Up To 80 House Dems Are Members Of The Communist Party.

[Carbizene]

...says Allen West.

Hopefully Palin and Cain get their way and West is chosen as VP and comedy writers can go back to sleep.

[Azrael]

...says Allen West.

Hopefully Palin and Cain get their way and West is chosen as VP and comedy writers can go back to sleep.

I wonder if Allen West is a closet case like McCarthy, too.

[Carbizene]

Such a drift from reality is indicative of a drift from one's reality.

[Hoosiernorm]

...says Allen West.

And the rest of them are goddamn marxist!@!

[Mr. Perfect]

Its way, way more than 80.

[Simple Minded]

Its way, way more than 80.

Yeah, pretty much all of them in both parties...... and most of the presidents of the last 60 years....

[Typhoon]

I would now like to call this meeting of the John Birch Society to order:



[bolsheviks ~ russian communists]

[Enki]

By the denuded terminology of the American right, isn't anyone who wants to work in Government a Communist now?

[Parodite]

By the denuded terminology of the American right, isn't anyone who wants to work in Government a Communist now?

Don't forget the banks. Full of commies. They rule us.

[Typhoon]

By the denuded terminology of the American right, isn't anyone who wants to work in Government a Communist now?

Don't forget the banks. Full of commies. They rule us.

Indeed.

The competition and risks of capitalism are wonderful . . . for the other guy . . .

[NapLajoieonSteroids]

I would now like to call this meeting of the John Birch Society to order:



[bolsheviks ~ russian communists]

This is one thing that the John Birch Society would have right in essence if not in form: Nobody with any sort of prominence on the Left today is a Communist. But all of them are anti-anti-Communists, because that is what they were taught and raised upon. Communism being taught as a strange off-shoot but one still for progress. At best they think of Communism as a mistake but that the anti-Communism of a Joe McCarthy or a Robert Welch is still too appalling; unlike communism itself, which wasn't. Which is why "McCarthyist" is a living insult, along with "fascist;" while "Communist," or any of its variants, is kind of dated and almost funny.

And we are all supposed to sit back and laugh at the person who commits this faux pas, because anyone who is anyone has moved on from the Communist phase, and we are all supposed to pretend that: 1) There isn't a connection between leftist factions, even though they all adhere to the "No enemy to the Left, no friend to the Right" principle. 2) That the United States hasn't been the biggest proponent of Communism/Radicalism/Liberalism/however you label it in the world and not only acted as an inspiration to the Bolsheviks (who we tried desperately to get along with) but that communism is one small part [never discredited] of the Progressive Experience and the Progressive Experience is a distinctly American product, so it is only natural that there would be an affinity to communism for a sizable portion of Americans.

[Enki]

This is one thing that the John Birch Society would have right in essence if not in form: Nobody with any sort of prominence on the Left today is a Communist. But all of them are anti-anti-Communists, because that is what they were taught and raised upon. Communism being taught as a strange off-shoot but one still for progress. At best they think of Communism as a mistake but that the anti-Communism of a Joe McCarthy or a Robert Welch is still too appalling; unlike communism itself, which wasn't. Which is why "McCarthyist" is a living insult, along with "fascist;" while "Communist," or any of its variants, is kind of dated and almost funny.

Communism is a wonderful thing. It's something Jesus and I agree upon.

What the Anti-Communists fight and justify mass slaughter over and was practiced by Mao and Stalin wasn't Communism in any way shape or form.

At the end of the day the Cold War was a way for cynical opportunists in the US to gain power by talking lavender about the cynical opportunists in Russia who were trying to gain power by talking lavender about the cynical opportunists in the US.

