Communism will win anyway.

[Owl]

 

Communism will win anyway.

it is useless to resist.

---

if you have Education, then try to argue ..

I warn you

- I hit hard and U hurts

Edited March 9, 2021 by Owl

[herbie]

Granted, you can put it off even if you both give workers the right to arm themselves and increasingly treat them like shit if you distract them with shiny objects for decades....

[Right To Left]

On 3/9/2021 at 10:53 AM, Owl said:

 

Communism will win anyway.

it is useless to resist.

---

if you have Education, then try to argue ..

I warn you

- I hit hard and U hurts

Well, now I'm curious about what kind or tendency of communism you're referring to here. Because the lessons of the past 150 years indicate that communist worker movements are very difficult to organize and hold together against outside attacks and dissension spawned within the movement. 

Factions break away every time some charismatic leader is miffed about not being selected for top leadership (Leon Trotsky) and figuratively, throws acid on the debates with other party leaders to deliberately increase the divide and lead a new movement that is the REAL communism. 

After the First World War, some capitalists realized that if necessary, it was better to create or allow a despot to take over government and divide the working people along sectarian lines -- appealing to nationalist, racial or religious sentiments, rather than on shared class interests. 

It's been said that the plutocrats who make up ruling oligarchies have divisions among themselves, but are the only economic class in a capitalist society who understands their class interests and needs for solidarity beyond grabbing short term profits. 

We might also need to ask today whether the biggest stumbling block in the way of socialism and workers movements is that the forces which serve capitalist interests, have become increasingly sophisticated in their propaganda and use of new technology to attack and marginalize socialists. 

By 'propaganda' I would especially include the development and widespread dissemination of psychologically manipulative advertising and marketing campaigns...first on television and now literally everywhere in the age of portable devices that are online 24/7, giving up information about us and our habits to the cyber-goons who spy on us for profit and surveillance purposes. 

Are we close to or already in a "1984" type of world where we won't be able to trust any information we receive from any source, and be unable to escape the clutches of our oppressors?  Just asking! Hope it's not true.

[Matarael]

Could you tell me some more information about it? Let’s talk in PM

[August1991]

"Communism"?

You should use the term: "progressive".

Recently, I've seen the term "socialism" creeping back.

=====

Years ago, in Cold War/Soviet times, 1970s or so, I realized that whenever an American described themselves as a socialist/communist/marxist, it had nothing to do with any political theory.

These people were speaking about America, and themselves.

[Michael Hardner]

8 hours ago, August1991 said:

"Communism"?

You should use the term: "progressive".

Recently, I've seen the term "socialism" creeping back.

You are muddying the already-muddy waters.  "Progressive" now means, in broad terms, favouring social change.  Socialism/Capitalism/Communism are terms that are abused by all sides now.

8 hours ago, August1991 said:

=====

Years ago, in Cold War/Soviet times, 1970s or so, I realized that whenever an American described themselves as a socialist/communist/marxist, it had nothing to do with any political theory.

These people were speaking about America, and themselves.

We all do.

 

[TreeBeard]

On 10/14/2021 at 7:20 PM, August1991 said:

Communism"?

You should use the term: "progressive".

You think progressive and communist are synonymous terms?

[August1991]

On 10/18/2021 at 3:46 PM, TreeBeard said:

You think progressive and communist are synonymous terms?

IME, whenever an American uses such terms, he (and occasionally she) is saying more about themselves and their country than any political economic theory.

And despite what Michael says, my experience is still true today in this 21st century.

Edited October 22, 2021 by August1991

[Michael Hardner]

2 hours ago, August1991 said:

And despite what Michael says, my experience is still true today in this 21st century.

IF you are sayings that meanings change, then ok.  You must allow, then, the converse.

[TreeBeard]

8 hours ago, August1991 said:

IME, whenever an American uses such terms, he (and occasionally she) is saying more about themselves and their country than any political economic theory.

And despite what Michael says, my experience is still true today in this 21st century.

I’m still unclear whether you think the terms are synonymous. 

[Michael Hardner]

1 minute ago, TreeBeard said:

I’m still unclear whether you think the terms are synonymous. 

He *seems to be saying "in the 21st century" what once was a communist is today a progressive... well... ok... but then a Bernier voter is a Nazi, if we're just mapping the political spectrum between eras right ? Or ??? 

[TreeBeard]

1 minute ago, Michael Hardner said:

He *seems to be saying "in the 21st century" what once was a communist is today a progressive... well... ok... but then a Bernier voter is a Nazi, if we're just mapping the political spectrum between eras right ? Or ??? 

Oh I see.

If progressives are communists, what do we call the people who want the state to own the means of production?  The ones we used to call communists, who are still around and likely aren’t progressive at all…  

 

 

[Michael Hardner]

33 minutes ago, TreeBeard said:

1. If progressives are communists, what do we call the people who want the state to own the means of production?

2. The ones we used to call communists, who are still around and likely aren’t progressive at all…  

 

 

1. You can call them paleo-Marxists or something.  Well, you SHOULD call them Communists and Marxists if you care about clarity.  If you care about poetry, then you care about the poet of forum posts, Auguste.

2. Split into 2 parties, combining for ~9,200 votes in Canada, or 1 in 5000.  You have better chance of getting a hole in 1 than finding a random Communist/Marxist voter.

[TreeBeard]

4 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

Well, you SHOULD call them Communists and Marxists if you care about clarity.

That’s all I care about.

Without clarity, can we have a rational discussion?

[Michael Hardner]

4 minutes ago, TreeBeard said:

1. That’s all I care about.

2. Without clarity, can we have a rational discussion?

1. Well... you care about OTHER things in life, Mr. Clarity
2. With a breezy pleasure that comes from just talking and not caring ?  Dunno... have you ever had a conversation with an Aires woman, and you're both drunk, and you are at a cast party for a contact-improv performance piece about the patriarchy ?  No ?  What's wrong with you ?

[OftenWrong]

7 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:

He *seems to be saying "in the 21st century" what once was a communist is today a progressive... well... ok... but then a Bernier voter is a Nazi, if we're just mapping the political spectrum between eras right ? Or ??? 

I think he’s saying progressivism has devolved directly into communism. It did not pass through socialism along the way. So that what we now have are bizarre franken-progressives with beautiful hairdo’s and commie army boots on.

But then, it is hard to tell for sure...

 

[blackbird]

Anyone who wants to know what God thinks of so-call progressive governments and radical activist's ideology needs to get the book "Progressive Evil: How Radicals Are Redefining America's Rights, Institutions, and Ideals, Making Her Globally Irrelevant for the End Times" Format Kindle   Whether one wants to know or not what God thinks, God still holds us accountable for what we believe and do.

Available on Amazon as a kindle book for $9.99 or soft cover for $24.07.

Progressive Evil: How Radicals Are Redefining America's Rights, Institutions, and Ideals, Making Her Globally Irrelevant for the End Times eBook: Maginnis, LTC Robert L.: Amazon.ca: Kindle Store

"20  Woe unto them that call evil good, and good evil; that put darkness for light, and light for darkness; that put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter!  21  Woe unto them that are wise in their own eyes, and prudent in their own sight!"   Isaiah 5:20, 21 King James Bible

"Interestingly, the Bible makes no argument for the existence of God. Instead, the Bible assumes God’s existence from the very first few words, “In the beginning, God…” The biblical writers did not feel a need, apparently, to offer arguments for the existence of God. To deny the existence of God is foolish (Psalm 14:1).

Yet, sadly, many in our day do deny the existence of God. Some deny his existence because they do not want to be accountable to God, and others because they have a difficult time understanding how God can exist and the world be so broken.

Even so, the Psalmist was right, theism is rational, and to deny God is not. In this post we will briefly visit many rational arguments for the existence of God." Is God Real? 17 Existence Of God Arguments (Proof Of God) (biblereasons.com)

To the non-believer I would say there are many websites that go into this and refute the claims of atheists and show how terribly wrong they are.   There are even debates on youtube between the famous atheist Richard Dawkins and professor John Lennox, which you may find interesting.     

Richard Dawkins vs John Lennox | The God Delusion Debate - Bing video

 

Edited October 24, 2021 by blackbird

[blackbird]

On 10/22/2021 at 10:11 AM, Michael Hardner said:

He *seems to be saying "in the 21st century" what once was a communist is today a progressive... well... ok... but then a Bernier voter is a Nazi, if we're just mapping the political spectrum between eras right ? Or ??? 

There is an interesting book "Why Nazism was Socialism and Why Socialism is Totalitarian" by George Reisman available on Amazon.  Fascism, Socialism, and Communism are all evil ideologies which destroy human rights and fundamental freedom.  A heathen or pagan country is always in danger of drifting into one of those ideological systems because it has no solid foundation; it is building on sand.

"24  Therefore whosoever heareth these sayings of mine, and doeth them, I will liken him unto a wise man, which built his house upon a rock: 25  And the rain descended, and the floods came, and the winds blew, and beat upon that house; and it fell not: for it was founded upon a rock. 26  And every one that heareth these sayings of mine, and doeth them not, shall be likened unto a foolish man, which built his house upon the sand: 27  And the rain descended, and the floods came, and the winds blew, and beat upon that house; and it fell: and great was the fall of it."  Matthew 7:24-27 KJB

People or a nations which have not built their belief system and life on the solid foundation of God and his word are open to the powers of darkness which are constantly at work to deceive mankind to follow them and their ideologies.  How often in history have we seen this happen.  We have all kinds of cults, some of clearly a religious nature and others of a secular humanist or worldly nature.

[August1991]

On 10/22/2021 at 1:09 PM, TreeBeard said:

I’m still unclear whether you think the terms are synonymous. 

In the past (Cold War), and for older people now, Americans who said that they were "communist" or "socialist", were not saying anything about an economic/political system. They were saying/declaring something about America, themselves.

In the late 1900s, (1980+), I met many so-called communist/leftist Americans abroad. Brennan and Obama types. Their leftism was simply based on their dislike of their own country.  As a Canadian, I began to understand their false identity.

[Michael Hardner]

7 hours ago, August1991 said:

In the past (Cold War), and for older people now, Americans who said that they were "communist" or "socialist", were not saying anything about an economic/political system. They were saying/declaring something about America, themselves.

In the late 1900s, (1980+), I met many so-called communist/leftist Americans abroad. Brennan and Obama types. Their leftism was simply based on their dislike of their own country.  As a Canadian, I began to understand their false identity.

The Communists I knew, those who described themselves as that, were very familiar with Das Kapital and history, so your first paragraph doesn't apply.  They were even patriotic.

I think you, like many centrists, misunderstand and underestimate true leftists.  The corporate media has been describing LGBTQ rights advocates as 'leftists' for so long that people are starting to believe it.

Maybe that's why populist rightists can rail against corporations and low wages and not appear 'leftist' at all.

[August1991]

On 10/29/2021 at 8:21 AM, Michael Hardner said:

The Communists I knew, those who described themselves as that, were very familiar with Das Kapital and history, so your first paragraph doesn't apply.  They were even patriotic.

I think you, like many centrists, misunderstand and underestimate true leftists.  The corporate media has been describing LGBTQ rights advocates as 'leftists' for so long that people are starting to believe it.

Maybe that's why populist rightists can rail against corporations and low wages and not appear 'leftist' at all.

Michael, I disagree.

Whenever I've met an American who talks about Marxism/Leftism/Socialism, they are invariably talking about themselves and their own country.

I think that John Cleese said that Americans don't understand irony: Americans are incapable of seeing their own folly.

IMV, this is the great strength of America and it makes its exceptionalism. Robert Redford is a typical leftist/progressive American. Yet, he is incapable of understanding the irony of his beliefs.

=====

Let me put this a different way: As a Canadian, whenever I've been in the US, I understood that unlike Canadians, Americans understood that they are it: there's no one else who will step in and fix the problem.

Canadians seem to think that someone in charge (Churchill, the Queen, the priest) will tell us what to do, bear the burden.

Americans seem to understand  that there is no one else: they bear the burden.

[Michael Hardner]

2 hours ago, August1991 said:

Canadians seem to think that someone in charge (Churchill, the Queen, the priest) will tell us what to do, bear the burden.

Americans seem to understand  that there is no one else: they bear the burden.

Maybe Canadians, who persist in a culture of order, need order.  Americans, raised in the culture of defiance and conspiracy, long for that.

Hofstadter wrote a book that you should read.

https://harpers.org/archive/1964/11/the-paranoid-style-in-american-politics/

[August1991]

On 12/4/2021 at 7:11 AM, Michael Hardner said:

Maybe Canadians, who persist in a culture of order, need order.  Americans, raised in the culture of defiance and conspiracy, long for that.

Hofstadter wrote a book that you should read.

https://harpers.org/archive/1964/11/the-paranoid-style-in-american-politics/

America? Various paranoid/conspiracy theories have existed elsewhere too: Marie-Antoinette's birth, Rasputin, the Opium Wars. How about the Elders of Zion? The Masons.

In 1964, after the assassination of Kennedy, trust The Atlantic (Harper's?) to publish an article somehow connecting "Right Wing" with "Conspiracy". Uh, the Masons.

===

No, Americans are exceptional. Robert Redford is incapable of understanding that the rest of the world views him as Donald Trump.

==

Dunning-Kruger Effect? Only in America could such a theory exist. It's a theory of self-confidence, a theory of how the Gods are not laughing. It's a theory for people who don't understand irony.

Edited December 7, 2021 by August1991

[August1991]

On 12/4/2021 at 7:11 AM, Michael Hardner said:

Maybe Canadians, who persist in a culture of order, need order.

Margaret Atwood was wrong. Canada is not a question/story/narrative of "survival".

We Canadians get along. That's our story/narrative.

[Michael Hardner]

12 hours ago, August1991 said:

America? Various paranoid/conspiracy theories have existed elsewhere too: Marie-Antoinette's birth, Rasputin, the Opium Wars. How about the Elders of Zion? The Masons.

In 1964, after the assassination of Kennedy, trust The Atlantic (Harper's?) to publish an article somehow connecting "Right Wing" with "Conspiracy". Uh, the Masons.

You waving your hand at a book that is seminal does nothing to diminish it:

https://www.semanticscholar.org/author/D.-Hofstadter/1705575

More than 8000 citations... 

12 hours ago, August1991 said:

===

No, Americans are exceptional. Robert Redford is incapable of understanding that the rest of the world views him as Donald Trump.

==

Dunning-Kruger Effect? Only in America could such a theory exist. It's a theory of self-confidence, a theory of how the Gods are not laughing. It's a theory for people who don't understand irony.

Everybody is 'exceptional' because everybody is an 'individual'.  America taught us that.

Interesting point about the DK effect.