If America Should Go Communist

Off Topic Politics & World Issues
301

[quote]Headhunter wrote:
I completely agree. America is an evil exploiter of all the nations of the world! Its a know FACT that the rich got that way by robbing the poor! They never come up with any ideas, developed new markets, or developed a mosquito-infested swamp without a dollar sign attached somewhere. “You should want to help other countries develop without ANY self-interest, you greedy Americans! Come and develop our economies, so we can kick you out by nationalizing all your hard work!”

It is a known fact that the intelligent exist for the benefit of the stupid, the ambitious exist for the benefit of the lazy, and that we’re all here to be slaves to every starving Cambodian or Mexican on the planet!!![/quote]

please tell me why it is wrong for the U.S. to help other countries develop without looking for its own financial gain.

it seems hypocritical that the U.S. is willing to go to war in the name of “freedom” and “democracy” yet it is not willing to helped a country develop without looking for financial gain.

your statements make you sound greedy and selfish

302

[quote]mcquaidla wrote:
First of all, there was nothing Socialist about the Nazis except the name, which was crafted to be misleading. Along with the Jews, the disabled, the Gypsies and the Gays, the Nazis made very short of work of the leftists - and that was one reason the German elite was so supportive of Hitler.

Second of all, not everyone dreams of working their entire lives for shit wages so Americans far away can live in McMansions. Strange, but true. And the U.S. has a longstanding reputation for intervening whenever a country attempts to nationalize its resources. A quick and cursory reading of world history in the 20th century might clear up any misconceptions you hold about our foreign policy and for whose benefit it is deployed. With the exception of WW2, our military has pretty much been utilized as a private army to protect the overseas property interests of our richest citizens.

A good place for you to start in your little history adventure would be Iran in 1953, Guatemala around the same time, and then onto Chile in the 70s. Once you’re done, you might want to reconsider all that “crazy” rhetoric coming from Chavez.

But then again, if you’re like most Americans, you won’t do the reading, you won’t reconsider and you won’t take time from your busy day to really consider what it’s like to not be an American and have to deal with us. And then, the next time we’re attacked here or abroad, you’ll cry and scratch your head and wonder why everyone hates us so much…[/quote]

lets not forget U.S. intervention in Argentina which put Argentina under a brutal military dictatorship. Also in Nicaragua, which put it under a brutal military dictatorship. In fact it would be hard to find a military dictatorship in Latin America that was not put in power based on U.S. interests. Haiti, Panama, Granada, the list goes on.

and we cant forget the attempts of U.S. intervention in Cuba and Venezuela.

and this is just in the western hemisphere.

303

[quote]orion wrote:

if you are refering to government as a centralized form of power that holds authority over the people then yes i say less is better, in fact i say abolish it altogether.

in its place create a new form of government with no centralization of power were everyone in the community participates and votes. instead of politicians have representatives that do not have any priviledges and receive no financial gain from attaining their post.

i understand that there is no such thing as completely free market capitalism but i think the reason why that is is because the capitalists wont allow it. the capitalists will use the government to increase their profits(patents and other government regulations). this is one of the reasons why capitalism is self destructive.

If you want a small government that grows weaker the higher it climbs the federal letter, politicians that have little to do and corporations that stay out of politics you are a closet libertarian.

Some of what you describe is utopian but
Switzerland comes pretty close.

No national debt, under 3% unemployment, people who vote on practically everything…

It is a capitalist Democracy though…[/quote]

no, i would like no government that holds power over the people and instead have a government made up of the people. no politicians, but rather representatives that do not govern they simply represent. no corporations.

304

[quote]mcquaidla wrote:
First of all, there was nothing Socialist about the Nazis except the name, which was crafted to be misleading. Along with the Jews, the disabled, the Gypsies and the Gays, the Nazis made very short of work of the leftists - and that was one reason the German elite was so supportive of Hitler.[/quote]

Nonsense. Go read the Nazi party’s platform - it reads like it has been copied and pasted from any modern Socialist’s playbook.

Secondly, the rich were the evil enemies of Communism - and that meant the Jewry. Never forget Marx wanted to liberate the world from the capitalistic Jews, and Hitler hated them for the same reason:

What is the worldly religion of the Jew? Huckstering. What is his worldly God? Money. Very well then! Emancipation from huckstering and money, consequently from practical, real Jewry, would be the self-emancipation of our time.

And what of Hitler’s desire for collectivization of agriculture and nationalization of industries?

Did Hitler make enemies with Social Democrats and Communists? Definitely - any ‘ism’ that differed even slightly from his maniacal vision became an enemy. Does that somehow make Hitler somehow less of a Socialist? Nope. His version had a much stronger Nationalist element, and he wasn’t much of a compromiser.

But don’t try and pretend that Nazism wasn’t a subset of Socialism.

True, but if they choose not to, then don’t.