And we are all supposed to sit back and laugh at the person who commits this faux pas, because anyone who is anyone has moved on from the Communist phase, and we are all supposed to pretend that: 1) There isn't a connection between leftist factions, even though they all adhere to the "No enemy to the Left, no friend to the Right" principle. 2) That the United States hasn't been the biggest proponent of Communism/Radicalism/Liberalism/however you label it in the world and not only acted as an inspiration to the Bolsheviks (who we tried desperately to get along with) but that communism is one small part [never discredited] of the Progressive Experience and the Progressive Experience is a distinctly American product, so it is only natural that there would be an affinity to communism for a sizable portion of Americans.

The notion that the left is this big unified bloc is one of the most ridiculous superstitions that a wide proportion of the population believes.

Progressivism =/= Communism. It doesn't even resemble it.

[Zack Morris]

American liberlas tend to be anti-anti-Communist? Well, gee, maybe it's because your side of the aisle spent so much effort over the past few decades associating Western Europe and any non-military government program with "socialism" that Americans actually started to believe it. A lot of them look around and think "it's nice we have a government like this -- maybe socialism/communism did have some good ideas after all."

American anti-Communists now look a lot more horrifying than American "communists". Good job, Napoleon Dynamite. Leave it to the right wing to make Stalin and Mao look credible.

[Ibrahim]

By the denuded terminology of the American right, isn't anyone who wants to work in Government a Communist now?

Except soldiers.

[Simple Minded]

But all of them are anti-anti-Communists, because that is what they were taught and raised upon. Communism being taught as a strange off-shoot but one still for progress....... .

.... we are all supposed to pretend that: 1) There isn't a connection between leftist factions, even though they all adhere to the "No enemy to the Left, no friend to the Right" principle.

Well put. Bravo!

[NapLajoieonSteroids]

American liberlas tend to be anti-anti-Communist? Well, gee, maybe it's because your side of the aisle spent so much effort over the past few decades associating Western Europe and any non-military government program with "socialism" that Americans actually started to believe it. A lot of them look around and think "it's nice we have a government like this -- maybe socialism/communism did have some good ideas after all."

American anti-Communists now look a lot more horrifying than American "communists". Good job, Napoleon Dynamite. Leave it to the right wing to make Stalin and Mao look credible.

My side? Did you just tu quoque me? You're not making head or tails here....

Am I to believe that it was a bunch of dorks, drunks and outsiders who somehow convinced Americans to embrace something that comes naturally to them? After all, Communism is as American as Apple Pie. That somehow it was men like Joe McCarthy, whose name is still a living insult, who tipped the balance? He was so "scary" and "malicious" because he was pointing out actual communists, which was a feat in itself for a man who was too intoxicated to piss straight. Since the American Right has had no significant effect on domestic governance since 1932 [with the McCarthy exception/toleration] I wonder what right wing regime made "Stalin and Mao credible." (Is that really want you want to suggest? It's like saying: I wasn't for murder until I met X who convinced me that homicide could be credible.)

Or is it untoward to mention that we were kissing up to Stalin and the Bolsheviks up until they treated us like a spurned lover when they attempted to gain global dominance after the end of the war?

This is how the Roosevelt administration/USG really felt about the Soviets:



The Cold War was more like an Anglo-Soviet breakup. And those Soviets/communists still have a place in your heart obviously, 'cause you still get all hot and bothered about them. Again, how else am I supposed to take your "Mao and Stalin are credible dudes, dude" statement?

As I said before: The American Left is compromised of Anti-anti communists with no friends to the right and no enemies to the left; even long after it's clear that Communist atrocities met and exceeded those of the 20th century fascists; anti-anti-Communism remains both conventionally wise and respectable. It has never been even slightly disowned from the mainstream even as today there is no quarter given to, say, anti-anti-Fascism or anti-anti-Monarchy.

[NapLajoieonSteroids]

Communism is a wonderful thing. It's something Jesus and I agree upon.

You may think this platitude gives you the high ground but you come off sounding like an immature ass every time you post it.

What the Anti-Communists fight and justify mass slaughter over and was practiced by Mao and Stalin wasn't Communism in any way shape or form.

