22,716
Registered: ‎07-11-2013

Re: The Progressive Movement

[ Edited ]
Message 90 of 396 (84 Views)

One of the best examples of a thing that the founding fathers -and the majority of citizens of the era - took for granted that everyone knew about, and were certain would get passed on to their children's children was something that was considered at the time to automatically be part of - and thus wasn't necessary to be specifically mentioned in the Bill of Rights - is the concept of Separation of Church and State.

The concept had been around since 1644 when the government of Rhode Island Colony mandated separation of church and state.

A great many of the nation's citizens at the time the Bill of rights was ratified worshipped the God they pleased - as often - and in the manner they saw fit - their neighbor's opinion be damned.

 

The founding fathers and framers of the Constitution assumed incorrectly that people would continue to remember that most of the people who originally settled here did so to escape anyone else ever having even the slightest bit of authority to tell them when, where, how, which religion's God, or even IF they had to worship.

 

It wasn't much of a problem as the nation expanded - especially in the fiercely independent individualistic West after the Civil War - a generation before Marx and Engle's book became at all widely known of anywhere in the United States of America.

 

Nevertheless separation of church and state was part of the intent of the founders/framers all along...

 

Subsequent research into the intent of the founders/framers of the Constitution established that separation of church and state had always been intended.

 

That's how things are.

 

It's one of the differences between Liberals/Democrats/Progressives who applauded the knowledge of centuries-old freedom to worship any specific or generalized God, be a Wiccan, a non-believer, whatever one pleases - much to the dismay of unconstitutionally controlling Conservatives/Republicans/Regressives/Booboisie.

 

And just imagine - all of that took place between one and four or five generations before Marx and Engle wrote that book - predicated upon assumptions that never really applied in the United States of America - but did in Russia - on the other side of Planet Earth.

 

 

KAKISTOCRACY