Also, I find this new slander of ‘McMansions’ to be weirdly hypocritical - bland suburbs, now the enemy of the Left, are a paradise to those who are actually poor or live in a dangerous area. The truly donwtrodden dream at night of living in a ‘McMansion’ - just don’t tell the Left that. The Left should be talking up how boring, dull suburbs with McMansions provide great escapes for the less fortunate among us - instead they arrogantly sneer down them for representing the ‘worst’ of our culture.

Pathetic.

305

[quote]Zap Branigan wrote:
Headhunter wrote:
I completely agree. America is an evil exploiter of all the nations of the world! Its a know FACT that the rich got that way by robbing the poor! …

Hard to get rich robbing the poor!
[/quote]

NO it isn’t in fact. 99.9999% of the population of most underdeveloped countries are in fact poor. If all they profited amounted to penneis a day it would transalte to billions a year–based on current populations.

306

Oh, and just for kicks - go through a history of the 20th century and add up all the deaths that can be pinned on a regime that had the name ‘Socialist’ in its title.

307

[quote]mcquaidla wrote:
First of all, there was nothing Socialist about the Nazis except the name, which was crafted to be misleading.[/quote]

Question:

Which great socialist said:

Why would I socialise corporations if I can socialise the people?

308

[quote]gladiatorsteer wrote:
orion wrote:
gladiatorsteer wrote:
Headhunter wrote:
gladiatorsteer wrote:

socialism in those countries did not succeed because of U.S. intervention and because the government became corrupt.

How dare we intervene in National Socialism and in Soviet Socialism! Its all the USA’s fault that those systems have been driven off the planet! They were, at heart, a true paradise for their people.

I, for one, am angry at all those young men who gave their lives in western Europe to destroy the National Socialist paradise in Germany. How dare they impose their wicked culture on the peaceful people of Nazi Germany!

i am confused by your posts. what does natzi germany have to do with the ussr.

socialists, all of them…

i thought germany was against communism. i dont think nazi germany qualifies as socialist, in fact im certain.[/quote]

Sure they were socialists. They were not even shy about it.

It is right there in the name:

National SOCIALIST german WORKERS party.

Nationalsozialistische Deutsche Arbeiterpartei.

Of course they also were fascists but so was Sovjet Russia to some degree.

309

[quote]gladiatorsteer wrote:

no, i would like no government that holds power over the people and instead have a government made up of the people. no politicians, but rather representatives that do not govern they simply represent. no corporations.[/quote]

Ah, you would like a system were the politician actually work for the people instead of exploiting them.

Unfortunately we have no such politicians and we will never ever get them, therefore the need for a tiny government with little power.

Then they will also be lying thiefing bastards, but can do a lot less damage.

No corporations? You don`t like legal entities? Things go wrong when they take on a certain legal form?

If you Jamaican fishermen created a corporation, would they have joined the dark side?

310

[quote]gladiatorsteer wrote:
…
lets not forget U.S. intervention in Argentina which put Argentina under a brutal military dictatorship. Also in Nicaragua, which put it under a brutal military dictatorship. In fact it would be hard to find a military dictatorship in Latin America that was not put in power based on U.S. interests. Haiti, Panama, Granada, the list goes on.

and we cant forget the attempts of U.S. intervention in Cuba and Venezuela.

and this is just in the western hemisphere. [/quote]

Funny you never mention the Soviets meddling in those countries either directly or through proxys.

311

[quote]gladiatorsteer wrote:
I, for one, am angry at all those young men who gave their lives in western Europe to destroy the National Socialist paradise in Germany. How dare they impose their wicked culture on the peaceful people of Nazi Germany!

i am confused by your posts. what does natzi germany have to do with the ussr.

socialists, all of them…

i thought germany was against communism. i dont think nazi germany qualifies as socialist, in fact im certain.[/quote]

Germany, Italy…basically the Axis powers were facists. They hated socialism even more than I do. The two ideologies are on opposite sides of the spectrum, but equally bad and evil.
Facism is extremly idividualistic, but only for the perfect individuals.
Socialism is for group only and completly ignores the individual as a factor.

312

[quote]thunderbolt23 wrote:
Oh, and just for kicks - go through a history of the 20th century and add up all the deaths that can be pinned on a regime that had the name ‘Socialist’ in its title.

[/quote]

wouldnt come close to the amount of deaths caused by poverty which in turn is caused by capitalism.

313

[quote]Zap Branigan wrote:
gladiatorsteer wrote:
…
lets not forget U.S. intervention in Argentina which put Argentina under a brutal military dictatorship. Also in Nicaragua, which put it under a brutal military dictatorship. In fact it would be hard to find a military dictatorship in Latin America that was not put in power based on U.S. interests. Haiti, Panama, Granada, the list goes on.

and we cant forget the attempts of U.S. intervention in Cuba and Venezuela.

and this is just in the western hemisphere.

