Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Communism, Socialism, and Marxism should be declared Treason:

page: 1
13
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
+3 more 
posted on Aug, 20 2011 @ 01:37 PM
link   
Considering that all three philosophies, as forms of governance, are contrary to the basic intent of personal freedoms, liberties and sovereignty of the individual, as established by the Constitution: Why do we allow anyone, who professes or proselytizes those belief's, to become involved in government at any level. And why should those who openly advocate the overthrow of those Constitutional principals, not be charged and prosecuted as traitors. What greater threat to liberty than that from within. This should be interesting



+19 more 
posted on Aug, 20 2011 @ 01:41 PM
link   
People have done a great deal of evil in this country for the sake of capitalism as well. No one should be declared a treason for their views on an economic system, that's ignorance.


+12 more 
posted on Aug, 20 2011 @ 01:43 PM
link   
The problem here is that you are taking socialism and communism from a corrupted point of view. They are totally viable systems of government. Don't fall for the precept that socialism and communism are what the Soviet Union was about. It was a despotic derivation of those philosophies. Marxism I'm not as familiar with.


+1 more 
posted on Aug, 20 2011 @ 01:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by nightstalker46
Considering that all three philosophies, as forms of governance, are contrary to the basic intent of personal freedoms, liberties and sovereignty of the individual, as established by the Constitution: Why do we allow anyone, who professes or proselytizes those belief's, to become involved in government at any level. And why should those who openly advocate the overthrow of those Constitutional principals, not be charged and prosecuted as traitors. What greater threat to liberty than that from within. This should be interesting


Why not add the Capitalists as well?


"For more than a century ideological extremists at either end of the political spectrum have seized upon well-publicized incidents such as my encounter with Castro to attack the Rockefeller family for the inordinate influence they claim we wield over American political and economic institutions. Some even believe we are part of a secret cabal working against the best interests of the United States, characterizing my family and me as ‘internationalists’ and of conspiring with others around the world to build a more integrated global political and economic structure – one world, if you will. If that’s the charge, I stand guilty, and I am proud of it." —David Rockefeller, from his own book, Memoirs.


How is that not also not only treason but self-confessed treason? It's something oft quoted on ATS but it does show a glaring assumption upon your part that treason or anti-freedom movements only exist within certain political ideologies.


+24 more 
posted on Aug, 20 2011 @ 01:46 PM
link   
Another ignorant american.

We have socialism in Europe/Canada..and its doing okay (specially in the Scandinavian nations)

Its sad that the american public perceives socialism/communism in a negative way.


+4 more 
posted on Aug, 20 2011 @ 01:51 PM
link   
OP,

I am a diehard Socialist and I hate the ideals of liberalism I also regard human rights as the biggest waste of time in history and despise the greed and corruption that plagues our societies as a direct result of the plight of capitalism.

Would I call a capitalist, liberal, libertarian a traitor for holding a different political ideology to myself, no, I would respect their difference of opinion. You don’t actually see the irony in your thread which I find kind of funny, you want to pass a law that will restrict a person’s FREEDOM in their choice of political ideology and have them branded and punished as a traitor for not following your political ideology. I think that is what the communists you proclaim to hate so much done. On the one hand you are talking about personal freedoms yet on the other you are talking about restricting these freedoms you hold so dear for anyone who disagrees with your political ideology. And therein lies the greater paradox of the liberal system freedom with the restrictions of law is not freedom.

Your OP actually displays not only a ignorance of other peoples ideology but a ignorance of your own ideology. Your ideology should advocate the freedom of the individual in choosing a political ideology yet you seek to restrict this freedom much in the same way a totalitarian dictator would advocate.


+9 more 
posted on Aug, 20 2011 @ 01:52 PM
link   
Why did you leave out the most dangerous one of all? Corporatism. This is something that a lot of people from both parties follow and it truly is a nation killer. There are countries that follow socialism and they are doing quite well.



posted on Aug, 20 2011 @ 01:57 PM
link   
reply to post by nightstalker46
 


If there is anything socialism promises, its the equality of every human being.



posted on Aug, 20 2011 @ 01:59 PM
link   
Socialism and Communism are both antithetical to freedom. Both involve using force to take the fruits of your labor to give to others without compensation. That is also known as slavery.



posted on Aug, 20 2011 @ 02:00 PM
link   
Another example of a political bent that is castigated and not understood is "anarchy". Most think it means chaos. it doesn't. It takes into account personal responsibility to society:


Anarchists are those who advocate the absence of the state, arguing that inherent human nature would allow people to come together in agreement to form a functional society allowing for the participants to freely develop their own sense of morality, ethics or principled behaviour. The rise of anarchism as a philosophical movement occurred in the mid 19th century, with its idea of freedom as being based upon political and economic self-rule. This occurred alongside the rise of the nation-state and large-scale industrial state capitalism or state-sponsored corporatism, and the political corruption that came with their successes.