As yes, and there has yet to be a true Scotsman born from the Highlands to Edinburgh as well....

The notion that the left is this big unified bloc is one of the most ridiculous superstitions that a wide proportion of the population believes.

Progressivism =/= Communism. It doesn't even resemble it.

...of course it resembles it. Lenin was informed by Daniel DeLeon and the Socialist Labor Party of America. Bolshevism started out as Russian imitation of American Progressivism, something that is now a world-wide phenomenon.

Let me ask you this: If the left weren't a unifed bloc, why is it so easy for you to dismiss the Stalinists and Maoists from the party? Are we to believe that they weren't what they say they were- revolutionary parties meant to move their nations leftward? Or is it that the consensus no longer allows them into the club? And it is that consensus that provides the unity I'm speaking about?

The goal of all leftward parties is to remake everyone in their image, and naturally there is a disagreement on what that image is, or should be. But how many governments to the left have been opposed by the United States, the 'International Consensus,' or conventional domestic groups?

Why is it that Miami Marlins manager Ozzie Guillen gets a five game slap on the wrist for saying he admires and respects Fidel Castro but the late-owner of the Cincinatti Reds, in all her surly glory, gets suspended for four years for saying Hitler was an alright-kinda guy?

How many "Right-Wing" Governments, installed/supported by their own people, have their been since the end of WWI?

Imperial Japan
Nazi Germany
Mussolini's Italy
South Rhodesia
Apartheid South Africa
The Junta in Greece
Franco's Spain
Portugal for a period of time
Israel post-six day war

And how many of these have had any support of one of the above groups I mentioned? How many of them are been obliterated and resigned to the dustbin of history?

Israel is the only exception, and it isn't much of one. I don't think any Leftist groups today support Israel, which exists on purely racists grounds- the 'International Consensus" barely tolerates her, and the United States government's official policy is to make Israel give up land and money to the Palestinian cause- that hardly sounds like an endorsement.

Now granted, the majority (if not the whole) of the above mentioned are losers through and through. Fascism is a disease- a right-wing disease- that breaks out when the old Right is about to collapse. I'm not sure if any of them have been particularly defensible. What doesn't change though is that your Stalins and Maos and the like were losers as well who were for a time very embraceable by at least one of the above mentioned groups. This is precisely the kind of "bloc" that I'm talking about. As long as their is someone to the "right", no matter how little that means nowadays, there is no infighting between different groups working in the name of progress: Whether that be American Progressivism, British Internationalism, Soviet Bolshevism....

[noddy]

to really get some meat into this argument it would be nice to get stats for real tax rates across countries (and states for us federated mobs)
its a nice starting point for just how "socialist" each of us really are and how much its certain powerful groups abusing said power to make themselves richer.

its easy to get private income tax stats but the real rate also needs to include sales taxes, business taxes, compulsory fees and licenses,sin taxes, import taxes..

did it for australia during the late 90's and it was around 70-80% of the average income for an average person driving an average car and eating an average basket of food.

then you need to work out how much of that money actually makes it back out as services for the community versus maintaining government wages and corporate welfare and special interest groups (the standard complaints)

without all that, its just opinion and perception and likely to go nowhere... damn difficult job though, it takes ages to trawl through all the stats to find these little nuggets, anyone would think that certain people had an interest in making it so (snort)

[NapLajoieonSteroids]

to really get some meat into this argument it would be nice to get stats for real tax rates across countries (and states for us federated mobs)
its a nice starting point for just how "socialist" each of us really are and how much its certain powerful groups abusing said power to make themselves richer.

its easy to get private income tax stats but the real rate also needs to include sales taxes, business taxes, compulsory fees and licenses,sin taxes, import taxes..

did it for australia during the late 90's and it was around 70-80% of the average income for an average person driving an average car and eating an average basket of food.

then you need to work out how much of that money actually makes it back out as services for the community versus maintaining government wages and corporate welfare and special interest groups (the standard complaints)

without all that, its just opinion and perception and likely to go nowhere... damn difficult job though, it takes ages to trawl through all the stats to find these little nuggets, anyone would think the various government departments where making it so (snort)

I don't think taxes are a good starting point in determining how "socialists" any of us are. There are plenty of right-wing arguments for high taxes and many of the social programs that get labeled as being "communists/socialist/leftist."

