Register :: Log in :: Profile :: Mail   

Your Ad Here

ARE YOU MILITANT
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    LVC Home // Conservative Corner
Author Message
TrespassersW
Veteran
Veteran


Joined: 27 Mar 2007
Posts: 524
Location: North Carolina, USA

PostPosted: Fri Mar 30, 2007 4:53 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Docsmitter wrote:
I would like to turn to history for proof of failure of communism and similar systems...

It occurs to me that the one irrefutable success of communism is that no matter how miserably it fails in every nation subjected to it, so many people continue to think that it would be a great idea for everyone if we could just do it right.
Back to top
rynln53
Newbie


Joined: 28 Mar 2007
Posts: 43

PostPosted: Fri Mar 30, 2007 5:36 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
communism is incentive for sloth and therefore creates it. It is based on the illegitimate claim that all are equal, so either the less hard working do more (unlikely) or the harder working do less, the latter being what will ultimately happen.
Lord Acton said:
"Power tends to corrupt, and ablsolute power corrupts absolutely."
This is exactly what happens in communism, people are not infallible and will often corupt if given the chance, sadly, that is why america was built on checks and balances, so we would not repeat the gluttony of the english monarchy in our fledgling country.
Back to top
Lester
Forum Elder
Forum Elder


Joined: 08 Dec 2006
Posts: 3796

PostPosted: Fri Mar 30, 2007 5:49 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
EVIL D wrote:
The communism bit is directed at some of the dip-shits who repeatedly use commie "talking points" on their posts. You know the "useful idiots".


Ahh ok, I'm happy then Razz
Back to top
Lester
Forum Elder
Forum Elder


Joined: 08 Dec 2006
Posts: 3796

PostPosted: Fri Mar 30, 2007 5:54 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
rynln53 wrote:
communism is seen as totalitarianism because that is what it is, the whole idea is that the "prolitariot" will atain justice when and only when they violently overthrow the "bourgeois." socialism is similar but it does not believe that a violent over throw is necessary, rather that society can be changed from the inside. Communism is far too cynical to trust anyone and there keeps its populus under control. China is different, they aren't really communist, they have allowed for economic freedom, as long as party rule is not challenged, they are authoritarian.


Communism is almost the complete opposite of cynical, like you say, it's based on the concept that everyone should be equal, and that absolute power *won't* corrupt absolutely, even though no one person would hold that power. True communism can't keep everyone under control because everyone is exactly who has all the power.

Marx wrote about the *neccesity* of the revolution because that was the style of the time.

Quote:
It occurs to me that the one irrefutable success of communism is that no matter how miserably it fails in every nation subjected to it, so many people continue to think that it would be a great idea for everyone if we could just do it right.


It's not "do it right" but rather, "do it". No true communist society has ever existed, although Lenin came close. Propaganda spread throughout the world wars, the korean war and vietnam has made people associate communism with countries that don't actually embrace the system at all.
Back to top
rynln53
Newbie


Joined: 28 Mar 2007
Posts: 43

PostPosted: Fri Mar 30, 2007 5:54 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
back to the bit about fighting, if emotions are allowed to control ANY aspect of our reasoning we will easily be able to be led around by the nose by our temptors, rendering us inefective. Why does life need to be a fight, obvious answer, because there is so much fighting already out there and we cant pretend like it doesn't exist, but why go to the fight response so readily?
Back to top
Lester
Forum Elder
Forum Elder


Joined: 08 Dec 2006
Posts: 3796

PostPosted: Fri Mar 30, 2007 5:58 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
If emotions are not allowed to affect our reasoning we become mindless automatons to logic, and lose a very important part of our humanity.
Back to top
chevydriver1123
Known Associate
Known Associate


Joined: 17 Dec 2006
Posts: 442
Location: Newburgh New York

PostPosted: Fri Mar 30, 2007 12:58 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Im a Libertarian
Back to top
Lester
Forum Elder
Forum Elder


Joined: 08 Dec 2006
Posts: 3796

PostPosted: Fri Mar 30, 2007 1:27 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Con...gratu..lations..??
Back to top
Raibeart
Known Associate
Known Associate


Joined: 12 Mar 2007
Posts: 287

PostPosted: Sat Mar 31, 2007 3:23 pm    Post subject: Re: ARE YOU MILITANT Reply with quote
EVIL D wrote:
I am and have been many things in my life, good, bad, evil... top of the list, I am an American. To be the American I want to be I've pretended to be something, to try it out and I've committed to being other things 100%. It makes each human who they are if you are truly free. In America it's how we roll.

Some people expect to be treated like something they are not and most tolerate what they have become, just whine about it and not try something new... pussies, cowards and leftists.

Being militant is easy when it comes to being an American citizen, cause freedom makes us so... at all costs, being free is the only option. Without our freedom we are not Americans, that is why Americans fight and die for it. Real Americans will fight for others freedom, cause we are Americans and it's what we do!

Are you truly free or just free enough, will you fight for your freedom and continue to earn it, since it is never free for long! There are too many who always expect to be free, they know nothing else... times are a changing, freedom is truly threatened.

USING FREEDOM TO REMAIN FREE, EVIL D.


Indeed EVIL D.
Quote:
In other words, the Henry Kissinger rule. The 'statecraft' that Kissinger personified in the 1970s is widely appreciated in circles of 'post-modern' expertise. Presidents and governments consult him. Douglas Hurd, when Foreign Secretary, arranged an honorary knighthood for him. The BBC pays him $3,000 for less than a minute's wisdom. That he secretly and illegally bombed a neutral country, Cambodia, causing tens of thousands of deaths, is immaterial. That he worked to overthrow the elected government in Chile is irrelevant. That he defied Congress and clandestinely supplied the Indonesian dictators with weapons with which they pursued the genocide in East Timor is of no consequence. That he encouraged the Kurds to fight for nationhood, then betrayed them, is by the way.


Quote:
We have 50 per cent of the world's wealth, but only 6 per cent of its population. In this situation, our real job in / the coming period is to devise a pattern of relationships which permit us to maintain this position of disparity. To do so, we have to dispense with all sentimentality . . . we should cease thinking about human rights, the raising of living standards and democratisation.
George Kennan, US Cold War planner, 1948


Aint it great to be so free at the expense of other peoples lives EVIL D.???????
Back to top
Xerxes
Forum Elder
Forum Elder


Joined: 15 Mar 2007
Posts: 1530
Location: 1600 Pennsylvania Ave.

PostPosted: Sun Apr 01, 2007 12:45 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
chevydriver1123 wrote:
Left wingers = evil communists

Right wingers = pyschotic religious nuts

hmm who to choose?


TrespassersW wrote:
I realize you are poking fun at these labels, but I want to use your comments as a jumping off point for some thoughts on how often these labels get thrown around in lieu of any actual argument.

I find it more useful to just consider the value of an individual's stated position on the issue at hand, rather than shoving them into boxes with labels. Try to label me based on my opinion on this issue or that, and you'll think me a right-wing nut-job or a pinko-leftist fag; which makes the labels meaningless. The reality is that most people are like that; conservative on some issues and liberal on others, so why not toss out the labels and just debate the issues civilly?




Words of reason, I agree. Do you think this chasm is intentional, because I believe that perhaps it is a result of a "Divide and Conquer" tactic used by the RNC and the DNC to pidgeonhole people and then equate them with one party or the other. It is a smokescreen, a slight of hand. If you and I are busy arguing with one another, then we don't even think about the real issues or what we can agree on and work from there.

I'm sure everyone reading this would agree that 99% of politicians are criminals and/or liars....

......See, we've already breached the gap.
Very Happy
Back to top
TrespassersW
Veteran
Veteran


Joined: 27 Mar 2007
Posts: 524
Location: North Carolina, USA

PostPosted: Tue Apr 10, 2007 4:04 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Xerxes wrote:
TrespassersW wrote:

I find it more useful to just consider the value of an individual's stated position on the issue at hand, rather than shoving them into boxes with labels. Try to label me based on my opinion on this issue or that, and you'll think me a right-wing nut-job or a pinko-leftist fag; which makes the labels meaningless. The reality is that most people are like that; conservative on some issues and liberal on others, so why not toss out the labels and just debate the issues civilly?

Words of reason, I agree. Do you think this chasm is intentional, because I believe that perhaps it is a result of a "Divide and Conquer" tactic used by the RNC and the DNC to pidgeonhole people and then equate them with one party or the other. It is a smokescreen, a slight of hand. If you and I are busy arguing with one another, then we don't even think about the real issues or what we can agree on and work from there.