*snip*

The word "anarchy" is often used by non-anarchists as a pejorative term, intended to connote a lack of control and a negatively chaotic environment. However, anarchists still argue that anarchy does not imply nihilism, anomie, or the total absence of rules, but rather an anti-statist society that is based on the spontaneous order of free individuals in autonomous communities.


en.wikipedia.org...

Related and I found this interesting. Same source:


Immanuel Kant's societal categories

The German philosopher Immanuel Kant defined "Anarchy" in his article about anthropology in the chapter "Freiheit und Gesetz" (korpora.zim.uni-duisburg-essen.de...) as follows:

A Law And Freedom without Violence (Anarchy)
B Law And Violence without Freedom (Despotism)
C Violence without Freedom And Law (Barbarism)
D Violence with Freedom And Law (Republic)



posted on Aug, 20 2011 @ 02:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by Unvarnished
reply to post by nightstalker46
 


If there is anything socialism promises, its the equality of every human being.
That is the problem. All people are created equal, but not all put out an equal amount of effort. If I work 6 days a week 50-70 hours a week to get the things I want, why should I be forced to donate part of my very life to support those who WILL NOT do the same? If I work all day, and you play video games all day, why should you benefit from my labor?



posted on Aug, 20 2011 @ 02:09 PM
link   
Why stop there?

While your at it, lets criminalize Islam, Satanism, Homosexuality, Abortion, Feminism, and promote only racial purity, western Christianity, conservatism, elitism, isolationism and return to conquering the world, by force where possible and can be made to be perceived as necessary for "national security".




posted on Aug, 20 2011 @ 02:10 PM
link   
In a truly free country (what we aspire to but don't necessarily have), there should be a free marketplace of ideas. If you do not like those philosophies/ideologies, the way to beat them is through reason, rational argument, and most importantly, through example.
I find collectivist ideologies to be disgusting. Corporatism, basically fascism but with a new name because of Nazi associations, is what the US currently follows. It is also collectivist. In my opinion there are heavy socialist strains in corporatism. It goes to the "welfare/warfare" system, that becomes more of a police state over time.
Ideological purists will claim fascism and socialism are completely different. I would say they are splitting hairs. Both are collectivist and will necessarily lead to authoritarianism if applied to humans, due to our biological primate nature.
Only a very decentralized organization of society would allow any true freedom. Natural leaders would emerge in this "system" since , as primates, our DNA requires "alphas". Some societies would be very authoritarian, some would be very libertarian depending on what leaders emerge and what the particular citizens of that society will support/tolerate. People could gravitate to their preferred existence. Imagine the American Indian/Germanic Tribe prototype but higher tech and freely connected through commerce and with less tribalist ignorance.



posted on Aug, 20 2011 @ 02:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by sonofliberty1776
If I work all day, and you play video games all day, why should you benefit from my labor?




What are you talking about?
First off, I don't benefit from your labor. The game I play is holdem. I'm a very good poker player, very lucky and make a nice living.

I don't mind paying my fair share of taxes to keep up the infrastructure, ex. roads, bridges, parks, schools etc. That's not socialism; thats a community. uh oh, did I say community? Am I a communist now?
edit on 20-8-2011 by whaaa because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 20 2011 @ 02:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by whaaa

Originally posted by sonofliberty1776
If I work all day, and you play video games all day, why should you benefit from my labor?




What are you talking about?
First off, I don't benefit from your labor. The game I play is holdem. I'm a very good poker player, very lucky and make a nice living.

