It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


"Progressive" is just a friendly name for COMMUNIST!

page: 7
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in


posted on Dec, 3 2009 @ 12:17 PM
Please explain to me how every single European country is communist, because if you believe US progressives are just "filthy, lying, communists" then you must believe that every Western European nation is a communist state. They are all far more progressive and liberal than progressives in the United States.

So when you see that the "Progressive" Obama Administration is full of Marxists you should realise that this is not an accident or negligence. This was intentional, because this is what the current administration believes is best for the USA. They think you would be better off in the collective. They think you would be happier if you were Communist. They seem to forget that Communism has failed over and over.

Wrong and you are completely brainwashed by your blatant GOP agenda that I see you spout day in and day out here on the boards.

The Obama administration has consistently moved wealth towards corporations and out of the hands of the middle class. If Obama really was about becoming a Communist state, that wealth would have been redistributed to the people. The TARP program would have consumed institutions and then redistributed their now massive earnings back to the people of the state. Instead, the government absorbed the losses of the corporations and then distributed wealth back upwards to the top earners in the nation.

You need to sit down and learn what the term "Fascism" means because that is what America's government, both Democrat and Republican, are exercising.

dictatorial movement: any movement, ideology, or attitude that favors dictatorial government, centralized control of private enterprise, repression of all opposition, and extreme nationalism


That is what the Democrats and Republicans have done to America, or did you forget that it was President Bush and Republican control that initiated the breakdown of our freedoms and wealth that Obama has continued? Just because this nation has the appearance of having two separate ideologies doesn't mean we actually do.

Welfare entitlements: Every single developed nation has them. Oh, I know the GOP voted against most of them, but guess who's supporting them now? Gee, it's conservatives in Congress who are trying to give 400 billion back to social entitlements that would be cut in the new healthcare bill.

As we all know Liberals like to make up super positive names for their most insane agendas. For example, they made murdering your baby all about the mothers choice instead of about the fact that her choice ends in the babies death.

Here's some fun ones from Conservatives:

"Separate but equal"

"Jim Crow Laws"

"Defense of Marriage"

"Compassionate Conservatism"

"Troubled Asset Relief Program"

I'm not going to get into an abortion debate with you, however, once you take biology in high school, you'll figure out that a fetus, zygote, embryo, etc. is not a baby, and abortion is not a euphemism.

posted on Dec, 3 2009 @ 12:18 PM
reply to post by ElectricUniverse

One more time : you think in term of ideology.

Communism is 95% like capitalism. ( i described in other post only 'small' difference )

The freedom of the market is a lie : there is not more freedom for the people.

Do you thing they use less indoctrinment in a capitalist country : oh oh, i need facts.

These two type use the same amount of energy to corrupt people.

The only difference is capistalism ( and hollywood) is really smarter at doing it : they let you think you are free, you have the power, you can change thing ( by electing a puppet) etc.

But you are the same slave.

What matter ( for the elite ) you must continu to accept their society, where THEY have the power, and they decid : and you got the crumb, and you must work for them.

This is the principle of a (bad) society.

The spirit of the founders of the modern undemocratic "democracy"

Let say you want to live free, in the way you want with your society, that's ok, (even in a communist country): but what happen if you want change a little the society : you will be killed ( and the fbi, cia will be near : like some worker syndicate)

[edit on 3-12-2009 by psychederic]

posted on Dec, 3 2009 @ 01:01 PM
Capitalism and Communism are all the same to poor people. Capitalism has businesses in control of politics and communism has politics control businesses. For the poor its the same old fascism.

In either system the poor and marginalized have no say in the workings of their own lives. This is because both systems are still based on money, labor and hierarchy.

To simply change the faces at the top of the pyramid still keeps the pyramid structure. When really society is really more like a sphere of interconnectedness. Our political and economic structures should represent that.

Communism and capitalism do not. They are still pyramidal forms of government and either way someone is telling you what to do in exchange for money.