The question to ask is: How many committees/people/bureaucracies have a say or have their hand in the pot of money you contribute to. Who is the sovereign and how is that sovereignty exercised? How many regulation committees must you acquire a license from if you want to build a new back porch?

Unlike what Zack Morris seems to think, I'm not on the right- I'm not too enthused by the conservatives, classical liberals, reactionaries or fascists. But I do think they bring up valid criticisms of what is on the modern left and I dislike that it is totally dismissed by cavils...a majority of people in our political class who congregate under the Democratic Party banner would probably qualify as socialist/communist in heart and mind. Just like the majority of our conservatives are further left than McCarthy/Lindburgh/Taft/Coolidge were. Every American has grown up on the ideas of 1920s Greenwich Village Bohemians and makes his or her peace from there. When someone like Allen West, who is one of those dorky outsiders I was speaking about earlier mentions it, his dorkiness doesn't make what he says less true, no matter how much of a faux pas it may be to mention it in polite company.

[noddy]

i was trying to get at that in the latter half of my dribble

[NapLajoieonSteroids]

i was trying to get at that in the latter half of my dribble.

i do think the real tax rate is part of the discussion, with all of it we have points of comparison for both OWS and TP arguments.

But what argument are they bringing to the table besides "Unanimity minus One, Now!"? It may oversimplifying their points, but both of them are saying, "Governance=bad" in their liberal-ish/conserve-ish type ways. And I'm saying: Hold on, isn't the opposite of bad governance good governance instead of no governance? And so who exactly is doing this governing? It's not the left with their endless processes and its not the right with its quasi-anarchy/survival of the fittest.

What am I missing here?

[Simple Minded]

My side? Did you just tu quoque me? You're not making head or tails here....

Actually.... I think he was trying to "too coo coo" you. IMO, seems to happen a lot on this forum with some people!

Or maybe it was an attempt to "too koo koo ka choo" you......Zack just might be the walrus......

[noddy]

i was trying to get at that in the latter half of my dribble.

i do think the real tax rate is part of the discussion, with all of it we have points of comparison for both OWS and TP arguments.

But what argument are they bringing to the table besides "Unanimity minus One, Now!"? It may oversimplifying their points, but both of them are saying, "Governance=bad" in their liberal-ish/conserve-ish type ways. And I'm saying: Hold on, isn't the opposite of bad governance good governance instead of no governance? And so who exactly is doing this governing? It's not the left with their endless processes and its not the right with its quasi-anarchy/survival of the fittest.

What am I missing here?

i suspect you arent missing much at all (heh) but the entire cultural viewpoint you are hinting at (or atleast i suspect you are) is not only dead, its taught as evil and responsible for all the worlds ills!

as such, i work with what i have, which is da power of the moot(!) and the wonders of facts as expressed via pretty graphs.

anything to avoid the endless communist russia versus anarchist somalia nonsense really... i cant see good governence on the horizon but "less" is an optimistic possibility.

[Enki]

Nap

It is not a no Tru Scotsman fallacy. Having a ruling elite that subjugates the masses is the opposite of Communism. It is as much a no true scotsman fallacy as saying a whale is not a shark.

Soviet government and the current American government are more similar than either is to Communism. If you disagree with me, you don't know what the word means.

And no, me pointing out that Jesus was in line with the actual meaning of communism is not immature. The American heresy that selfish profit seeking is good and treating every human being as your equal is evil, is diametrically opposed to what Christ actually taught.

[Enki]

The loaves and fishes is probably the most famous story of communism in action in all of history.