Reply
Honored Social Butterfly

neoMarxism

While on vacation and peddling my tryke from restaurant to restaurant, I got to thinking about a promise I had made to bring up something very much in need of discussion and clarification. So - 

 

Some are offended by the term "neoMarxist" being used to describe the Progressive Movement. I believe there are two possible reasons for that. One is a lack of understanding of the term – and I shall attempt to fix that in this topic. The other is that some recognize their own ideological tendencies going in that direction and are embarrassed to admit it. Hopefully, this topic will show that there is no reason to not "come out of the closet". 

 

To start with the "don't call me commiecomplaint is not valid. It comes from fear that admitting their Marxist tendencies would tie them to the USSR and Stalin. In reality, a part of the Marxist vision was in play in Russia for the first two years after the revolution under Lenin. The farms were stolen from the landowners and given to those who had worked the land. But then Stalin came into power and adopted the "we the people" theory meaning that everything belonged to all the people – naturally administered by the Central government. The result – the USSR under Stalin in which everything was owned by the government and distributed as it saw fit. 

 

Now, about the Progressive Movement. It was begun by Teddy Roosevelt and did change America, for the better. It strengthened free market capitalism by insuring it's freedom (anti-trust laws). It also protected ALL Americans form the food industry's unhealthy actions. The National Park system was created – for two valuable purposes. It kept the forests for the use of the people and it preserved the trees for the lumber industry. 

 

So, as you can see, Progressivism was off to a good start. But.....well, what happened to it is a story for another day. Let's see if we can first all agree that Teddy had a great idea and there is nothing to be ashamed of about being a Marxist. 

300 Views
144
Report
Reply
Honored Social Butterfly

The use of "neoMarxsism" as a synonym for "Progressive" is nothing more than an attempt to use America's 100-year vilification and vituperation of all things Marxsist to slander those who oppose Oligarchy and support Democracy.

 

neoRepublicans currently oppose Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid , PBS and NPR, public education, public roads, the Earned Income Tax Credit, the inheritance tax and the Federal Income tax.

 

All those things are supported by a huge majority of Americans, which is why neoRepublicans also support Gerrymandering, Citizens United and voter suppression laws.

 

By bombarding their base with fake news for the last half century, GOPers can win elections be claiming only they will prevent Government seizure of all firearms, the end to hunting on Federal Lands and the use of public schools to undermine Fundamentalist religious beliefs. Their lofo base believes these lies are real threats, and will always vote out of fear and ignorance - not exactly what the Founding Fathers had in mind.

 

Tying Progressives to ANOTHER hatefilled boogyman by using the term "neoMarxist" is just one more dirty trick Republicans are playing on America to advance their plans to replace Democracy with Oligarchy.

274 Views
5
Report
Reply
Honored Social Butterfly


@Olderscout66 wrote:

The use of "neoMarxsism" as a synonym for "Progressive" is nothing more than an attempt to use America's 100-year vilification and vituperation of all things Marxsist to slander those who oppose Oligarchy and support Democracy.

 Democracy, Oligarchy, vilification, and vituperation are not part of post #1. It is only a none judgemental assessment of Marxism and the Progressivism. The defensive responses makes one wonder what deep and shameful thought posters are hiding. Do you not see any of the thinking of Karl Marx in modern Progressive thinking??

neoRepublicans currently oppose Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid , PBS and NPR, public education, public roads, the Earned Income Tax Credit, the inheritance tax and the Federal Income tax.

None of the above are part of post #1 - why go so far afield?

 

All those things are supported by a huge majority of Americans, which is why neoRepublicans also support Gerrymandering, Citizens United and voter suppression laws.

Also not part of the topic. Why must you avoid the basic issue?

 

By bombarding their base with fake news for the last half century, GOPers can win elections be claiming only they will prevent Government seizure of all firearms, the end to hunting on Federal Lands and the use of public schools to undermine Fundamentalist religious beliefs. Their lofo base believes these lies are real threats, and will always vote out of fear and ignorance - not exactly what the Founding Fathers had in mind.

None of that is part of the topic. What are you hiding?

 

Tying Progressives to ANOTHER hatefilled boogyman by using the term "neoMarxist" is just one more dirty trick Republicans are playing on America to advance their plans to replace Democracy with Oligarchy.

