Page 5 of 8 FirstFirst ...
3
4
5
6
7
... LastLast
  1. #81
    Void Lord Felya's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    the other
    Posts
    58,334
    Quote Originally Posted by Therionn View Post
    The point is that Government is made by the citizens (voting), it's full of citizens, and that it exists "for the people" in order to protect and support the liberty of the people. Again, it's about ordered liberty for the people, not Government that rules the people.
    Ordered liberty is an oxymoron. Government, as it has been in pretty much all civilized world since WW1, has been to empower the people, to fight off forces that would inhibit their rights. Europe was dominated by governments that didn't represent the people, but were a dick measuring contest for wealth. The inbreeding and all the bizarre marriage arrangements, were all to maintain and increase the power dictated by wealth. Why do you think 'corporations are people' was such a big deal? It was explicitly giving a conglomerate of wealth, the power of the people. This isn't that different than in monarchies saying that their wealth shouldn't be abridged by the government, which is why serfs never had a say in it.
    Folly and fakery have always been with us... but it has never before been as dangerous as it is now, never in history have we been able to afford it less. - Isaac Asimov
    Every damn thing you do in this life, you pay for. - Edith Piaf
    The party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command. - Orwell
    No amount of belief makes something a fact. - James Randi

  2. #82
    Deleted
    Quote Originally Posted by Felya View Post
    No, it really isn't. It's why you are focusing on the result, instead of the action. 1917 in Russia, also over threw their government, to give more power to the people. Saying Europe is some how more susceptible to government control, contradicts the long history of Europe. I'm pretty sure that's why he said WW2... as by the time 1939 rolled around, Europe has gone through a segnificant change from royalty having their people due for petty causes. Like WW1... it's why Lenin's creed was 'peace, food and land'. It's why the entire concept of Marxism, hinges on the conflict between proletariat and the ruling class.
    Marxism is based on everyone being subservient to a giant benevolent Government that controls everything. As history showed, their big Government was anything but benevolent, and it all failed.

    Europe has consistently rebelled against rulers, but has consistently failed to become citizens rather than subjects. Not until America came in and showed them the way. Somehow Europeans seem to have lost it again, though.

  3. #83
    Void Lord Felya's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    the other
    Posts
    58,334
    Quote Originally Posted by Therionn View Post
    Except I am. I have conservative beliefs. They're not the same as religious fundamentalist beliefs. Republicans are both conservatives and religious fundamentalists. It's a party of two different belief systems that can work together (sometimes). So really, what you mean, is that I'm not the ideal Republican. I agree.
    Again, you can call your self a unicorn and then point at your forehead to show unicorns don't have a horn and don't look like horses. It won't make it true. You are not a special snowflake, whose image defines conservative values. You can claim to be liberal and say the same things you are and my reply would be exactly the same.
    Folly and fakery have always been with us... but it has never before been as dangerous as it is now, never in history have we been able to afford it less. - Isaac Asimov
    Every damn thing you do in this life, you pay for. - Edith Piaf
    The party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command. - Orwell
    No amount of belief makes something a fact. - James Randi

  4. #84
    Deleted
    Quote Originally Posted by Felya View Post
    Ordered liberty is an oxymoron. Government, as it has been in pretty much all civilized world since WW1, has been to empower the people, to fight off forces that would inhibit their rights. Europe was dominated by governments that didn't represent the people, but were a dick measuring contest for wealth. The inbreeding and all the bizarre marriage arrangements, were all to maintain and increase the power dictated by wealth. Why do you think 'corporations are people' was such a big deal? It was explicitly giving a conglomerate of wealth, the power of the people. This isn't that different than in monarchies saying that their wealth shouldn't be abridged by the government, which is why serfs never had a say in it.
    Order meaning, Government, that only exists to support and protect the liberty of the people. That's what America is. If there is no order, no Government, you have anarchy.

    I don't see the problem of using your money to support a cause you believe in. The Government does not get to tell us how we should spend our money outside of taxes and fines. That's why the ruling was made. The Constitution does not give the Government the power to do that.

  5. #85
    Void Lord Felya's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    the other
    Posts
    58,334
    Quote Originally Posted by Therionn View Post
    Marxism is based on everyone being subservient to a giant benevolent Government that controls everything. As history showed, their big Government was anything but benevolent, and it all failed.
    You are conflating the power of wealth that Marxism was fighting and government. The government that Marxism was revolting against, had limitless power and was centralized to the few. As in small in size, but far more reaching than Marxism. Marxism was fighting big government. Bolshevism overthrew a czar, not a government representing the people. Big government is a bullshit term, that ignores what government is.

    Europe has consistently rebelled against rulers, but has consistently failed to become citizens rather than subjects. Not until America came in and showed them the way. Somehow Europeans seem to have lost it again, though.
    This is undeniably false to an absurd degree. There is a reason why the guillotine I mentioned, was pulled out 6 years after the American revolution ended.
    Folly and fakery have always been with us... but it has never before been as dangerous as it is now, never in history have we been able to afford it less. - Isaac Asimov
    Every damn thing you do in this life, you pay for. - Edith Piaf
    The party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command. - Orwell
    No amount of belief makes something a fact. - James Randi

  6. #86
    Deleted
    Quote Originally Posted by Felya View Post
    Again, you can call your self a unicorn and then point at your forehead to show unicorns don't have a horn and don't look like horses. It won't make it true. You are not a special snowflake, whose image defines conservative values. You can claim to be liberal and say the same things you are and my reply would be exactly the same.
    Did I ever say my image defines conservative values? I simply stated I was a conservative and not a religious fundamentalist, and that the two are not the same. Which they aren't. You can be a conservative without being a religious fundamentalist. As you've even pointed out, Ayn Rand and Goldwater were definitely conservatives without being religious fundamentalists.

  7. #87
    Void Lord Felya's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    the other
    Posts
    58,334
    Quote Originally Posted by Therionn View Post
    Order meaning, Government, that only exists to support and protect the liberty of the people. That's what America is. If there is no order, no Government, you have anarchy.
    You mean that without government, we would have an extreme version of liberty? The power of the government to protect the liberty of its people, specifically hinges on its strength to do so. The more you fight it and hand your liberty over to entities you have no control over, the more you return to the good old days, where the government is dictated not by the people, but by the power afforded by wealth.

    I don't see the problem of using your money to support a cause you believe in. The Government does not get to tell us how we should spend our money outside of taxes and fines. That's why the ruling was made. The Constitution does not give the Government the power to do that.
    Yes, my cause of products disclosing they are harmful. Let me express my power as an American citizen, against a corporation. Let me dig out my pocket book and they dig out theirs... let's see which one of us has resources to win.
    Folly and fakery have always been with us... but it has never before been as dangerous as it is now, never in history have we been able to afford it less. - Isaac Asimov
    Every damn thing you do in this life, you pay for. - Edith Piaf
    The party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command. - Orwell
    No amount of belief makes something a fact. - James Randi

  8. #88
    Deleted
    Quote Originally Posted by Felya View Post
    You are conflating the power of wealth that Marxism was fighting and government. The government that Marxism was revolting against, had limitless power and was centralized to the few. As in small in size, but far more reaching than Marxism. Marxism was fighting big government. Bolshevism overthrew a czar, not a government representing the people. Big government is a bullshit term, that ignores what government is.



    This is undeniably false to an absurd degree. There is a reason why the guillotine I mentioned, was pulled out 6 years after the American revolution ended.
    Big Government, meaning powerful Government. Do I need to start breaking everything down for you to understand? Marxism was fighting for a massive powerful Government that controlled all life "for the good".

  9. #89
    Quote Originally Posted by Therionn View Post
    Big Government, meaning powerful Government. Do I need to start breaking everything down for you to understand? Marxism was fighting for a massive powerful Government that controlled all life "for the good".
    ...and how is that any different than what Dumbass Donnie Dump is doing? He's just giving all the governmental power to the top 1% of Big Buisnessmen, including himself - and do you think THEY have everybody's best interests at heart?