To argue about the differences is simply to argue about the clothing that masks the fascist underneath. We will never be free under ANY system still based on money, labor and hierarchy.

posted on Dec, 3 2009 @ 01:07 PM

Originally posted by Avenginggecko
You need to sit down and learn what the term "Fascism" means because that is what America's government, both Democrat and Republican, are exercising.


Hotsauce is nothing but a fascist shill, doing his/her part to try and maintain the division of americans along party lines, intended to keep us focused on each other, and not the 2 party fascist scam that's robbing us all blind.

posted on Dec, 3 2009 @ 01:26 PM
It's clear that there's many "progressives" on ATS that are, understandably, quite offended by the OP's post. I believe you guys have been manipulated and indoctrinated into liberalism by those who seek to destroy everything America stands for so they can turn it into some sort of 1984ish, non-offensive, dystopia. Britain, sadly, is already well on its way to becoming "Air Strip One". It's most unfortunate, as Britain is the country closest to our own and I hate to see what is happening to them. They've been disarmed, there's CCTV cameras everywhere, and they can't even criticize a bizarre, dangerous minority that has invaded their society with the blessings of the far left, without being accused of "racism and xenophobia"(powerwords for the far-left). In this video i'm going to post, Yuri Bezmenov explains how the KGB planted agents in our educational system and their effects on the 60's. (I always have trouble with these, hope it works)

You guys need to understand that all of this so-called "progress" is regressive. Powerful nations aren't created because transvestism, free sex, drug abuse and various other social ills are cultivated and propped up by social programs and the government. Pandering to minorities which don't wish to integrate, but wish instead to create small enclaves resembling their former country, does not improve upon our culture or way of life. It slowly divides us and sets us up for destruction in total. Rome burned while their populace indulged in orgies.

posted on Dec, 3 2009 @ 01:29 PM
“Conservatives and “Individualists”(as if there is such as thing) hate Communism because they know the Communists liberated the poor and downtrodden of the earth even if they couldn’t deliver them from the poverty that Capitalism keeps them in.

Stalin did in little more than twenty years what the Christian church couldn’t do in 2000 years, even though one of the main mandates from their God was to aid and uplift the poor of the earth.
Not only did Stalin-- to the greatest degree and Mao to a lesser degree—aid and uplift the poor of the earth, he did it while at the same time taking a Nation of historical Surfs to the moon. At the same time everybody in that land was employed, housed, fed and clothed. At the same time he gave tremendous wealth, arms and manpower to South America and Africa, so they could fight to liberate themselves from slavery. At the same time he had no colonies or overseas plantations he was robbing and committing genocide in.

Those states around Russia that the Soviet Union controlled got more from Russia than the Russians ever got from them. And even then, most of that had to do with not allowing themselves be surrounded with client states by their ideological enemies.

I’m always hearing about how many people Stalin supposedly killed but we never hear about how many people were trying to kill Stalin—as if the only rabid, poor hating, selfish people, is in the U.S.
Russia had plenty of that type during the days of Stalin and they were trying to kill him and his life’s mission as hard as he was trying to kill them.

It’s funny how such people sincerely believe that they are the only ones who have the right to aspire, build and defend themselves and their visions for the world.

They can war and murder nonstop for their Individualism and Capitalism but when other people fight and kill for their visions—even in their own lands and space—it’s always the horror!, the horror!
Capitalism is a plague on the earth—that demon trying to pass itself off as angel of light as the bible will have it. Most people want to work for their bread. And everybody who wants to work should be able to. But full employment is an impossibility under the greed of the Capitalist system and everybody knows it. Yet it don’t keep the Capitalists from lying and blaming and hating.

If individualism is so valued, how come people can’t express their political view peacefully as Communists without getting gun downed in the streets like what happened a few years ago in South Carolina? Nobody was punished for that in the land of the Individual.
This aint no land of Individualism. This is a land of all mine. When I’m in the risk of failing, all the sacrosanct myths, rules and doctrine change, so I never lose. So there’s never any risk of me trumpeting on about a system that is as evil as any hell for most people.

Communism is the right of man and it’s the natural condition of man to live and thrive in.
It always has been and it will be again.
All Aboriginal and Indigenous people lived a communal way of life.

Another thing; Communism is the only system that can achieve such things as universal health care, space exploration and full employment without sucking off the rest of the world and keeping the majority of Mankind in the dirt. It’s because everybody works together to make whatever they do a success and they satisfy themselves with enough.

People want to try to credit five years of Capitalism for the success of China as if the fifty years that Communism put into building that Nation and unifying those people was some kind of mirage.

Yeah Capitalism and Individualism is always going to be the best system for the few.

But everybody on this earth has a right to a decent existence.

And I’m not going to pussyfoot around and call it Socialism, Progressivism, Christianity, or none of that. I’m going to call it what it is because there is absolutely nothing wrong with it, or its label.


posted on Dec, 3 2009 @ 01:31 PM
I suggest everyone ignore our foolish friend and not justify this stupidity with trying to explain our communist ways to him. Neocons have destroyed the country and this is their way to reform their image and regain legitimacy in the political square. "NEOCONS are not conservatives!!!"
- and why did you vote for it twice? Why did Ronald have neocons crawling all over his administration??? Hotsauce and his whole crew of ATS neocons have it pretty good really - Their ideas and party RUINED the country, they don't really care, can blame the whole thing on other peoples ideas. Anyhow my neoconservative friends,
you neoconservatives are good at politics and you have uncovered our plans.

posted on Dec, 3 2009 @ 01:32 PM
COMMUNISM is the breath, life and inalienable right of this man/woman species.
Nobody is supposed to be living like the majority of the people on this earth lives—begging and stressed out from cradle to grave.

The only thing you have to do is somehow get some decent people to rise in leadership positions.
Which is the real, and almost imposible task for any system

posted on Dec, 3 2009 @ 01:34 PM
And freedom's just another word for nothing left to lose.

posted on Dec, 3 2009 @ 01:37 PM
reply to post by 222938

You guys need to understand that all of this so-called "progress" is regressive. Powerful nations aren't created because transvestism, free sex, drug abuse and various other social ills are cultivated and propped up by social programs and the government. Pandering to minorities which don't wish to integrate, but wish instead to create small enclaves resembling their former country, does not improve upon our culture or way of life. It slowly divides us and sets us up for destruction in total. Rome burned while their populace indulged in orgies.

Awesome, someone who believes Conservatism = Theocracy and Apartheid. You are so incredibly uneducated on the subject matter.

You did bring a quite a chuckle, though. I hadn't realized those transvestites were the ones who toppled empires.

Rome burned while their populace indulged in orgies

And it thrived while their population indulged in orgies, sacrificed cows to pagan gods, and experimented with same sex relationships. Rome fell because it spread itself too thin, treated their conquered territories poorly, allowed nepotism and dictators control the empire, and let Christianity take hold in society.

Sound familiar? None of the above has to do with progressives. It has everything to do with keeping the power in the elite of society.

posted on Dec, 3 2009 @ 01:42 PM

Originally posted by ElectricUniverse
reply to post by Angus123

You have made your opinions well known several times, and I have never seen any mods suppress you in any way...

I have also seen you to love to ask "how has Obama taken away any rights" and then you run away from the thread when people post a long list with excerpts, and links to laws which President Obama signed, not to mention the videos he has made telling people in general that they shouldn't have a choice.... From telling an old lady "you might be better continuing to take your pills, than getting treatments, and or operations even if the doctors say it might help you" to Mandatory Community Service, and laws like H.R. 1388...

You are clearly confused. I think I'd remember if I saw any proof of the rubbish you're shoveling. And I have been censored many times.
But I didn't refer to myself being censored, I said OTHER PEOPLE. I guess you missed that part.

I've never seen anyone provide a link to any law Obama has signed taking away any rights. And the Congress writes the laws, and debates them before they even make it to the president's desk. But to hear you talk he's a unitary executive. Wait... where have I heard that phrase before? Oh yes... that was the guy before him.

So step up... let's see this video where he says people shouldn't have a choice. Let's see these draconian laws you're so certain exist and since you know SO MUCH about them I want to see the HR numbers that went with them.

posted on Dec, 3 2009 @ 01:45 PM

Originally posted by Avenginggecko
reply to post by 222938

Awesome, someone who believes Conservatism = Theocracy and Apartheid. You are so incredibly uneducated on the subject matter.

I appreciate your attempt to deflect and distort my statement into some theocratic boast while calling me uneducated on the matter. Please, explain to me, what makes me uneducated about this? Do I not understand the shining liberal truth that you have been fed by Oprah and Dr. Phil? Typical leftist tactics. Discredit your opponent and raise yourself up as the ultra-elite educated superior.

You did bring a quite a chuckle, though. I hadn't realized those transvestites were the ones who toppled empires.

Are you sure you actually read my post, or did you just skim over it and pick out key words that offended your leftist sensibilities professor? Why don't you school me on this miss. You claim that I plan to segregate people in some strange form of apartheid, when I stated that these people move in and segregate themselves into small enclaves. My suggestion was to incorporate them into the national fabric, instead of insulating them in backwards ghettos the way the liberals enjoy doing. You clearly have no understanding of the matter beyond what you've read in Newsweek.

posted on Dec, 3 2009 @ 01:52 PM
I believe it is better to be divided under many leaders then be united under a dictator. If you have division, chances are one of those leaders will oppose dictatorship. If you have unity, all you need is one corrupt leader to ruin it for everyone. The division of countries is necessary because you will always have a country curbing a worldwide domination.

posted on Dec, 3 2009 @ 01:53 PM
reply to post by 222938

Dude... Dr. Phil is a die-hard conservative and personal friend of Bush.
Although I did read an article about how he once got drunk and tried to hit on Jane Fonda.
Of course... you'd have to be wasted out of your mind to hit on Jane Fonda, lol.

posted on Dec, 3 2009 @ 01:54 PM
Since this is a conspiracy web site I'm going to throw it into this thread since I can't waste my time on political pandering left, right or otherwise.

Why because I read, and think for myself not necessarily listening to what I'm fed over the brainwashing tube conduit, the mainstream media.

The facts don't lie and Historically , since 1952 , almost all of our presidents ,Republicans and Democrats , have been members of the Council on Foreign Relations.

Both Obama AND McCain included.

What does this have to do with COMMUNISTS ? Well what that transpires to even though we have term limits, those in control have not changed. Dubya couldn't have put it better in that the Constitution is just a goddamned piece of paper !

They choose the actors, we call presidential candidates, assign them their role as coke or pepsi and hand them their marching orders.

All in all , even though we have progressives in office now, the Republicans have dominated POTUS for the last 40 years. Thats 28 years of Republican presidents vs 12 years of Democrats. Percentage wise thats approximately 60% Republican vs 40% Democrats.

After 40 years of this Are we really any better off ? Did the Dollar just begin falling since the Progressives were in office ? From my perspective only the rich have benefitted over the past 40 years with a shrinking middle class due to the steady loss of jobs being shipped overseas. Jobs shipped overseas to maintain profits to the wealthy stockholders as well as plenty of wars to boost the bottom line of he military industrial complex.

Eisenhower warned us about this.....JFK warned us as well and here we are 50 years later with the Obama puppet incensing the people in order to fill the Halliburton constructed internment camps for systematic population control.

Please Read this article about the connection between the presidency and CFR and Trilateral Commission.

posted on Dec, 3 2009 @ 01:58 PM

Originally posted by Angus123
reply to post by 222938

Dude... Dr. Phil is a die-hard conservative and personal friend of Bush.
Although I did read an article about how he once got drunk and tried to hit on Jane Fonda.
Of course... you'd have to be wasted out of your mind to hit on Jane Fonda, lol.

I'll admit, I've never actually watched Dr. Phil. I just assumed he talked about the same types of things Oprah and Tyra Banks spend their time rambling about. My point is that this girl has accused me of being "incredibly uneducated on the matter", yet she did nothing but talk about how apparently stupid I am and proved none of my statements wrong. It's typical far-left tactics and you know it. Deflect, deflect, deflect.

posted on Dec, 3 2009 @ 02:01 PM
reply to post by HotSauce

Isnt that exactly what we have happening now in our "Quasy Capitalist" system? Souless, psychopathic corporation acting soley for the bottom line?

Im not going to get into communist/capitalist debate but the current system is far from working for the middle class...or whats left of it. Major metropolitan populations are being stripped of their cultural identity and reprogramned as slaves consumers to a few powerful elite.

If you wont work 65 hours a week for a pitance with the worst healthcare system and worst vacation benifits in the modern world we'll just import someone from india who will.

posted on Dec, 3 2009 @ 02:07 PM

Originally posted by Electricneo

I never said the history of the Republican party was formed with that goal
as you say.

I am saying that contemporary Republicans lack compassion and have voted against everything from Civil rights legislation in the 1960's, they voted against social security, they are voting against health care and helping the poor yet they always vote yes to blow up children in other countries with bombs.

Republicans are totally Satanic-no doubt about it.
Jesus always helped the poor.
republicans follow Satan every step of the way all the way
down to hell. War is hell.

Sorry buddy, but somehow you have been reading the revisionist version of history. In actuality it was the Democrats that stood opposed to these things, and the Republicans that championed them.

Many people do not know that the civil rights movement was first started by Republicans. Professors and the media today gloss over the fact that when Republicans freed the slaves under President Lincoln, it was Democrats standing opposed. When the vote came to Congress on Emancipation Proclamation, every single democrat voted against it, while every republican voted in favor of it. It was republican principles, ideals and blood that was spent to free the slaves. It was republicans that lead the effort to pass the 13th Amendment officially making slavery constitutionally outlawed. It was the Democratic Party that stood opposed. Republicans passed the first Civil Right Act legally extending citizenship and equal right to all, regardless of race. The Republicans passed the 14th Amendment requiring all states to give due process of law, and equal protection of the laws to all races. Every single Republican voted in favor, while every democrat opposed.

Every single African-American Congressmen until 1935 was a Republican. The first African-American governor was a republican. Colin Powell was the first African-American National Security Advisor and Secretary of State. Condoleezza Rice was the first woman to serve as the National Security Advisor. The first Hispanic governor was a Republican. The first Hispanic US Senator was a Republican. The first Asian American US Senator was a Republican. The first Asian American Federal Judge was a Republican. The first woman elected to Congress was a Republican. Secretary of Labor under Bush, Elaine Chao, amazingly was the first Asian American woman in any president’s cabinet. The first women allowed to be delegates to a national convention were Republicans. The first Republican Supreme Court Justice was republican Sandra Day O’Connor, who before that was also the first woman in any state to be the Majority Leader in the Legislature.

Republicans led the movement for women’s right to vote, and as a party the democrats opposed this right. Every leader of the early feminist movement were Republicans, including Susan B. Anthony, Lucretia Mott, and Elizabeth Cady Stanton. Two of the leading African-American suffragists, Ida Wells and Mary Terrell were Republicans, and also were co-founders of the NAACP.

It was Republicans that integrated professional sports. Brooklyn Dodgers General Manager Branch Rickey was an outspoken supporter of race integration and Republican, as was Jackie Robinson. Those most outspoken to sports integration were southern democrats.

The Brown v. Board of Education Supreme Court decision was written by a Republican Chief Justice appointed by Republican President Dwight Eisenhower. That Republican Chief Justice, Earl Warren, was a three-term Republican Governor in California, and was the Republican nominee for Vice President of the United States in 1948. Roughly three years after this Supreme Court ruling, President Eisenhower won passage of the Civil Rights Act of 1957. The important thing to note here is that Eisenhower was the first Republican President in four administrations. Democrats controlled the White House for four administrations and did not pass a single civil rights bill. Not one. It was U.S. Senator Everett Dirksen that authored and introduced the 1960 Civil Rights Act. Individually he was the most responsible for the passage of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as he was the Republican leader who crafted the strategy that overcame long odds and tenacious Democratic opposition to the Bill. After all, it was entirely democrats that filibustered the Bill and it was Dirksen that overcame them. When the Bill was finally passed it received significantly more support from Republicans than Democrats.

In 1976 it was republican President Ford who repealed democratic President F. Roosevelt’s now infamous executive order interning 120,000 Japanese Americans during World War II. None of the numerous democrat Presidents before him felt it necessary and democrats role in the interning has been glossed over.

[edit on 3-12-2009 by johnny2127]

posted on Dec, 3 2009 @ 02:13 PM
I believe the most impostant message for people on earth these days is that to be an individual means to have be able to choose your course of actions, to be able to choose how you really feel about something, to be able to choose the things you believe in.

The purpose of attempted denial of individuality is for the purpose of denying choice, denying beliefs and being tethered financially, emotionally and physically to serving the purpose of organisations who are hiding allegiance to dark motives.

The reason for this is because they are scared, they are scared if people really knew the truth they would leave them and would have self rule and would no longer be in allegiance to them, no longer tethered to them.

There are things far greater and more powerful than these organisations which these dark force alleagiance organisations CANNOT control so they tried denying them, tried saying ''nope it's only humanity, only planet earth
and all you need do is be a 'good citizen', stay in line and do as you're told'' which we all know is lying.

Now they have moved to tethering those areas of earth where there was some individuality, and making them corporate slaves too with the premise of 'shafting the west' as bait.

Add to that the general smoke screen of 'wars' and terrorism as an attempt at clouding reality and you got a picture of a euphemistic example like a kid who pretends to other kids they got all the power ''mom said I am in charge'' and ''I have all the toys and you aren't getting any'' who so wants to keep control they lie ''if you take that toy I will tell'' ''if you don't do as I say it's breaking the rules'', that fears mom (higher power) walking in and telling the truth, equally distributing the toys and taking power from 'control freak kid'.

Do the 'governments' know extra terrestrial life exists -YES!
Would the 'governments' retain the same control if they admitted this- PROBABLY NOT!
Would people demand answers and realise there is a greater power to which they could / should have allegiance - PROBABLY YES!
Would 'governments' like this - PROBABLY NOT!
Do individuals have the right to believe in something they know to be true? - YES!
Would the company you work for / the 'government' agree to this? - PROBABLY NOT!

'Government' and corporate control freakery has to stop, the objective of any governance should be in the interests of those it governs and should be based on reality.

posted on Dec, 3 2009 @ 02:14 PM
I honestly don't know why people respond to these TROLL threads it is humanities INTEREST to be "progressive" if it wasn't for progressives like benjimen franklin and george washington who would have freed the slaves granted benjimen Did have a slave of his own but thats beside the point. 300 years ago anyone trying to free the slaves would have been hung drawn and quartered.

However nowadays pritty much anyone trying to own a slave would be looked down upon by society and ridiculed as "lazy" or incompetant not to mention possibly labled as a racist depending on the color of the slave.

As stated in dawkins book The God Dellusion the further you go back in history the more people were racist, intolerant, ignorant or just didn't care about other colors and likely the more years that pass SINCE dawkins wrote his book the more accepting we will become (yes i'm talking to you steriotypical version of the deep south

Perhaps it should not be "one mans junk is another mans treasure" perhaps it should be "one mans communist is the other mans communist" right....WRONG there are many different types of communist from stalinists to trotskyists to marxists to leninists. Now personally I can't stand stalinists or mao or kim jong ill or anyone that thinks it's a good idea to kill millions of people and justify it as "one mans death is a tragedy one million deaths is a statistic"

so let me know what you think you dirty commies
j/k you guys are ok

new topics

top topics

<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in