Jump to content

Ok libs, answer this honestly. No BS.


Vegas
 Share

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 90
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Trick question. Never in the history of man has communism ever existed.

yes it has. it just didn't have the results it portended to have on paper. so you and other marxist libs try to pretend

like it has never been implemented ever just to keep the utopian dream alive in your own pea-brains.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Do you believe that government should protect your rights?

 

Or do you believe that government should provide for your needs?

This is a good way to put it but I want them to come clean and see if they will admit to communism, I want to hear them say it.

 

Vegas wants an honest answer when he himself has never offered one.

And I am sure you can give an example as when I have lied. BTW, you didn't answer the question.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is a good way to put it but I want them to come clean and see if they will admit to communism, I want to hear them say it.

 

No, they'll play games and post they want "democratic socialism" AKA moral majority stealing as opposed to the state simply stealing on it's own.

 

They'll never understand that you can't have an entitlement based government and a rights based government at the same time, at least federally.

 

Hell, I bet most of them don't even know what a natural right vs an entitlement right even means...... :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

No, they'll play games and post they want "democratic socialism" AKA moral majority stealing as opposed to the state simply stealing on it's own.

 

They'll never understand that you can't have an entitlement based government and a rights based government at the same time, at least federally.

 

Hell, I bet most of them don't even know what a natural right vs an entitlement right even means...... :D

Very true!

 

I don't expect straight answers, but it's worth a shot. I made my question as defined and to the point as possible. If one asks a vague question they will get vague answers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Very true!

 

I don't expect straight answers, but it's worth a shot. I made my question as defined and to the point as possible. If one asks a vague question they will get vague answers.

:lol: Search my profile..... Hundreds of threads full of ad hominem attacks without ONE single rational/logical answer to the OP I provided.

 

Progressives are incapable of higher thought processes. IF they ever educate their way to higher thought processes they quit being progressive.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The better question is- What do you favor?

Fascism?

Pure libertarian wasteland where everyone does as they will?

how is that definition linked to fascism in your pea-brained mind? what you described is anarchy. fascism is a totalitarian form of government.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

both which stifle the evolutionary process of man. the illusion of equality has rendered the progress of mankind stagnate.

 

They do no such thing. The reason they don't work is that man is self-oriented. If he were other-oriented, either would probably work.

But there's no chance of human nature changing, so we are stuck with capitalism, which is as anti-Christian as any form of government gets. Capitalism would be okay if humans weren't grasping hedonists.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Kinda like the model the Tea members of the House are currently displaying? Is that what you mean?

again....how is advocating for "less government" or a government shut-down in anyway related to fascism, which adheres

to a large centralized totalitarian government? the liberal agenda is more closely related to actual fascism than tea party

conservatism. not that liberals are fascists....they aren't. liberals aren't intelligent or realistic enough to be fascists. but the

liberal ideology itself is closer to fascism than is conservatism.

 

 

They do no such thing. The reason they don't work is that man is self-oriented. If he were other-oriented, either would probably work.

But there's no chance of human nature changing, so we are stuck with capitalism, which is as anti-Christian as any form of government gets. Capitalism would be okay if humans weren't grasping hedonists.

capitalism is every bit as poisonous as communism.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

:lol: Search my profile..... Hundreds of threads full of ad hominem attacks without ONE single rational/logical answer to the OP I provided.

 

Progressives are incapable of higher thought processes. IF they ever educate their way to higher thought processes they quit being progressive.

 

Do you favor Americans being protected from bad food and drugs? Pollution? Should people of one color have the right to strip those of another color of their rights under the Constitution? Progressives / liberals fought for the creation of the Food and Drug Administration, the Environmental Protection Agency. They went to court to desegregate public education.

 

Conservatives fought against each of these things. They also fought against the 8-hour workday, worker safety legislation, Social Security, antitrust legislation. If it's good for people, liberals / progressives have fought for it. Conservatives fight for legislation that helps the 1%.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

They do no such thing. The reason they don't work is that man is self-oriented. If he were other-oriented, either would probably work.

But there's no chance of human nature changing, so we are stuck with capitalism, which is as anti-Christian as any form of government gets. Capitalism would be okay if humans weren't grasping hedonists.

That is flawed. There is nothing wrong with man putting himself first. It is wrong if they succeed on the expense of another man, but if they are their own person achieving their own means, then that is freedom. To say we are other-oriented is to neglect yourself. How is that healthy?

 

Society is nothing more than a collection of individuals. The individual is the smallest minority you can have. Thinking of society first, then the individual second will naturally implode. It's like sawing off the branch you are sitting on.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

capitalism is every bit as poisonous as communism.

 

Communism is fine. It just cannot be handled by human beings. In Russia, when it was the USSR, approximately 250,000 people, a group called the Nomenklatura, lived in luxury and controlled everything. Everyone else lived shabby lives or worse. We called that "communism." It wasn't. It was feudalism.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

again....how is advocating for "less government" or a government shut-down in anyway related to fascism, which adheres

to a large centralized totalitarian government? the liberal agenda is more closely related to actual fascism than tea party

conservatism. not that liberals are fascists....they aren't. liberals aren't intelligent or realistic enough to be fascists. but the

liberal ideology itself is closer to fascism than is conservatism.

 

capitalism is every bit as poisonous as communism.

Capitalism is not poisonous if it is done right. If capitalism mingles with the government or is equated with corporatism (which is often the case) then yes, it is poisonous. But then that, in itself, is not capitalism.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Communism is fine. It just cannot be handled by human beings. In Russia, when it was the USSR, approximately 250,000 people, a group called the Nomenklatura, lived in luxury and controlled everything. Everyone else lived shabby lives or worse. We called that "communism." It wasn't. It was feudalism.

"communism" is a scam. devised by an embittered atheist jew and his wealthy bourgeois compatriot. it was written as a godless religion

to rob the souls of all whom partook of it's communion. a way to dupe the middle and lower classes into freely and voluntarily submitting themselves

and their property to servitude.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That is flawed. There is nothing wrong with man putting himself first. It is wrong if they succeed on the expense of another man, but if they are their own person achieving their own means, then that is freedom. To say we are other-oriented is to neglect yourself. How is that healthy?

 

Society is nothing more than a collection of individuals. The individual is the smallest minority you can have. Thinking of society first, then the individual second will naturally implode. It's like sawing off the branch you are sitting on.

 

When everyone is concerned with the welfare of others, his own needs are handily met. There's nothing in communism that says you can't follow your dreams or achieve them.

 

Have you ever heard this definition of the difference between Heaven and Hell? In Hell, everyone sits at a huge banquet table, on which sits every delicacy. Each person has a fork with a long handle, and is compelled to grasp it only at the end. Problem is, the handle is too long to allow one to stretch his arm long enough to turn the fork around so he can eat from it. In the midst of plenty, no one eats.

 

In Heaven there is a similar banquet table. Everyone has the same long-handled forks and must grasp only the ends of the handles.

 

But in Heaven, everyone feeds the person across the table from himself.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share


×
×
  • Create New...