  10. #90
    Void Lord Felya's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    the other
    Posts
    58,334
    Quote Originally Posted by Therionn View Post
    Did I ever say my image defines conservative values? I simply stated I was a conservative and not a religious fundamentalist, and that the two are not the same. Which they aren't. You can be a conservative without being a religious fundamentalist. As you've even pointed out, Ayn Rand and Goldwater were definitely conservatives without being religious fundamentalists.
    Yes, you explicitly did, by saying the thing that makes conservatives not fundamentalists, is you. You are what you are claiming, is contradicting the definition. Meaning, you are claiming to be the definition. Otherwise, it would negate the definition of conservative, it would just be a part that you don't agree with. That maintains it as a conservative value, but expresses you not adhering to it... instead of 'no, look at me... me... me... me...'

    Yes, and both of those conservatives, agreed that America conservatism has been intertwined with religion. They said they had a problem with it, unlike your assertion, that it's not true because you exist. They were conservatives, that hated what it became in US. They didn't defend it, by claiming it's not true, because they exist.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Therionn View Post
    Big Government, meaning powerful Government. Do I need to start breaking everything down for you to understand? Marxism was fighting for a massive powerful Government that controlled all life "for the good".
    Who were they fighting? A massive government that controlled all life "for the rich"? Arbitrary... the American government is by the people, "FOR THE PEOPLE", of the people.
    Folly and fakery have always been with us... but it has never before been as dangerous as it is now, never in history have we been able to afford it less. - Isaac Asimov
    Every damn thing you do in this life, you pay for. - Edith Piaf
    The party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command. - Orwell
    No amount of belief makes something a fact. - James Randi

  11. #91
    Deleted
    Quote Originally Posted by mvallas View Post
    ...and how is that any different than what Dumbass Donnie Dump is doing? He's just giving all the governmental power to the top 1% of Big Buisnessmen, including himself - and do you think THEY have everybody's best interests at heart?
    I support Ben Sasse's view on Government. Not Trump's.

  12. #92
    Void Lord Felya's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    the other
    Posts
    58,334
    Quote Originally Posted by Therionn View Post
    I support Ben Sasse's view on Government. Not Trump's.
    It's not the size, it's the function. Big government is a red herring, that distracts from the power that is being taken away from the people. If the government is of the people, the more you shrink it, the more you shrink the power of the people. Attack the function, not the size...
    Folly and fakery have always been with us... but it has never before been as dangerous as it is now, never in history have we been able to afford it less. - Isaac Asimov
    Every damn thing you do in this life, you pay for. - Edith Piaf
    The party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command. - Orwell
    No amount of belief makes something a fact. - James Randi

  13. #93
    The Unstoppable Force Mayhem's Avatar
    15+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    pending...
    Posts
    23,913
    Quote Originally Posted by primalmatter View Post
    I am referring to the founding of the country.
    Cool... not relevant to what i was saying, but great input thanks.
    Quote Originally Posted by ash
    So, look um, I'm not a grief counselor, but if it's any consolation, I have had to kill and bury loved ones before. A bunch of times actually.
    Quote Originally Posted by PC2 View Post
    I never said I was knowledge-able and I wouldn't even care if I was the least knowledge-able person and the biggest dumb-ass out of all 7.8 billion people on the planet.

  14. #94
    The Insane Acidbaron's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Belgium, Flanders
    Posts
    18,230
    American conservatism does anyone really understand it? Does it even exist at this point? Who in power actually represents it?

    Yet to see anything conservative happen with a supposed conservative government in place. All i see i some sort of "anti" party. Opposing anything and everything, as long as it divides people and creates enemies of those that oppose them luring out violence, since that's how you win elections while screwing over your voter base so they can all in all collect money for another term from interests groups and companies that care even less about human life or quality of any life.

    I dare say people who think there's such a thing going in the US can't even name a single conservative thing that has been done recently, successfully that is. But really who cares about labels when money dominates your politics that much that it doesn't even matter for the common person, all you can do in the US is literally bend over take it, smile and say thank you.

  15. #95
    The Unstoppable Force Mayhem's Avatar
    15+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    pending...
    Posts
    23,913
    Quote Originally Posted by Therionn View Post
    Europeans claim to know so much about the USA without even understanding the entire premise of the USA. We're a country that was founded and created based off of ideals. Unlike most countries that are formed based off ethnic boundaries, America, more than anything, is an idea. The idea being that We The People are in charge. That We The People are born free from the tyranny that our ancestors lived through. We The People are active citizens rather than subjects, and we control the destiny of our Republic. And we can take a look at the rest of the world and see what big and powerful Governments do to their people.
    And you the people ignore everything and pretend to have all the right ideas while tricking yourself into thinking that your government is not big and powerful.
    Quote Originally Posted by ash
    So, look um, I'm not a grief counselor, but if it's any consolation, I have had to kill and bury loved ones before. A bunch of times actually.
    Quote Originally Posted by PC2 View Post
    I never said I was knowledge-able and I wouldn't even care if I was the least knowledge-able person and the biggest dumb-ass out of all 7.8 billion people on the planet.

  16. #96
    Deleted
    Quote Originally Posted by Felya View Post
    Yes, you explicitly did, by saying the thing that makes conservatives not fundamentalists, is you. You are what you are claiming, is contradicting the definition. Meaning, you are claiming to be the definition. Otherwise, it would negate the definition of conservative, it would just be a part that you don't agree with. That maintains it as a conservative value, but expresses you not adhering to it... instead of 'no, look at me... me... me... me...'

    Yes, and both of those conservatives, agreed that America conservatism has been intertwined with religion. They said they had a problem with it, unlike your assertion, that it's not true because you exist. They were conservatives, that hated what it became in US. They didn't defend it, by claiming it's not true, because they exist.

    - - - Updated - - -



    Who were they fighting? A massive government that controlled all life "for the rich"? Arbitrary... the American government is by the people, "FOR THE PEOPLE", of the people.
    The point is that not all conservatives are religious fundamentalists. You even just stated that they were both Conservatives, and they obviously were not religious fundamentalists, and therefore you cannot deny I am a conservative. You just proved yourself wrong, sport.

    For the people to have liberty. Our Government exists to protect and ensure that We the People continue to have liberty. It's not difficult to understand. Marxism was about replacing a big government... with an even bigger Government that controlled everything. It's really not difficult to understand. Honestly, do you even know what you're talking about when it comes to Marxism?

    As for your point that the French Revolution was a result of the American revolution? Probably. It doesn't change the fact that the French Revolution was nothing like the American Revolution and ultimately failed. The french fought to topple the power of the few over the many, without any principles other than "they have more than me". America fought to Govern itself through elected citizen representation, for weaker decentralized Government whose purpose was to ensure liberty for it's people, and lower taxes. The french revolution brought mob rule and anarchy, and eventually dictatorship. The American revolution brought smaller decentralized Government that protected the liberties of the people.

    The circumstances that started both revolutions weren't even remotely the same.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Felya View Post
    It's not the size, it's the function. Big government is a red herring, that distracts from the power that is being taken away from the people. If the government is of the people, the more you shrink it, the more you shrink the power of the people. Attack the function, not the size...
    That's entirely incorrect. The more powerful the Government the less powerful the individual people are. The more powerful the Government the more restrictive, and therefore the people are oppressed and lose their liberties. Powerful Government has never made powerful citizens, just subjects.

  17. #97
    Void Lord Felya's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    the other
    Posts
    58,334
    Quote Originally Posted by Mayhem View Post
    And you the people ignore everything and pretend to have all the right ideas while tricking yourself into thinking that your government is not big and powerful.
    I get the sentiment, but this isn't true. The person you are responding to, obviously and explicitly, believes that the US government is too big and is too powerful. His case is that the power of government in US should be lower than it is. Just because he thinks US doesn't have as much dependence on government as Europe, doesn't mean he thinks it's not big and powerful. It's a legitimate argument, I just don't think he is expressing it correctly. As I said, function over size... I think you'd have a better case if that were his argument.
    Folly and fakery have always been with us... but it has never before been as dangerous as it is now, never in history have we been able to afford it less. - Isaac Asimov
    Every damn thing you do in this life, you pay for. - Edith Piaf
    The party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command. - Orwell
    No amount of belief makes something a fact. - James Randi