Funny you never mention the Soviets meddling in those countries either directly or through proxys.[/quote]

i do not deny soviet meddling in foreign countries. but how many military dictatorships have they sponsered, how many foreign leaders have they assasinated?

yes, the U.S. government(through the CIA has assasinated foreign leaders)

314

[quote]gladiatorsteer wrote:
thunderbolt23 wrote:
Oh, and just for kicks - go through a history of the 20th century and add up all the deaths that can be pinned on a regime that had the name ‘Socialist’ in its title.

wouldnt come close to the amount of deaths caused by poverty which in turn is caused by capitalism.[/quote]

Sure…

The great capitalist Mao let 30 million starve to make a profit…

I am glad Deng Xiaping led Chinas agriculture back to its socialist roots, which explains the abundance of food…

They learned from the success of the glorious Sowjet Union which turned Russia, the former Europes breadbasket, into a nation that could feed all of its people.

Kind off.

And let us not forget the success stories of Nicaragua, Cuba, Ethopia, North Korea countries well known for their abundance.

I mourn for countries like Taiwan, South Korea and even Austria…

If we had only seen the light after WWII we would not have adopted a market system…

If I think about all the riches we would have ammassed by now, following the lead of Roumania, Bulgaria, Poland, economic powerhouses, all of them…

Capitalism, the fifth apocalyptic horseman, which is allways accompanied by war, famine, disease and poverty…

315

[quote]gladiatorsteer wrote:

wouldnt come close to the amount of deaths caused by poverty which in turn is caused by capitalism.[/quote]

Rubbish - poverty existed long before formal capitalism, and in fact, was both worse and more widespread.

Capitalism isn’t perfect, just better. And if being poor is bad, then presumably being the opposite of poor is good - and only one ‘ism’ successfully completes that.

And you make the most elementary mistake a communist always makes - you assume economics is a zero-sum game. It isn’t, especially in the modern era.

316

[quote]gladiatorsteer wrote:
Zap Branigan wrote:
gladiatorsteer wrote:
…
lets not forget U.S. intervention in Argentina which put Argentina under a brutal military dictatorship. Also in Nicaragua, which put it under a brutal military dictatorship. In fact it would be hard to find a military dictatorship in Latin America that was not put in power based on U.S. interests. Haiti, Panama, Granada, the list goes on.

and we cant forget the attempts of U.S. intervention in Cuba and Venezuela.

and this is just in the western hemisphere.

Funny you never mention the Soviets meddling in those countries either directly or through proxys.

i do not deny soviet meddling in foreign countries. but how many military dictatorships have they sponsered, how many foreign leaders have they assasinated?

yes, the U.S. government(through the CIA has assasinated foreign leaders)[/quote]

Much of Argentina’s issues were the direct result of soviet meddling, actually.

317

[quote]orion wrote:

Capitalism, the fifth apocalyptic horseman, which is allways accompanied by war, famine, disease and poverty…

[/quote]

yes, now you are starting to understand

318

[quote]pat36 wrote:
gladiatorsteer wrote:
Zap Branigan wrote:
gladiatorsteer wrote:
…
lets not forget U.S. intervention in Argentina which put Argentina under a brutal military dictatorship. Also in Nicaragua, which put it under a brutal military dictatorship. In fact it would be hard to find a military dictatorship in Latin America that was not put in power based on U.S. interests. Haiti, Panama, Granada, the list goes on.

and we cant forget the attempts of U.S. intervention in Cuba and Venezuela.

and this is just in the western hemisphere.

Funny you never mention the Soviets meddling in those countries either directly or through proxys.

i do not deny soviet meddling in foreign countries. but how many military dictatorships have they sponsered, how many foreign leaders have they assasinated?

yes, the U.S. government(through the CIA has assasinated foreign leaders)

Much of Argentina’s issues were the direct result of soviet meddling, actually. [/quote]

issues such as what?

319

[quote]thunderbolt23 wrote:
gladiatorsteer wrote:

wouldnt come close to the amount of deaths caused by poverty which in turn is caused by capitalism.

Rubbish - poverty existed long before formal capitalism, and in fact, was both worse and more widespread.

Capitalism isn’t perfect, just better. And if being poor is bad, then presumably being the opposite of poor is good - and only one ‘ism’ successfully completes that.

And you make the most elementary mistake a communist always makes - you assume economics is a zero-sum game. It isn’t, especially in the modern era. [/quote]

capitalism is based on the assumption that people look out only for their individual interest.

how can you support an economic theory that relies on selfishness and greed.

we have seen the effects of capitalism, we are living them. we have wars over corporate interests, we have corporately owned governments, we have corporately owned media. capitalism cannot co-exist with democracy.

320

[quote]Zap Branigan wrote:
Headhunter wrote:
I completely agree. America is an evil exploiter of all the nations of the world! Its a know FACT that the rich got that way by robbing the poor! …

Hard to get rich robbing the poor!
[/quote]

No one ever got rich by coming up with a brilliant idea or working his ass off. Its only by robbing people with no money… :wink: