Communist Party of the USA endorses Obama in 2012

[Velho]

The mechanism is the collectivist ideology. Even in a Republic like ours, you can see how collectivism can permeate it and gradually change it. If you haven't seen this series of clips on individualism vs. collectivism, please watch? Clip two speaks directly to what I propose.

Thanks, I will watch these once I have the time.

 

[Deborah K]

Please do, they're only about 5-8 minutes each. Watch number 2 first? And squeeze the rest in when you can. It will give you a good idea of how most of the established forum members think about the topic of communism, socialism, etc. Most know who Ed Griffin is, and believe in the individualist philosophy.

Thanks, and welcome to the forums, btw.

 

[AlexAmore]

I think that everyone is forgetting that China is "communist" country.
When they absorb us, we will be too.

I think that you threw them a bone with that email.

I'm not so sure. China is not a utopia by anybody's definition. Communist party of USA is allegedly for the little man. China is not for the little man, they excessively execute for non violent crimes. They have censorship, they have repression. No trials for many...

They just don't realize in the long run power corrupts.

 

[Warrior_of_Freedom]

I'm not so sure. China is not a utopia by anybody's definition. Communist party of USA is allegedly for the little man. China is not for the little man, they excessively execute for non violent crimes. They have censorship, they have repression. No trials for many...

They just don't realize in the long run power corrupts.

Utopia can only be achieved when ~30% of people's production isn't put to military. It doesn't help anyone's health or well being.

 

[pcosmar]

Please read the rest of the sentence.

I read the whole sentence. And the other sentences.
I reject socialism in entirety. Yet it is a reality and has infected most of the world and the US.
I oppose it.

 

[teacherone]

I'm not so sure. China is not a utopia by anybody's definition. Communist party of USA is allegedly for the little man. China is not for the little man, they excessively execute for non violent crimes. They have censorship, they have repression. No trials for many...

They just don't realize in the long run power corrupts.

collectivism always ends in the gulags.

 

[Pro-Life Libertarian]

Republicans need to capitalize on this endorsement more than they did last time. Put in TV ads and show them how far left Obama is.

 

[Velho]

Please do, they're only about 5-8 minutes each. Watch number 2 first? And squeeze the rest in when you can. It will give you a good idea of how most of the established forum members think about the topic of communism, socialism, etc. Most know who Ed Griffin is, and believe in the individualist philosophy.

Thanks, and welcome to the forums, btw.

Ok, I watched the second part. I pretty much agree with everything that it says, and it mostly applies to modern social democracy. Social democracy is in simple terms collectivism for the benefit of the individual. In such societies there is a general consensus that the whole has to protect the individual. The main difference (most likely, by what the last seconds of the video said) comes from the fact, that in a social democracy the population grants the government the right to enact laws that basically force the majority (in taxes) to subsidize the minorities. And here the differing opinions about the role of government and the definition of freedom and responsibility of the individual towards the minorities comes to play. And just to make sure I'm not misunderstood, I'm not saying that America should adopt ANY form of socialism, it is not my place to dictate that. I am simply trying to explain how the different systems work.

 

[awake]

That still does not tell me how it's all gonna end up in communism, since you can't draw straight lines like that in complex social and economic issues

Can you tell me which deal that was so I can read what it's all about.

In the end, as Ron Paul has talked about, it's about what people think the role of government should be. If the majority of the population wants to move toward a more social democratic system then there's no stopping them. Blah somehow this got into a socialism-in-America kind of discussion while I began talking about socialism as a whole.

Ron Paul is correct; it is what people think the proper role of government is. The fact of the matter is that something like Obamacare passed in spite of near overwhelming opposition - tell me where the people were on that one? It still stands in force just like the Patriot Act. Even after the ballots flushed the old for the new. We are proceeding in incremental steps...Crises precedes the legislation, with constant conditioning and endless sophism to help make the next timid steps. Democracy is not a safe guard, it is the means to achieve further socialization through progressive installment plans.

We will never see communism in the Marxist sense in the world we live in. The bloody attempts in the 20th century to achieve it ground society like hamburger - even the psychopaths could see that it was not going to work - they ran out of bullets. National socialism and Stalin's "communism" were not the true end, they simply were "transitional stages". Both plans (really one in the same) only achieved a high degree of socialism.

Everyone makes the mistake by assuming the idea of communism failed, it only failed in these particular attempts. The ideas are still very much alive and well and in wait for the proper atmosphere from which to grow again. And it won't be wearing the old garb and slogans - that is for sure.

In about 350 years of gulags and mass murder we would get to communism - Marx himself described it that way. Marx used the terms socialism and communism interchangeably. Regardless of the terminology, the program would require that all non believers be liquidated and those not marked as trash would have to be trained to act against their own nature - the "new socialist man".

 

[ChaosControl]

So the communist party is corporatist too?
Wow. So where would the anti-corporatist left go? Green party?

 

[Uncle Emanuel Watkins]

While not a communist myself, I do see the benefits in utilizing a new brand of American communism.
First, let's review the timeline giving rise to communism:

1) George Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel (1770 - 1831): In order to be free, the people need to own property.
2) Karl Heinrich Marx (from 1818 to 1883): a social and political scientist who defined how society works not in unison, but as a result of conflict. "Capitalism" is a relationship between the owning "bourgeoisie," the wealthy middle and upper classes, and the proletariat, the workers. People would gain the necessary property to be free when tensions ultimately led to the old social structure being destroyed and replaced by a new system of socialism. This socialism would evolve over time into a stateless and classless system called pure communism.
3) Uncle Emanuel Watkins (from 1958 to present): Watkian communism has won many posititive +refs in the political forum rating system as it believes that socialism should only be utilized and applied to the banking industry. As the conservative endeavor of banking and the liberl endeavor of the social communist system are extremes at each far end of the political spectrum, combining the two should result in the destruction of the other for the benefit of mankind. As banking has had to be bailed out numerous times by the American people, so, the industry should now be declared as part of the United States government and regulated as such. While the endeavor of banking should exist to serve the people, the money paid to each communist employee working in the industry should be fair and equal.
An example of fair and equal pay:
Yearly pay of Bank CEO: $25,000 (no benefits).
Yearly pay of middle manager: $24,500 (no benefits).
Yearly pay of Janitor: $24,000 (no benefits).