Republican plans for the future are not the topic. It is about political thinking over a century ago and it's modern application.

 

Back to the topic - do you agree that Marx was a decent man with a view of "Utopia" for mankind?


 

0 Kudos
266 Views
4
Report
Reply
Honored Social Butterfly


@rk9152 wrote:

@Olderscout66 wrote:

The use of "neoMarxsism" as a synonym for "Progressive" is nothing more than an attempt to use America's 100-year vilification and vituperation of all things Marxsist to slander those who oppose Oligarchy and support Democracy.

 Democracy, Oligarchy, vilification, and vituperation are not part of post #1. It is only a none judgemental assessment of Marxism and the Progressivism. The defensive responses makes one wonder what deep and shameful thought posters are hiding. Do you not see any of the thinking of Karl Marx in modern Progressive thinking??

neoRepublicans currently oppose Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid , PBS and NPR, public education, public roads, the Earned Income Tax Credit, the inheritance tax and the Federal Income tax.

None of the above are part of post #1 - why go so far afield?

 

All those things are supported by a huge majority of Americans, which is why neoRepublicans also support Gerrymandering, Citizens United and voter suppression laws.

Also not part of the topic. Why must you avoid the basic issue?

 

By bombarding their base with fake news for the last half century, GOPers can win elections be claiming only they will prevent Government seizure of all firearms, the end to hunting on Federal Lands and the use of public schools to undermine Fundamentalist religious beliefs. Their lofo base believes these lies are real threats, and will always vote out of fear and ignorance - not exactly what the Founding Fathers had in mind.

None of that is part of the topic. What are you hiding?

 

Tying Progressives to ANOTHER hatefilled boogyman by using the term "neoMarxist" is just one more dirty trick Republicans are playing on America to advance their plans to replace Democracy with Oligarchy.

Republican plans for the future are not the topic. It is about political thinking over a century ago and it's modern application.

 

Back to the topic - do you agree that Marx was a decent man with a view of "Utopia" for mankind?


 


are you saying this is an instance of marxist jews bent on world dominion? is that your concern and opposition to these neomarxist theories? or do you just think they were the progeny of the elders of zion? The reality of the world is we operate under a mix of theories. Currently neofascist methods hold sway, and they were born long ago.

So it begins.
270 Views
3
Report
Reply
Honored Social Butterfly


@MIseker wrote:

@rk9152 wrote:

@Olderscout66 wrote:

The use of "neoMarxsism" as a synonym for "Progressive" is nothing more than an attempt to use America's 100-year vilification and vituperation of all things Marxsist to slander those who oppose Oligarchy and support Democracy.

 Democracy, Oligarchy, vilification, and vituperation are not part of post #1. It is only a none judgemental assessment of Marxism and the Progressivism. The defensive responses makes one wonder what deep and shameful thought posters are hiding. Do you not see any of the thinking of Karl Marx in modern Progressive thinking??

neoRepublicans currently oppose Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid , PBS and NPR, public education, public roads, the Earned Income Tax Credit, the inheritance tax and the Federal Income tax.

None of the above are part of post #1 - why go so far afield?

 

All those things are supported by a huge majority of Americans, which is why neoRepublicans also support Gerrymandering, Citizens United and voter suppression laws.

Also not part of the topic. Why must you avoid the basic issue?

 

By bombarding their base with fake news for the last half century, GOPers can win elections be claiming only they will prevent Government seizure of all firearms, the end to hunting on Federal Lands and the use of public schools to undermine Fundamentalist religious beliefs. Their lofo base believes these lies are real threats, and will always vote out of fear and ignorance - not exactly what the Founding Fathers had in mind.

None of that is part of the topic. What are you hiding?

 

Tying Progressives to ANOTHER hatefilled boogyman by using the term "neoMarxist" is just one more dirty trick Republicans are playing on America to advance their plans to replace Democracy with Oligarchy.

Republican plans for the future are not the topic. It is about political thinking over a century ago and it's modern application.

 

Back to the topic - do you agree that Marx was a decent man with a view of "Utopia" for mankind?


 


are you saying this is an instance of marxist jews bent on world dominion? is that your concern and opposition to these neomarxist theories? or do you just think they were the progeny of the elders of zion? The reality of the world is we operate under a mix of theories. Currently neofascist methods hold sway, and they were born long ago.


Certainly not. I have no idea where that came from. Except possibly the inability to respond logically so needing to get offensive.

 

Their religion was the motivation for leaving Germany, period.

 

Bottom line (had you read the information offered) they were believers in the dream of Karl Marx and were trying to figure out what went wrong and put Marxism back on track. And the question becomes, how many of our posters share their dream.

 

I hope that clarifies things for you.

0 Kudos
519 Views
2
Report
Reply
Honored Social Butterfly


@rk9152 wrote:

@MIseker wrote:

@rk9152 wrote:

@Olderscout66 wrote:

The use of "neoMarxsism" as a synonym for "Progressive" is nothing more than an attempt to use America's 100-year vilification and vituperation of all things Marxsist to slander those who oppose Oligarchy and support Democracy.

 Democracy, Oligarchy, vilification, and vituperation are not part of post #1. It is only a none judgemental assessment of Marxism and the Progressivism. The defensive responses makes one wonder what deep and shameful thought posters are hiding. Do you not see any of the thinking of Karl Marx in modern Progressive thinking??

neoRepublicans currently oppose Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid , PBS and NPR, public education, public roads, the Earned Income Tax Credit, the inheritance tax and the Federal Income tax.

None of the above are part of post #1 - why go so far afield?

 

All those things are supported by a huge majority of Americans, which is why neoRepublicans also support Gerrymandering, Citizens United and voter suppression laws.

Also not part of the topic. Why must you avoid the basic issue?

 

By bombarding their base with fake news for the last half century, GOPers can win elections be claiming only they will prevent Government seizure of all firearms, the end to hunting on Federal Lands and the use of public schools to undermine Fundamentalist religious beliefs. Their lofo base believes these lies are real threats, and will always vote out of fear and ignorance - not exactly what the Founding Fathers had in mind.

None of that is part of the topic. What are you hiding?

 

Tying Progressives to ANOTHER hatefilled boogyman by using the term "neoMarxist" is just one more dirty trick Republicans are playing on America to advance their plans to replace Democracy with Oligarchy.

Republican plans for the future are not the topic. It is about political thinking over a century ago and it's modern application.

 

Back to the topic - do you agree that Marx was a decent man with a view of "Utopia" for mankind?


 


are you saying this is an instance of marxist jews bent on world dominion? is that your concern and opposition to these neomarxist theories? or do you just think they were the progeny of the elders of zion? The reality of the world is we operate under a mix of theories. Currently neofascist methods hold sway, and they were born long ago.


Certainly not. I have no idea where that came from. Except possibly the inability to respond logically so needing to get offensive.

 

Their religion was the motivation for leaving Germany, period.

 

Bottom line (had you read the information offered) they were believers in the dream of Karl Marx and were trying to figure out what went wrong and put Marxism back on track. And the question becomes, how many of our posters share their dream.

 

I hope that clarifies things for you.


How many on the political right share that imaginary screwball belief that "neomarxism" actually exists in this day and age?

44>dolt45
514 Views
1
Report
Reply
Honored Social Butterfly

@alferdpacker--Oh, oh I know!!  The ones that feel the need to divert attention away from the criminal in the White House!  May also be the ones who feel the need for attention!  

 

Gee, I miss having a real President!!
512 Views
0
Report
Reply
Honored Social Butterfly

The very term Capitalist is one that invests in the future.  Republicans primary pitch is that they will not "waste" money by investing in education or infrastructure while Democrats cry for these things.  Republicans believe in a level playing field as long as they have several generations of wealth at their end of the pitch helping to elevate them. 

297 Views
2
Report
Reply
Honored Social Butterfly


@Richva wrote:

The very term Capitalist is one that invests in the future.  Republicans primary pitch is that they will not "waste" money by investing in education or infrastructure while Democrats cry for these things.  Republicans believe in a level playing field as long as they have several generations of wealth at their end of the pitch helping to elevate them. 


Was Marx anti-education? Was Roosevelt anti-education? How does that relate to the topic?

0 Kudos
348 Views
0
Report
Reply
Honored Social Butterfly

rk which neo marxist theory do you think was part of the progressive movement? there is more than one.
So it begins.
332 Views
0
Report
Reply
Honored Social Butterfly

Democrats are capitalists who believe in equal opportunity for all players. Republicans believe in inherited privilege. It makes for quite a divide and requires Republicans fall back on alternative facts to make their case. 

265 Views
2
Report
Reply
Honored Social Butterfly


@Richva wrote:

Democrats are capitalists who believe in equal opportunity for all players. Republicans believe in inherited privilege. It makes for quite a divide and requires Republicans fall back on alternative facts to make their case. 


Exactly so, which is why neoRepublicans try and revive their 1950's War Cry of "COMMIE!" when dealing with actual capitialists from the Democratic party. But the monitors here have banned them from calling other posters Commie, so they make up a new word that translates "COMMIE", and for some reason our monitors find that peachy.

 

The GOPerLords are totally opposed to a level economic playing field and are determined to continue to tilt it in favor of inherited wealth by transfering wealth from the middle class to the very top of the 1%, and then allowing that wealth to pass unencumbered to the spawn of the Uberrich.

 

At the beginning of the 20th Century, Theodore Rex understood that the rise of industrial capitalism made the entire concept of "limited Government nul and void if Democracy was to survive. NeoRepublicans agree, which is why they are demanding we return to limited Government so industrial Capitalism can destroy Democracy and replace it with an Oligarchy.

 

TR made Presidential Power more dependant on the will of the American People than the Constitution, which is why the neoRepubs seek to pack SCOTUS with "strict Constructionists" who insist we must enforce the Constitution as if it was still 1787.

 

All during his Presidency and until his death, Teddy Roosevelt championed the cause of Progressivism and sought to move our Nation closer to the citizen-friendly constructs found in Western Europe.

 

No wonder today's neoGOPers dislike Teddy- he understood their views were archaic and anti-democratic 100 years ago, and proved it.

301 Views
1
Report
Reply
Honored Social Butterfly


@Olderscout66 wrote:

@Richva wrote:

Democrats are capitalists who believe in equal opportunity for all players. Republicans believe in inherited privilege. It makes for quite a divide and requires Republicans fall back on alternative facts to make their case. 


Exactly so, which is why neoRepublicans try and revive their 1950's War Cry of "COMMIE!" when dealing with actual capitialists from the Democratic party. But the monitors here have banned them from calling other posters Commie, so they make up a new word that translates "COMMIE", and for some reason our monitors find that peachy.

 

The GOPerLords are totally opposed to a level economic playing field and are determined to continue to tilt it in favor of inherited wealth by transfering wealth from the middle class to the very top of the 1%, and then allowing that wealth to pass unencumbered to the spawn of the Uberrich.

 

At the beginning of the 20th Century, Theodore Rex understood that the rise of industrial capitalism made the entire concept of "limited Government nul and void if Democracy was to survive. NeoRepublicans agree, which is why they are demanding we return to limited Government so industrial Capitalism can destroy Democracy and replace it with an Oligarchy.

 

TR made Presidential Power more dependant on the will of the American People than the Constitution, which is why the neoRepubs seek to pack SCOTUS with "strict Constructionists" who insist we must enforce the Constitution as if it was still 1787.

 

All during his Presidency and until his death, Teddy Roosevelt championed the cause of Progressivism and sought to move our Nation closer to the citizen-friendly constructs found in Western Europe.

 

No wonder today's neoGOPers dislike Teddy- he understood their views were archaic and anti-democratic 100 years ago, and proved it.


Who are these GOPers that dislike Teddy - you made that up.

 

Who is talking about Commies - you made that up.

 

What do GOPerLords have to do with Marx or Teddy - you made that up.

 

What have Oligarchs and neoRepublicans to do with the topic - you made that up.

 

Do you have any interest (or understanding) of the actual topic.

0 Kudos
338 Views
0
Report
Reply
Honored Social Butterfly

There certainly is "nothing to be ashamed of about being a Marxist".  There is nothing to be ashamed of about being LGBT either but most of us who are not prefer not to be labeled as such simply because we are not. Progressives have little wish to change the basic economic structure of our capitalist system other than to add some rules of the road yet some posters love to use the term Neo Marxist simply because it makes such a great bumper sticker regardless of accuracy. 