  18. #98
    The Unstoppable Force Mayhem's Avatar
    15+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    pending...
    Posts
    23,913
    Quote Originally Posted by Felya View Post
    I get the sentiment, but this isn't true. The person you are responding to, obviously and explicitly, believes that the US government is too big and is too powerful. His case is that the power of government in US should be lower than it is. Just because he thinks US doesn't have as much dependence on government as Europe, doesn't mean he thinks it's not big and powerful. It's a legitimate argument, I just don't think he is expressing it correctly. As I said, function over size... I think you'd have a better case if that were his argument.
    Considering the way he writes about europe and europeans i don't see it that he is also saying the americans are subjects. On the other hand he is all over the place so...
    Quote Originally Posted by ash
    So, look um, I'm not a grief counselor, but if it's any consolation, I have had to kill and bury loved ones before. A bunch of times actually.
    Quote Originally Posted by PC2 View Post
    I never said I was knowledge-able and I wouldn't even care if I was the least knowledge-able person and the biggest dumb-ass out of all 7.8 billion people on the planet.

  19. #99
    Void Lord Felya's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    the other
    Posts
    58,334
    Quote Originally Posted by Therionn View Post
    The point is that not all conservatives are religious fundamentalists. You even just stated that they were both Conservatives, and they obviously were not religious fundamentalists, and therefore you cannot deny I am a conservative. You just proved yourself wrong, sport.
    Yes, and not all conservatives believe that guns rights should be unabridged. That doesn't legitimize your argument that it's not a conservative value. The issue isn't what you value, but what conservatives value. You are an individual, while a group is defined by majority opinion. A reply of 'I'm conservative, so it's not true that it's a conservative value' is considerably different than 'I'm conservative and don't agree with this value.

    As ironic as it may seem, you are expressing the angst of being a minority.

    For the people to have liberty. Our Government exists to protect and ensure that We the People continue to have liberty. It's not difficult to understand. Marxism was about replacing a big government... with an even bigger Government that controlled everything. It's really not difficult to understand. Honestly, do you even know what you're talking about when it comes to Marxism?
    I'm not having difficulty understanding, it's why I don't need to question if you know what you are talking about. I get your perspective, just because you don't get mine, doesn't mean I'm not well versed.

    How exactly was communism, even in Stalin's form, a bigger government than the czar? You need to be specific here, because that is wholly untrue.

    As for your point that the French Revolution was a result of the American revolution? Probably. It doesn't change the fact that the French Revolution was nothing like the American Revolution and ultimately failed. The french fought to topple the power of the few over the many, without any principles other than "they have more than me". America fought to Govern itself through elected citizen representation, for weaker decentralized Government whose purpose was to ensure liberty for it's people, and lower taxes. The french revolution brought mob rule and anarchy, and eventually dictatorship. The American revolution brought smaller decentralized Government that protected the liberties of the people.
    The French monarchy controlled every facet of French life. It wasn't just because they were wealthy, it's was because the populace had nothing. You are making a terrifying point, if you are suggesting that the issue was just wealth and not the power it had over the people.

    The circumstances that started both revolutions weren't even remotely the same.
    Absurd... there is no possible way this is the case. How exactly is rising against monarchy, not even remotely the same? How about remotely similar, instead of absolutes like the same? (Remotely the same, is also an oxymoron.)

    That's entirely incorrect. The more powerful the Government the less powerful the individual people are. The more powerful the Government the more restrictive, and therefore the people are oppressed and lose their liberties. Powerful Government has never made powerful citizens, just subjects.
    A government by an individual, for the individual, of the individual. Is a monarchy...

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Mayhem View Post
    Considering the way he writes about europe and europeans i don't see it that he is also saying the americans are subjects. On the other hand he is all over the place so...
    It's the usual thing that has been reinforced by Trump. You are not to trust opposing point of views. You watch the same rhetoric and then when confronted with disagreement, you don't actually understand the point you are making. Because you don't build the necessary perspective of the opposition in an echo chamber, you don't know how to defend it from critics.
    Folly and fakery have always been with us... but it has never before been as dangerous as it is now, never in history have we been able to afford it less. - Isaac Asimov
    Every damn thing you do in this life, you pay for. - Edith Piaf
    The party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command. - Orwell
    No amount of belief makes something a fact. - James Randi

  20. #100
    Deleted
    Quote Originally Posted by Felya View Post
    Yes, and not all conservatives believe that guns rights should be unabridged. That doesn't legitimize your argument that it's not a conservative value. The issue isn't what you value, but what conservatives value. You are an individual, while a group is defined by majority opinion. A reply of 'I'm conservative, so it's not true that it's a conservative value' is considerably different than 'I'm conservative and don't agree with this value.

    As ironic as it may seem, you are expressing the angst of being a minority.



    I'm not having difficulty understanding, it's why I don't need to question if you know what you are talking about. I get your perspective, just because you don't get mine, doesn't mean I'm not well versed.

    How exactly was communism, even in Stalin's form, a bigger government than the czar? You need to be specific here, because that is wholly untrue.



    The French monarchy controlled every facet of French life. It wasn't just because they were wealthy, it's was because the populace had nothing. You are making a terrifying point, if you are suggesting that the issue was just wealth and not the power it had over the people.



    Absurd... there is no possible way this is the case. How exactly is rising against monarchy, not even remotely the same? How about remotely similar, instead of absolutes like the same? (Remotely the same, is also an oxymoron.)



    A government by an individual, for the individual, of the individual. Is a monarchy...

    - - - Updated - - -



    It's the usual thing that has been reinforced by Trump. You are not to trust opposing point of views. You watch the same rhetoric and then when confronted with disagreement, you don't actually understand the point you are making. Because you don't build the necessary perspective of the opposition in an echo chamber, you don't know how to defend it from critics.
    I simply pointed out that not all conservatives are religious fundamentalist in response to "all conservatives are religious fundamentalists". You then replied that we're not, and even pointed out very prominent conservatives as not being religious fundamentalists. Thanks. I don't see the point in continuing this as we have come to agreement on it. As an ethnic minority, I don't see the irony.

    "How exactly was communism, even in Stalin's form, a bigger government than the czar".

    That question clearly shows that you have no idea what you're talking about. Government that is so massive that it consumes everything is what communism is. From every industry, to the job you are forcefully placed in, to your social life, and even to what you can talk about legally. It's about falling in line with Government for the greater good. It's about everyone being controlled by the state so that everyone is economically equal. It's about trading all independence and liberty so that no one can be better off.


    "The French monarchy controlled every facet of French life. It wasn't just because they were wealthy, it's was because the populace had nothing."

    Yes, exactly, just like political marxism. The only difference between the two is that the you served the "state" and not a monarch. When you're a subject, you're a subject. It doesn't matter who you are subservient to.

    I'll break down the difference between a Republic and a monarchy for you. I hope you didn't pay for a college education, because you were badly ripped off if you did.

    mon·ar·chy
    ˈmänərkē,ˈmänˌärkē/Submit
    noun
    a form of government with a monarch at the head.
    a state that has a monarch.
    plural noun: monarchies
    the monarch and royal family of a country.
    noun: the monarchy
    "the monarchy is the focus of loyalty and service"

    re·pub·lic
    rəˈpəblik/Submit
    noun
    a state in which supreme power is held by the people and their elected representatives, and which has an elected or nominated president rather than a monarch.
    archaic
    a group with a certain equality between its members.

    In a monarchy, the monarch controls the Government. They are unelected and the people are simply beneath them. In a Republic we vote for and choose from the people to represent us in Government (of the people and by the people), who then serve us by creating laws and funding things that protect our liberty, (for the people).

    I hope you can move on from this false belief that the founding fathers believed in Marxism. It's very simple minded, and is nothing more than revision of history. The USA is about liberty for all. It is about each citizen being an individual, having free thoughts, being able to speak against the state, independence to live the life that one desires. Communism is totalitarianism.

    Your opposing view, political marxism, is not something I trust. Here's three reasons why I don't trust what you're espousing

    a.) You don't even understand what political marxism is.
    b.) your revisionist view that the founding fathers were marxists
    c.) Political marxism has killed millions and millions of people. Marxism is about oppression. "Dictatorship of the proletariat" is totalitarianism. Political marxism states that the state is everything, and everyone is subservient to the state. If we lived in a marxist state I would be executed for my views.
    Last edited by mmocdf810d1583; 2017-06-24 at 11:40 PM.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •