Of marxists, socialists, eco-terrorists and other Neo-Coms

reply to post by Skyfloating


Wrong concept. 3D concept. You must think as a multidimensional being in order to understand multidimensional concepts. ONE is many. This is how ONE creates, from the self of ONE into the many but all as still ONE. The infinate facets of the ONE, all created by the firsts and then the seconds who begot billions who begot trillions. We are each of us the whole hive and each of its parts and particles in entirety and in unique individuality. And still we are a part of more. Much more

reply to post by tothetenthpower


Again. 3 dimensional thinking for a multidimensional problem.

Originally posted by maria_stardust
So, by your logic, emotion and empathy are negative traits that will ultimately lead to chaos, and hence mankind's destruction. Seriously?

The resentment alluded to in the OPs analysis has proven to be a destructive Emotion throughout History. Empathy has proven to be a constructive Emotion throughout History.

reply to post by woodwardjnr


They raise CHE flags because Che is the archetype of REVOLUTION! He is the unyielding spirit of the spirit of freedom that will not die. They try to snuff it out but it will always remain, undefeatable. "Better to die on your feet than to spend the eons on your knees" E.G. We will stand for no more. No one must pass though onto the guillotine's of this modern age. Not a drop of blood should be shed. No tear cried. Think about it. Embrace it. It's a wave, a cosmic wave. Ride it. Go with it.

Originally posted by HUMBLEONE


Wrong concept. 3D concept. You must think as a multidimensional being in order to understand multidimensional concepts. ONE is many. This is how ONE creates, from the self of ONE into the many but all as still ONE. The infinate facets of the ONE, all created by the firsts and then the seconds who begot billions who begot trillions. We are each of us the whole hive and each of its parts and particles in entirety and in unique individuality. And still we are a part of more. Much more

I dont disagree with this - but it has little relation to any of the specifics raised in the OP. You demand that I do not seperate - but the joy of coming back together can only be experienced by first seperating.Many parts of the puzzle, from one view it is many parts, from another view it is one.

If all is ONE anyway, seperation should not make you as uncomfortable as it apparently does.

Originally posted by HUMBLEONE
They raise CHE flags because Che is the archetype of REVOLUTION! He is the unyielding spirit of the spirit of freedom that will not die. They try to snuff it out but it will always remain, undefeatable. "Better to die on your feet than to spend the eons on your knees" E.G. We will stand for no more. No one must pass though onto the guillotine's of this modern age. Not a drop of blood should be shed. No tear cried. Think about it. Embrace it. It's a wave, a cosmic wave. Ride it. Go with it.

Since you were saying I should not seperate...you do realize Che was a Seperatist-to-the-Max, yes?

I guess its not OK for me to "seperate", but it is OK for Che to do so...

reply to post by maria_stardust


Im wondering if you'd still be concerned about Stereotyping if I had created an OP about another group than the far-left.

Originally posted by tothetenthpower
We all know that left vs right is a fairy tale that exists only to dilude the masses into thinking there is a side that is better than another.

Yes, however this insight is often used on this site and in Blogosphere in general to dismiss examining the specific types of evil of both of these sides. Right-wing evil is very different than left-wing evil.

And from what I can see, they go widely unnoticed by all the smart folk here.

Originally posted by Skyfloating
The resentment alluded to in the OPs analysis has proven to be a destructive Emotion throughout History. Empathy has proven to be a constructive Emotion throughout History.

Forgive me if I disagree with the fundamental basis of the OPs analysis, and say that the premise is decidedly lacking integrity.

For instance, take your analysis of oppression. It makes a mockery of very real phenomenas that do, indeed, exist. To allude that any of the groups you used in your example have not suffered from any form of oppression borders upon ridiculous. It's much to easy to bandy about terms such as self-determination and free-will and use that as a justification to deny any form of oppression has ever occurred.

Your examples of Oprah and Obama as proof positive that oppression doesn't occur is pretty thin. We all know that there are shining exceptions to every rule, and these two individuals are that exception in this case.

Does that mean that all minorities, or women, or workers are oppressed? Of course, not. But that doesn't mean that historically it hasn't been the case, and in some instances, still remains so. After all, the proverbial glass ceiling isn't just a myth. There is more than a grain of truth present to suggest that oppression does occur even in the present day.

I won't go through the entire list featured in your analysis, for I have neither the time nor inclination to do so. However, your entire analysis is based upon negativity and the belittling -- through over simplification -- of ideologies that don't mesh with your own.

Ideals such as "freedom from oppression", social justice and the embracement of social causes are generally viewed as positive things. In fact, it would be safe to say that all of these ideals are based upon empathetic notions of fairness and equity. And as you so graciously pointed out, empathy is both a positive and constructive emotion.

To demonize these ideals only shows that you're overall assessment is somewhat lacking in the end.

Im wondering if you'd still be concerned about Stereotyping if I had created an OP about another group than the far-left.

On the contrary, stereotypes for the far-right exist, as well. The term "capitalist pig" comes to mind.

Does that make it right? Of course, not.

The truth of the matter is I am a moderate and embrace ideals from both sides of the political spectrum. I believe this is where most peoples ideals lay. I just don't agree with the way you seem to be perpetuating the polarization of political views by demonizing one side over the other. There is no need to deepen the divide when we should actively seek ways to meet in the middle.

Well, I appreciate that you actually address specific points brought up. Afterall, thats the point of civil Internet Discussion.

Originally posted by maria_stardust
For instance, take your analysis of oppression. It makes a mockery of very real phenomenas that do, indeed, exist.

Oppression exists. For example, modern day India still oppresses blacks. Iran still oppresses homosexuals. A majority of leftist literature makes no mention of these instances of Oppression but instead chooses to focus on America being the center of world Oppression.

Feminism for example, pretends that Oppression of Women is widespread, not an Exception. Feminist literature specifically and repeatedly refers to our society as a "Patriarchy" that is specifically set-up to dominate and oppress women.

Your examples of Oprah and Obama as proof positive that oppression doesn't occur is pretty thin. We all know that there are shining exceptions to every rule, and these two individuals are that exception in this case.

Blacks arent oppressed in America. Of all the countries in the world, America is where they shine the brightest because they are the least oppressed and can get an Education.

There is more than a grain of truth present to suggest that oppression does occur even in the present day.

Most "minority" groups can easily stand up for themselves in modern America and Europe. And in cases in which they dont, this is not always the fault of some "oppressor". 9 times out of 10 Im responsible for my life.

Ideals such as "freedom from oppression", social justice and the embracement of social causes are generally viewed as positive things. In fact, it would be safe to say that all of these ideals are based upon empathetic notions of fairness and equity.

What is "social justice"? What do you mean by "fairness"?

If someone has no money it is not generally the fault of some "oppressor" but the responsibility of that person. There are exceptions such as wartorn countries or people with a disablity, children and people of old age. But other than that...where do you get the idea of "Oppression"?

If I force you to work by holding a gun to your face, that could be seen as Oppression. But how often does that occur? And even here it would be your responsibility to report me to the police and have me arrested.

reply to post by Skyfloating

A majority of leftist literature makes no mention of these instances of Oppression but instead chooses to focus on America being the center of world Oppression.

This is worded rather vaguely. First of all, what construes leftist literature? What makes you confident that the majority of this literature focuses solely upon the U.S.?

It seems to me that you’re basing your opinion – which in reality, is all it is – upon your gut feeling, as opposed to actual statistics and facts.

Furthermore, it seems highly unlikely that hardly anyone would truly envision the U.S. as the center of world oppression – again, a personal opinion that is not necessarily rooted in any verifiable fact. It is nothing more than your perspective.

In fact, it would probably be a safe bet to say that oppression takes place worldwide and is more prevalent in certain areas than in others. So, we can establish that oppression is not limited to only the U.S., it is also most assuredly not the epicenter of it. Call it a hunch based upon logical reasoning on my part.

Feminism for example, pretends that Oppression of Women is widespread, not an Exception. Feminist literature specifically and repeatedly refers to our society as a "Patriarchy" that is specifically set-up to dominate and oppress women.

The mere suggestion that patriarchy does not exist in today’s society, whether at the home front or in the workforce is absurd. For the most part women are considered the main caregivers in their families – even in cases were both parents work.

When discussing sexual promiscuity, men are considered virile while women are considered whores. Let’s not even delve into the issue of domestic violence.

By and large, statistics show that there is still an identifiable wage gap that exists between the sexes. The trend remains that men still earn more for the same jobs and skill sets than women. More men are in corporate executive positions than women. Men hold more political seats of power than women.

Gender bias still exists and is not a figment of the collective female imagination.

Blacks arent oppressed in America. Of all the countries in the world, America is where they shine the brightest because they are the least oppressed and can get an Education.

Ethnic minorities still face forms of oppression in America. All one has to do is observe the backlash that immigrants from the Middle East experienced directly after 9/11 and are still facing to a lesser extent today.

Another glaring example can be found in the issue of immigration where Hispanics are prominently featured as a convenient scapegoat for many of the economic ills facing this nation. It easy for many to say they’re only referring to illegal immigrants. The problem resides in the fact that the only way to ascertain citizenship is actually check for proper identification. However, many Americans feel that they shouldn’t have to prove they’re citizens – only people who appear to be illegal immigrants should be checked. When judgments are passed strictly on appearance, the ability to speak English or the fact that they happen to have a Hispanic surname – well, that certainly qualifies as a form of oppression.

That’s not to say that the issue of illegal immigration isn’t problematic in the U.S. Unfortunately, the issue has created a needless backlash that has resulted in the stigmatization of certain segments of our society based upon race.

What is "social justice"? What do you mean by "fairness"?

Sometimes it is necessary for the good of the community to have certain basic necessities, such as a solid public education system, affordable housing and access to affordable healthcare.

There is no reason why people should have to choose between putting food on the table, or keeping a roof over their head or paying for life-saving medication.

There is no good reason why homosexuals should be denied recognition in marriages and civil unions. Nor why they should be denied entry into the military based solely upon their sexual orientation.

That is not a “cry baby” mentality, as you so laconically put it. These social issues deserve to be treated with a sense of fairness, empathy and justice.

There are exceptions such as wartorn countries or people with a disablity, children and people of old age. But other than that...where do you get the idea of "Oppression"?

I’ve pointed out several areas in society where various forms of oppression occur – some of it is subtle, some of it is not quite so.

That said, there is no good reason to resort to negative stereotypes in an effort to justify the denigration of entire segments of society.

I ask you: Is resorting to these kinds of stereotypes truly a necessity to ensure "mankind's survival"?

Sadly, answers to society’s ills will not be found at either the extreme-left or extreme-right of the political spectrum – at one end reigns tyranny and other anarchy. There is nothing wrong with seeking answers, both fairly and justly, in middle ground.

Originally posted by HUMBLEONE
With a wide brush you paint this work of disinformation. You attack the victims of this travesty with the same spool of lies given forward by your masters. These lies that try to perpetuate separation. Know you not that we are ONE. We are forever ONE. Look down in your sorry heart and clear away the dust. Let shine the divine spark and join us forever the one.

Like the man said....neo-com. "victims of this travesty"...talk about wide stupid brush. Obama stimulus....billions to his voter base....buy a vote the good ol neo-com way.

Originally posted by maria_stardust
reply to post by Skyfloating

 

A majority of leftist literature makes no mention of these instances of Oppression but instead chooses to focus on America being the center of world Oppression.

This is worded rather vaguely. First of all, what construes leftist literature? What makes you confident that the majority of this literature focuses solely upon the U.S.?

It seems to me that you’re basing your opinion – which in reality, is all it is – upon your gut feeling, as opposed to actual statistics and facts.

.

Hay dont make me break out facts and figures about death and killing under communist controled nations over the last 100 years. Thats not opinion but fact. And yet they have the gas to go on over the years about american "oppression".

Originally posted by Logarock
Hay dont make me break out facts and figures about death and killing under communist controled nations over the last 100 years. Thats not opinion but fact. And yet they have the gas to go on over the years about american "oppression".

You do realize that the same could be said of any form of government, even the United States. It doesn't matter if it's a matter of a nation struggling with internal civil strife, or nations marching their soldiers to fight wars on foreign soil.

You do realize that the political scandal surrounding the Iran-Contra affair originated in the U.S. under a conservative administration that ultimately funded the Sandinistas in Nicaragua. A shadowy anti-communist group which waged guerrilla warfare upon a mostly civilian population that resulted in some of the most savage examples of war atrocities in history.

I take great exception to your tirade! You are no different from the people you are criticising! You come across as being incredibly patronising! I can think for myself and whilst I don't agree entirely with the tenets of the Left, I do believe in a middle way and am not such a cynic to believe that human beings are all brainwashed automatons as your commentary would seem to suggest! Thank you very much (NOT) for putting me right... I touch my cap to you!

While I have the uttermost respect for you defending your opinions I cannot agree. to begin you have steryotyped the left just as much as people do the right, how do you come to the conclusion communists are anti progress??? The aspects you acuse communism would destroy are founded on very similar ideology; the internet was born from a CERN project to network computers to allow scientists to share information and colaborate; road networks were built by the goverment because of the benifits to all npt for profits - under a far right system roads would only link factorys/busneses and the general public would never have had acsess. However I agree marxism is imperfect and needs altering, compotition can be a good thing but is beter between individuals than corporations that become all powerfull - my ideal system would be an anarchocommunist socity using a parcon nontransferable currency and govened by direct democracy. Finaly please stop judging all comunists on the failed 20th century dictatorships, they failed because they were revelutions and revelutions require a hierarchy which will not relinquish power easily. A gradual transition will maintain order and democracy when we abandon the absurd notions of 'profit'.

Originally posted by maria_stardust
This is worded rather vaguely. First of all, what construes leftist literature? What makes you confident that the majority of this literature focuses solely upon the U.S.?

This is one of the best selling leftist books of our time: The Empire. It is required reading in Universities across the Nation and a book on which many others are based on.

"The Imperialist Agressors" according to the far-left, are not North Korea (which still does not allow people to access the Internet), Iran (which marxists such as Chavez buddy up with) or even Libya, but Europe/America/Israel. That is the prevailing leftist view.

When George Bush pointed out that N.Korea, Iran and Libya are the most oppressive regimes in the world, leftists went crazy and villified him to be the most evil President of all time.

It seems to me that you’re basing your opinion – which in reality, is all it is – upon your gut feeling, as opposed to actual statistics and facts.

The deeds of people such as Stalin, Lenin, Pol Pot, Chavez, Mugabe, Castro, Kim Ill Sung and their socialist philosophies that drive those deeds are a historical fact. Their hatred of America/Europe/Isreal is a documented fact. Leftists also openly admit this, as you can read almost every day on this very site.

Furthermore, it seems highly unlikely that hardly anyone would truly envision the U.S. as the center of world oppression – again, a personal opinion that is not necessarily rooted in any verifiable fact. It is nothing more than your perspective.

As theOP points out, for the Neo-Com there is no truth...everything is merely a "matter of perspective".From this view it is "only my perspective" that Mao and Mugabe are oppressors compared to the USA.

Because there is "no truth" people like Chavez can say that HAARP created the earthquake in Hawaii and Ahmadenijad can say that the Holocaust did not happen, even though both of these conspiracy-theories are false.

The mere suggestion that patriarchy does not exist in today’s society, whether at the home front or in the workforce is absurd. For the most part women are considered the main caregivers in their families – even in cases were both parents work.

In most cultures women have just as much say on things as men....just in different areas.

Men going out to work more than woman comes from stone-age habits of men going out hunting while women take care of children. This is how things naturally developed over time. It does not come from men being "evil oppressors".

When discussing sexual promiscuity, men are considered virile while women are considered whores. Let’s not even delve into the issue of domestic violence.

That may be the case in some cultures. But in our culture the days when women could not have sex with more than one partner without causing a scandal are long gone.

I actually think Feminism would be appropriate in some countries. But if I tell you in which countries Womens Liberation is needed the PC crowd will call me an "Islamophobe".

Gender bias still exists and is not a figment of the collective female imagination.

Yes, some gender bias exists. But thats not what the OP was referring to. It was referring to the feminist theory that gender is not biological but rather "socially constructed.

Ethnic minorities

There are about 1.5 Billion white people in a world of 6.5 Billion people. Hence whites are a minority.

When judgments are passed strictly on appearance, the ability to speak English or the fact that they happen to have a Hispanic surname – well, that certainly qualifies as a form of oppression.

No it doesnt. Ive been judged, laughed at or required to undergo special examination due to my own foreigness throughout my life and I never felt "oppressed". It is my choice how I feel.

Sometimes it is necessary for the good of the community to have certain basic necessities, such as a solid public education system, affordable housing and access to affordable healthcare.

There is no reason why people should have to choose between putting food on the table, or keeping a roof over their head or paying for life-saving medication. There is no good reason why homosexuals should be denied recognition in marriages and civil unions. Nor why they should be denied entry into the military based solely upon their sexual orientation.

If were a ruler of this world my motto would be "prosperity for all". Everyone should have plenty of food and housing. Homosexuals should be able to do whatever they want. But thats apparently not the way it is in this day and age....yet. But looking at the development of humankind Im optimistic that this is the direction in which we are heading. Until then there is absolutely no use or merit in whining about how "unfair" life is and blaming us "evil Capitalists and Neo-Cons" for all these ills. It is thanks to us that so much prosperity already exists.

I ask you: Is resorting to these kinds of stereotypes truly a necessity to ensure "mankind's survival"?

Yes, it is necessary to expose false information that is running rampant in society and most especially on websits like this one. As can be seen by the deeds of Neo-Coms throughout the 20th Century, the information is harmful on a mass-scale.

Originally posted by AnonymousJ
how do you come to the conclusion communists are anti progress???

Ever travelled through Communist countries and smelled the decay?

Utter Nonsense, and I laughed so hard I almost prolapsed, still each to their own :-)

Originally posted by Shminkee Pinkee
Utter Nonsense, and I laughed so hard I almost prolapsed, still each to their own :-)

With one exception (maria_stardust) this is the typical response one can expect. None of the facts are addressed or rebutted so the only thing left to do is ridicule.