Those who have been allowed to shape political debate in this country (hell, in the world) for the past 30 years have done so with a goal of elevating one party over another rather than elevating society over its problems; we're told the debate is about whether or not we care about the environment, rather than whether or not a specific proposed course of action is the best available and the least costly in terms of the real trade-offs we have to make when we do anything. The same is true of education, health care, the poor, the elderly... you name the topic.

The reality is that those who would do away with welfare don't hate the poor; many simply think that our welfare system fails at its intended goal of helping the poor. Sadly, the useful debate that might be had by considering the pros and cons of the current system and considering the likely pros and cons of alternatives simply never happens, because those who would suggest alternatives end up shouted down by people who can't think beyond the lexicon forced upon them by pundits and politicians who don't want to solve problems nearly as much as they want to use those problems as political footballs with which to garner support, votes, and power.

Xerxes wrote:
I'm sure everyone reading this would agree that 99% of politicians are criminals and/or liars...

With the remaining 1% being the candidates he or she actually voted for. Rolling Eyes
Back to top
Xerxes
Forum Elder
Forum Elder


Joined: 15 Mar 2007
Posts: 1530
Location: 1600 Pennsylvania Ave.

PostPosted: Tue Apr 10, 2007 4:33 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
TrespassersW wrote:
Xerxes wrote:
TrespassersW wrote:

I find it more useful to just consider the value of an individual's stated position on the issue at hand, rather than shoving them into boxes with labels. Try to label me based on my opinion on this issue or that, and you'll think me a right-wing nut-job or a pinko-leftist fag; which makes the labels meaningless. The reality is that most people are like that; conservative on some issues and liberal on others, so why not toss out the labels and just debate the issues civilly?

Words of reason, I agree. Do you think this chasm is intentional, because I believe that perhaps it is a result of a "Divide and Conquer" tactic used by the RNC and the DNC to pidgeonhole people and then equate them with one party or the other. It is a smokescreen, a slight of hand. If you and I are busy arguing with one another, then we don't even think about the real issues or what we can agree on and work from there.

Those who have been allowed to shape political debate in this country (hell, in the world) for the past 30 years have done so with a goal of elevating one party over another rather than elevating society over its problems; we're told the debate is about whether or not we care about the environment, rather than whether or not a specific proposed course of action is the best available and the least costly in terms of the real trade-offs we have to make when we do anything. The same is true of education, health care, the poor, the elderly... you name the topic.

The reality is that those who would do away with welfare don't hate the poor; many simply think that our welfare system fails at its intended goal of helping the poor. Sadly, the useful debate that might be had by considering the pros and cons of the current system and considering the likely pros and cons of alternatives simply never happens, because those who would suggest alternatives end up shouted down by people who can't think beyond the lexicon forced upon them by pundits and politicians who don't want to solve problems nearly as much as they want to use those problems as political footballs with which to garner support, votes, and power.

Xerxes wrote:
I'm sure everyone reading this would agree that 99% of politicians are criminals and/or liars...

With the remaining 1% being the candidates he or she actually voted for. Rolling Eyes


We need a "regime change" in the media.
Back to top
Lester
Forum Elder
Forum Elder


Joined: 08 Dec 2006
Posts: 3796

PostPosted: Tue Apr 10, 2007 5:00 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Or we could make it not a regime at all?
Back to top
TrespassersW
Veteran
Veteran


Joined: 27 Mar 2007
Posts: 524
Location: North Carolina, USA

PostPosted: Tue Apr 10, 2007 5:39 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Xerxes wrote:
We need a "regime change" in the media.

Between the blogosphere and the proliferation of smaller Internet news outlets I think that's happening. People certainly have more choices than they had just a few years ago.
Back to top
Xerxes
Forum Elder
Forum Elder


Joined: 15 Mar 2007
Posts: 1530
Location: 1600 Pennsylvania Ave.

PostPosted: Tue Apr 10, 2007 3:29 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
TrespassersW wrote:
Xerxes wrote:
We need a "regime change" in the media.

Between the blogosphere and the proliferation of smaller Internet news outlets I think that's happening. People certainly have more choices than they had just a few years ago.


You are so right, there! Alternative media definitely has become the blogosphere. I strive to be the Studs Terkel of the internets. LoL Rolling Eyes
Back to top
Post new topic   Reply to topic    LVC Home // Conservative Corner All times are GMT
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next
Page 2 of 3

 


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2002 phpBB Group

Add to My Yahoo! Add to Google

Politics Blogs - Blog Top Sites Politics Blogs Politics