Jump to content

Why do liberals embrace Marxism so much?


Recommended Posts

Why do liberals embrace Marxism so much?

They do not understand nor have they been taught or embrace American history. They are to lazy and stupid to understand free market capitalism.

 

They hate success, they think wealth is limited and if someone has it they took it all from someone else. They have been systematically brain washed why the liberal media that is headed up by George soros and they could care less about it.

 

They think we appeared from no where so they have no morals. They cant explain their own existence so they feel the need to be relevant all the while they are the most irrelevant. I could go on for hours ...but if you arent a liberal you totally understand everything I just said, if your a liberal reading this you are lost and confused.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm no liberal lol I fully understand the fault in their logic..well lack of anyway

Welcome :) You will see that liberals in here are propagandist, they refuse logic, truth, and decency....but...that is a liberal anywhere..enjoy beating their brains in...its easy to do in here...they are dumb .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why do liberals embrace Marxism so much?

Ah, Marx never worked & lived off other people?

Also, two of Marx's daughters committed suicide. One, simply because someone suggested she do it. I guess that leaves out Marx being a good father figure.

  • The toadie thought he could change the world; while his family went down in flames.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Atwater on the Southern Strategy[edit]

As a member of the Reagan administration in 1981, Atwater gave an anonymous interview to political scientist Alexander P. Lamis. Part of the interview was printed in Lamis' book The Two-Party South, then reprinted in Southern Politics in the 1990s with Atwater's name revealed. Bob Herbert reported on the interview in the October 6, 2005 edition of The New York Times. On November 13, 2012, The Nation magazine released a 42-minute audio recording of the interview.[10] James Carter IV, grandson of former president Jimmy Carter, had asked and been granted access to these tapes by Lamis' widow. Atwater talked about the Republican Southern Strategy and Ronald Reagan's version of it:

Atwater: As to the whole Southern strategy that Harry S. Dent, Sr. and others put together in 1968, opposition to the Voting Rights Act would have been a central part of keeping the South. Now you don't have to do that. All you have to do to keep the South is for Reagan to run in place on the issues he's campaigned on since 1964, and that's fiscal conservatism, balancing the budget, cut taxes, you know, the whole cluster.

Questioner: But the fact is, isn't it, that Reagan does get to the Wallace voter and to the racist side of the Wallace voter by doing away with legal services, by cutting down on food stamps?

Atwater: You start out in 1954 by saying, "[African-American slur], [African-American slur], [African-American slur]." By 1968 you can't say "[African-American slur]"—that hurts you. Backfires. So you say stuff like forced busing, states' rights and all that stuff. You're getting so abstract now [that] you're talking about cutting taxes, and all these things you're talking about are totally economic things and a byproduct of them is [that] blacks get hurt worse than whites. And subconsciously maybe that is part of it. I'm not saying that. But I'm saying that if it is getting that abstract, and that coded, that we are doing away with the racial problem one way or the other. You follow me—because obviously sitting around saying, "We want to cut this," is much more abstract than even the busing thing, and a hell of a lot more abstract than "[African-American slur], [African-American slur]."[11][12]

Atwater also argued that Reagan did not need to make racial appeals, suggesting that Reagan's issues transcended the racial prism of the "Southern Strategy":

Atwater: But Reagan did not have to do a southern strategy for two reasons. Number one, race was not a dominant issue. And number two, the mainstream issues in this campaign had been, quote, southern issues since way back in the sixties. So Reagan goes out and campaigns on the issues of economics and of national defense. The whole campaign was devoid of any kind of racism, any kind of reference. And I'll tell you another thing you all need to think about, that even surprised me, is the lack of interest, really, the lack of knowledge right now in the South among white voters about the Voting Rights Act."[13]

 

 

 

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lee_Atwater#Atwater_on_the_Southern_Strategy

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why do liberals embrace Marxism so much?

they don't

Liberals hate these filthy fucking commies

Better dead than red

Leftists love it though

They don't ever consider the constitution when they spout their nonsense

Communism isn't compatible with individual liberty

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

Now if you could only convince progressives and the modern Democratic Party leadership of that, native.

working on it player

Soon we will be taking the party over

These leftists will be purged

Give us a few more years

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why do liberals embrace Marxism so much?

Hmm, what is wrong with Marxism?

 

Ah, Marx never worked & lived off other people?

Also, two of Marx's daughters committed suicide. One, simply because someone suggested she do it. I guess that leaves out Marx being a good father figure.

  • The toadie thought he could change the world; while his family went down in flames.

 

Oh wow! Those are all good points.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

You can speed the process up by helping to indict and prosecute Hillary and her associates.

yes, that would speed it up like crazy

We may not have the pull to do that yet

But soon we will

Then all the traitors are gonna be held accountable

Let's see if hrc gets nabbed anyways

She is blatant and recent

That may happen without us

She is insanely corrupt

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hey, there's benson, the degenerate that celebrated when a six-year old little girl was killed by an accidental shotgun blast last week.

 

SICKO!!

 

See for yourself:

http://www.liberalforum.org/index.php?/topic/204379-hick-christmas-6-year-old-killed-by-11-year-olds-gun/?p=1059716237

Link to comment
Share on other sites

^^ Z~man wannabe

You must feel pretty speshul, being the only other lefty that supported benson's effed-up celebration of an innocent little girl's untimely death.

 

You and benson like getting the award for most despicable degenerates.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You must feel pretty speshul, being the only other lefty that supported benson's effed-up celebration of an innocent little girl's untimely death.

 

You and benson like getting the award for most despicable degenerates.

You must be that clueless cracker who thinks I give a shit

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Marx was correct in much of what he said about capitalism. He said that in a race to outproduce competitors, capitalists will drive the prices of raw materials and labor ever lower. We have seen this in the US textile and garment industry. Textiles and ready made clothing has left this country for the cheapest places, first Mexico, then El Salvador and Central America, then China, then Bangladesh. We can see this in the prices of clothing, particularly at the wholesale level. There is a race to the bottom for raw materials, which translates into cotton depleting the soil and water resources everywhere cotton is grown. The Aral Sea has almost entirely dried up because the water that used to keep it filled was diverted to grow cotton. Capitalism, Marx pointed out, is essentially suicidal, as at some point, the workers cannot survive on their low salaries and the land cannot produce the raw materials. This is followed by a collapsing economy.

 

Marx was never a political leader. He was a philosopher and theorist and his personal life is unrelated to his ideas.He lived the typical life of a lower middle class person in his times. It was not a happy life, but neither were the lives of those who shared his standard of living.

 

Marx was wrong about how the economic system would change human nature when equality was imposed by a dictatorship of the proletariat, He was a very important figure in the 20th Century and he had an enormous impact on the world. Americans think that the US won WWII in Europe, but this is simply untrue: most of the dying on both sides took place between the Nazis and the Soviets. Without the industrial strength that resulted from Lenin ans Stalin's running the USSR, Germany could not have been defeated. We know from history that the Czarist Russians were no match for the Germans in WWI.

 

If you have not read what Marx wrote, and you have not studied European history during the 1900's, you cannot understand his importance.

Guys like Trump do not know shit about history, Marx or anything else except self-promotion ans the myth of American Exceptionalism.

 

I don't embrace Marxism, not do most Democrats, but I do understand that Marx was a dedicated scholar and that his understanding of capitalism in his time was crucial to understanding economics today.

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...