I don't mind paying my fair share of taxes to keep up the infrastructure, ex. roads, bridges, parks, schools etc. That's not socialism; thats a community. uh oh, did I say community? Am I a communist now?
edit on 20-8-2011 by whaaa because: (no reason given)
Quit being obtuse. You know exactly what I am referring to, and I am not talking about the funds necessary to keep the streets paved. I am referring to the income redistribution programs.



posted on Aug, 20 2011 @ 03:15 PM
link   
reply to post by goldentorch
 


What you are alluding to is the effect of unbridled corporatism which has morphed into global monopolies. David Rockefeller along with Carter and Bresinzki, founders of the Trilateral Commission, which was the brain trust of the current round of global governance or NWO, have been part of the global elite's plan to dominate the globe economically.
By their own admission, the plan of restructuring the worlds economy, thru global trade agreements like NAFTA, GATT, APEC etc., was only the beginning of a process.

At the 1991 meeting of the TL Commission, the lead speaker, who was the president of the largest bank in Japan, addressed the meeting by stating: "gentlemen, what you have to understand is that global trade agreements have little if anything to do with trade, and everything to do with restructuring the global politic".

After the meeting, a reporter asked Rockefeller " Your organization (TLC) has advocated global governance since it's inception. What do you have to do to make it happen?" Rockefeller's answer; " everything we need is already in place, all we need is one good crisis."
The reporter, then turned to Bresinzki and asked, " What you are advocating is a global socialist order; What makes you think America will ever accept Socialism?"

Bresinki's answer: "America will never accept Socialism until the middle class is standing in the breadlines".

The combined actions of TLC, CFR, World Bank, IMF, and WTO, under the guise of promoting "free trade" have led to the destruction of anti-trust laws, consumer protection laws, child labor laws, and anything else that stood in the way of the creation of global monopoles .

There is no free trade or competitive capitalism under a system of monopolies. It could more correctly be described as a monopolistic oligarchy.

And yes, David Rockefeller, who, by the way, was once a card carrying communist, should have been tried for treason as well as Carter a global socialist, and Bresinki, noted Marxist economist.

The point being, is that capitalism or socialism as an (economic) model is not the issue. The (governing) principals of the thread as it relates to the US constitution and it's underlying principals of the rights of the individual, is diametrically opposed by the principals of communism, which place the rights and authority of the state above the individual. Basically, it is an ant colony approach, where the individual is expendable for the sake of the colony.

I stand by my statement; Communism, Socialism, and Marxism are treasonous.
Do we have abuses of our system, yes. But the solutions can be addressed thru our constitutional system. You don't throw out the baby out with the bath water.



posted on Aug, 20 2011 @ 03:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by nightstalker46
Considering that all three philosophies, as forms of governance, are contrary to the basic intent of personal freedoms, liberties and sovereignty of the individual, as established by the Constitution:


Uhmmm just because thinking and talking about them although they are the opposite is all about giving the ones thinking and talking about them the freedoms, liberties and sovereignty of the individual. Take away that and you commit Treason.
edit on 20-8-2011 by Diyainoue because: typo



posted on Aug, 20 2011 @ 04:02 PM
link   
reply to post by nightstalker46
 


Communism and Capitlism are dying are rightly so...



posted on Aug, 20 2011 @ 04:11 PM
link   
reply to post by louieprima
 


I couldn't agree more. The safeguards for a truly free society, installed in the original constitution, have been incrementallydiluted and destroyed, by the delusional utopian concept, perpetrated by the communist, socialist element in our society.
They have infiltrated our educational system, (as evidenced by some of these replies) and our government, as evidenced by the rise of the welfare state. The delegation of unconstitutional powers to the Federal gov. and the notion that gov. can solve all our problems, as espoused by big government socialist, has led to the rise of a police state. None of these could have occurred, if we as a nation, had not capitulated to the socialist element, and stood firm with the original principals.

And yes, there were those "capitalist" who found a way to exploit every socialist legislative agenda, and raked in billions.
It truly is a double edged sword. Socialism inadvertently, has played into the hands, of the greedy. It always will. That's what they don't understand.

I say go back to the original constitution. Quit messing with it.



posted on Aug, 20 2011 @ 04:15 PM
link   
During the collapse of the US, there are too many on assistance, help, handouts to do whats necessary to save it all.
It's sad what we once were, but we will never be able to compete with the slave labor of the world until we become like them.....
We are doomed in what's coming.






top topics



 
13
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join