 

335 Views
0
Report
Reply
Honored Social Butterfly

A vote of a kudo is an indication that a particular poster thought the post being "kudoed" was worthy of approval and the positive affirmation implicit in voting a kudo for the post.

Multiple kudos is an indication that a post is thought to be worthy of approval by more than one person who read it.

Lack of kudos - well...

 

44>dolt45
222 Views
2
Report
Reply
Honored Social Butterfly

Another of this posters dead cat topics. especially in light of 2 facts..there is no neo marxism, and the lack of understanding of the progressive movement.
So it begins.
403 Views
1
Report
Reply
Honored Social Butterfly

Image result for dog chasing tail gif


"FAKE 45 #illegitimate" read a sign at the Woman's March in DC, 1/27/2017
410 Views
0
Report
Reply
Honored Social Butterfly

Joe McCarthy - crackpot

McCarthy followers - crackpots

Robert Welch - crackpot

John Birch Society - crackpots

Barry Goldwater - crackpot

Goldwater Republicans - crackpots

Tea Party - crackpots

Tea Party politicians - crackpots

Rush Limbaugh - crackpot

Bill O'Reilly - crackpot

Sean Hannity - crackpot

Louie Gohmert - crackpot

Joe Barton - crackpot

Michele Bachmann - crackpot

Sarah Palin - crackpot whose presence defeated McCain

"47%" speech - crackpot statement that defeated Romney

Todd Akin - crackpot

Robert Mourdock - crackpot

Phil Gingery - crackpot

Rick Perry - crackpot

Ben Carson - crackpot

Betsy DeVos - crackpot

Mooch - crackpot

trump - crackpot whose crackpottery is limited only by incompetence.

 

"I did not mean that Conservatives are generally stupid; I meant, that stupid persons are generally Conservative. I believe that to be so obvious and undeniable a fact that I hardly think any hon. Gentleman will question it."

John Stuart Mill, May 31, 1866 

Still true to this very day...

 

Fallacious alleged NeoMarxist "threat" to the United States - something that a great many conservatives will swallow hook, line, and sinker - and wash down with the obligatory koolaide.

 

44>dolt45
350 Views
0
Report
Reply
Honored Social Butterfly

 I am offended by the term NeoMarxist because of all the negative implications of that term.

I am also offended by racism, greed in the extreme, which the right wing shows us every day that it embraces, threads based on lies and absurd misinformation,  those who support a throwback to the 50s where  

sexual orientation was not understood, and those people who weren't heterosexual were discriminated against,  isolationalism,  and those who support a man who is clearly out of his league professionally, and shows extreme signs of mental illness.

 

I am offended by anyone who would support anybody who is so destructive to the well-being of Americans and America. 

 

 I am offended by people who post ridiculous statements like there was no Russian meddling when it has become a matter of fact. 

 

With regard to NeoMarxists having tendencies like those of Russia, look to the man in the White House, whom some support,  and whom those who DON'T live in an alternative reality will clearly see someone who supports the rhetoric of the Russians and the propensity to supress its citizens, free press, and liberties, as does the Russian gocernment--run by a man who has so much influence over the crazy in office, that the Senate had to put language into the sanctions it wrote to punish Russua for meddling in our elections to prevent trump from easing them.

 I am offended by threads posted to this forum that have absolutely nothing to do with reality, but are put out only in an attempt to misdirect and mislead.

 I am offended by using racist, small minded, bogus "news" sites to support the bogus information put forth by some.

To call progressives neo-Marxists is as bogus ad saying that little donnie Looney Tunes is competent---and that, IS EXTREMELY offensive.

Gee, I miss having a real President!!
320 Views
6
Report
Reply
Honored Social Butterfly


@pc6063 wrote:

 I am offended by the term NeoMarxist because of all the negative implications of that term.

I am also offended by racism, greed in the extreme, which the right wing shows us every day that it embraces, threads based on lies and absurd misinformation,  those who support a throwback to the 50s where  

sexual orientation was not understood, and those people who weren't heterosexual were discriminated against,  isolationalism,  and those who support a man who is clearly out of his league professionally, and shows extreme signs of mental illness.

 

I am offended by anyone who would support anybody who is so destructive to the well-being of Americans and America. 

 

 I am offended by people who post ridiculous statements like there was no Russian meddling when it has become a matter of fact. 

 

With regard to NeoMarxists having tendencies like those of Russia, look to the man in the White House, whom some support,  and whom those who DON'T live in an alternative reality will clearly see someone who supports the rhetoric of the Russians and the propensity to supress its citizens, free press, and liberties, as does the Russian gocernment--run by a man who has so much influence over the crazy in office, that the Senate had to put language into the sanctions it wrote to punish Russua for meddling in our elections to prevent trump from easing them.

 I am offended by threads posted to this forum that have absolutely nothing to do with reality, but are put out only in an attempt to misdirect and mislead.

 I am offended by using racist, small minded, bogus "news" sites to support the bogus information put forth by some.

To call progressives neo-Marxists is as bogus ad saying that little donnie Looney Tunes is competent---and that, IS EXTREMELY offensive.


That is very hard to respond to because it does not address the original thinking that Marx was not a bad man and Teddy started a good movement.

 

Instead it is loaded with other stuff not related to the topic such as - racism, greed, the right wing, lies, misinformation, the '50s, sexual orientation, isolationism, mental illness, Russian meddling, the man in the white house, rhetoric of the Russians, the Senate, "Russua", sanctions, bogus news sites, and little donnie Looney Toons.

 

Trust me, I have read Marx and he mentioned none of those items and, to the best of my knowledge, neither did President Roosevelt.

 

Any thoughts on post #1???

0 Kudos
295 Views
5
Report
Reply
Honored Social Butterfly


@rk9152 wrote:

@pc6063 wrote:

 I am offended by the term NeoMarxist because of all the negative implications of that term.

I am also offended by racism, greed in the extreme, which the right wing shows us every day that it embraces, threads based on lies and absurd misinformation,  those who support a throwback to the 50s where  

sexual orientation was not understood, and those people who weren't heterosexual were discriminated against,  isolationalism,  and those who support a man who is clearly out of his league professionally, and shows extreme signs of mental illness.

 

I am offended by anyone who would support anybody who is so destructive to the well-being of Americans and America. 

 

 I am offended by people who post ridiculous statements like there was no Russian meddling when it has become a matter of fact. 

 

With regard to NeoMarxists having tendencies like those of Russia, look to the man in the White House, whom some support,  and whom those who DON'T live in an alternative reality will clearly see someone who supports the rhetoric of the Russians and the propensity to supress its citizens, free press, and liberties, as does the Russian gocernment--run by a man who has so much influence over the crazy in office, that the Senate had to put language into the sanctions it wrote to punish Russua for meddling in our elections to prevent trump from easing them.

 I am offended by threads posted to this forum that have absolutely nothing to do with reality, but are put out only in an attempt to misdirect and mislead.

 I am offended by using racist, small minded, bogus "news" sites to support the bogus information put forth by some.

To call progressives neo-Marxists is as bogus ad saying that little donnie Looney Tunes is competent---and that, IS EXTREMELY offensive.


That is very hard to respond to because it does not address the original thinking that Marx was not a bad man and Teddy started a good movement.

 

Instead it is loaded with other stuff not related to the topic such as - racism, greed, the right wing, lies, misinformation, the '50s, sexual orientation, isolationism, mental illness, Russian meddling, the man in the white house, rhetoric of the Russians, the Senate, "Russua", sanctions, bogus news sites, and little donnie Looney Toons.

 

Trust me, I have read Marx and he mentioned none of those items and, to the best of my knowledge, neither did President Roosevelt.

 

Any thoughts on post #1???


yes. you dont understnd what marx wrote, nor do you have a grasp on how marx effected the progressive movement. hint : he did a bit, and i wont tell you. you miss the biggest part of the progressive movement, and, its demise.

So it begins.
400 Views
0
Report
Reply
Honored Social Butterfly

RK---All your posts--no minds changed--

Here, I will simplify things for you

PROGRESSIVES AS NEOMARXISTS

 

BLATHER

 

 The propagation of falsehoods, racist, and discriminating ideals – – OFFENSIVE!

Gee, I miss having a real President!!
296 Views
3
Report
Reply
Honored Social Butterfly


@pc6063 wrote:

RK---All your posts--no minds changed--

Here, I will simplify things for you

PROGRESSIVES AS NEOMARXISTS

 

BLATHER

 

 The propagation of falsehoods, racist, and discriminating ideals – – OFFENSIVE!


What in my post indicated anything about that stuff?

 

Was Marx a racist? - how about Roosevelt?

I don't know what "discriminating ideals" are but are you accusing Roosevelt or Marx of it (whatever it is)?

And "propagation of falsehoods" - which of the two subjects of post #1 are you accusing of that??

 

Or, could it be that you'd rather not discuss post #1 and instead are going off in directions sure to garner kudoes??

0 Kudos
342 Views
2
Report
Reply
Honored Social Butterfly


@rk9152 wrote:

@pc6063 wrote:

RK---All your posts--no minds changed--

Here, I will simplify things for you

PROGRESSIVES AS NEOMARXISTS

 

BLATHER

 

 The propagation of falsehoods, racist, and discriminating ideals – – OFFENSIVE!


What in my post indicated anything about that stuff?

 

Was Marx a racist? - how about Roosevelt?

I don't know what "discriminating ideals" are but are you accusing Roosevelt or Marx of it (whatever it is)?

And "propagation of falsehoods" - which of the two subjects of post #1 are you accusing of that??

 

Or, could it be that you'd rather not discuss post #1 and instead are going off in directions sure to garner kudoes??


Ah!!!!!! finally the never ending question appears.
Roosevelt a Marxist?  Teddy a Marxist?  Gee how many times I have seen old people refer to Rossevelt as a Communist/  too many times not to be bewildered.
But, you know more than many that, most people in this country have no idea of what is communism, or Marxim or Socialism. 
So. to label anyone that has a different concept than their own has become very easy to apply whatever lables they like the most.
Where they racists?  well, frankly I don't know, wasn't  there at the time. I don't like Teddy, he wanted to annex Cuba. (The gall)
Roosevelt was the dreamer, the Don Quijote that tried to elevate this country and make it great for all.
Did they make mistakes, probably.
But can you comapare any of thiem with Trump?  
This country has had great men, for Presidents, some better than others. 
But this one will go into the **bleep** of history and the biggest mistake that this country has ever made.






no name
218 Views
1
Report
Reply
Honored Social Butterfly


@Roxanna35 wrote:

@rk9152 wrote:

@pc6063 wrote:

RK---All your posts--no minds changed--

Here, I will simplify things for you

PROGRESSIVES AS NEOMARXISTS

 

BLATHER

 

 The propagation of falsehoods, racist, and discriminating ideals – – OFFENSIVE!


What in my post indicated anything about that stuff?

 

Was Marx a racist? - how about Roosevelt?

I don't know what "discriminating ideals" are but are you accusing Roosevelt or Marx of it (whatever it is)?

And "propagation of falsehoods" - which of the two subjects of post #1 are you accusing of that??

 

Or, could it be that you'd rather not discuss post #1 and instead are going off in directions sure to garner kudoes??


Ah!!!!!! finally the never ending question appears.
Roosevelt a Marxist?  Teddy a Marxist?  Gee how many times I have seen old people refer to Rossevelt as a Communist/  too many times not to be bewildered.
But, you know more than many that, most people in this country have no idea of what is communism, or Marxim or Socialism. 
So. to label anyone that has a different concept than their own has become very easy to apply whatever lables they like the most.
Where they racists?  well, frankly I don't know, wasn't  there at the time. I don't like Teddy, he wanted to annex Cuba. (The gall)
Roosevelt was the dreamer, the Don Quijote that tried to elevate this country and make it great for all.
Did they make mistakes, probably.
But can you comapare any of thiem with Trump?  
This country has had great men, for Presidents, some better than others. 
But this one will go into the **bleep** of history and the biggest mistake that this country has ever made.

If you would fully read the posts and those to which they were responses to, your replies would seem much more intelligent.

 

Example - no where was Teddy called a Marxist. If you'd like to engage, please read that which you are responding to.

223 Views
0
Report
Reply
Recognized Social Butterfly

Best you get on your tryke and peddle to a library and find out what Karl Marx really meant when he wrote the Communist Manifesto.  Teddy never had anything in common with that.

332 Views
91
Report
Reply
Honored Social Butterfly


@creppelrm wrote:

Best you get on your tryke and peddle to a library and find out what Karl Marx really meant when he wrote the Communist Manifesto.  Teddy never had anything in common with that.


No library tryking today - it is raining. Besides, today is Sunday so it is closed. However, not to worry. I have a copy of the Communist Manifesto on my kindle.

 

Now to your second point - agreed. I never said anything about Teddy being related to Marx.

 

The distressing thing is that here is a post from someone putting out an insult while making it obvious that he/she/it didn't bother to read the original - and gets 6, count 'em 6 kudoes. That says bad things about our suppose discussers. Did they not notice the lack of understanding of the original by the poster - or do they not care?

288 Views
90
Report
Reply
Recognized Social Butterfly


@rk9152 wrote:

@creppelrm wrote:

Best you get on your tryke and peddle to a library and find out what Karl Marx really meant when he wrote the Communist Manifesto.  Teddy never had anything in common with that.


No library tryking today - it is raining. Besides, today is Sunday so it is closed. However, not to worry. I have a copy of the Communist Manifesto on my kindle.

 

Now to your second point - agreed. I never said anything about Teddy being related to Marx.

 

The distressing thing is that here is a post from someone putting out an insult while making it obvious that he/she/it didn't bother to read the original - and gets 6, count 'em 6 kudoes. That says bad things about our suppose discussers. Did they not notice the lack of understanding of the original by the poster - or do they not care?


Let me figure this out..  You said you ride a tryke.  I said ride your tryke to the library.  You said I emplied you said Teddy and Marx was related.  I said Teddy had nothing in common with the Communist Manifesto Karl Marx wrote.  Where are the insults?  I'm going to give you a kudo, maybe that will make you feel better.

222 Views
88
Report
Reply
Honored Social Butterfly


@creppelrm wrote:

@rk9152 wrote:

@creppelrm wrote:

Best you get on your tryke and peddle to a library and find out what Karl Marx really meant when he wrote the Communist Manifesto.  Teddy never had anything in common with that.


No library tryking today - it is raining. Besides, today is Sunday so it is closed. However, not to worry. I have a copy of the Communist Manifesto on my kindle.

 

Now to your second point - agreed. I never said anything about Teddy being related to Marx.

 

The distressing thing is that here is a post from someone putting out an insult while making it obvious that he/she/it didn't bother to read the original - and gets 6, count 'em 6 kudoes. That says bad things about our suppose discussers. Did they not notice the lack of understanding of the original by the poster - or do they not care?


Let me figure this out..  You said you ride a tryke.  I said ride your tryke to the library.  You said I emplied you said Teddy and Marx was related.  I said Teddy had nothing in common with the Communist Manifesto Karl Marx wrote.  Where are the insults?  I'm going to give you a kudo, maybe that will make you feel better.


Exactly - Marx had his vision; Teddy started the Progressive era and there was no connection and I clearly stated that they were separate subjects.

 

Now, would you like to talk about Marxism or Progressivism??

0 Kudos
260 Views
87
Report
Reply
Recognized Social Butterfly

OK, since you agree with me.  Not insulted anymore?

263 Views
86
Report
Reply
cancel
Showing results for 
Show  only  | Search instead for 
Did you mean: 
Users
Announcements

Does AARP donate to political parties or endorse candidates?

AARP is strictly non-partisan and always has been. We never endorse or donate to candidates, political parties or political action committees.

Learn more.

AARP Members Only Games

Play members only games, like FIll Ins, Lumeno, 2048 and a collaborative, multiplayer Let's Crossword.

Play Now
AARP Members Only Games Logos
AARP Rewards

Solve Crosswords. Earn Rewards. Activate AARP Rewards to earn points for games, quizzes and videos. Redeem for deals and discounts.

Get started with AARP Rewards now!
/html/assets/Rewards-program-badge-355x224.png