It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.

 

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

 

The strawman called "Communism."

page: 1
6

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 30 2012 @ 08:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by tonycliffs

Originally posted by signal2noise

Originally posted by ANOK
No need to apologize for her being a communist. There is nothing wrong with communism, unless you buy into the cold war propaganda.


Really? If communism is so good, then why did if fail in the Soviet Union, East Germany, etc???



A LOT of Americans pay little attention to the Occupy movement simply because of the American Communist Party connection.

Communism is something you believe in while you are a wild eyed radical in college, and you can't get a job after college by dint of your wildness.

The majority of Americans have no use of sympathy for Communism.




Communism is an irrelevant strawman; but what the elite have managed to do with it, is really very clever.

One of the fundamental things which toddlers used to be taught, was that if you had a friend with you, and one of you had a biscuit, you'd break the biscuit into equally sized halves, and each have one half, rather than one child eating the entire thing, and the other child getting nothing.

What the cabal managed to do, is take that simple principle, and then build an extremely complex and misleading ideology on top of it, courtesy of Karl Marx; an NWO shill in sheep's clothing if ever there was one; as well as his fellow shills, Lenin, Trotsky, et. al. They then tied the simple concept, and the complex ideology, inseperably together in the majority of people's minds; so that at this point, compassionate, altruistic, life-affirming behaviour...that is, behaving in a way that actually benefits us...has become associated with genocide.

So what they've ultimately managed to do, is convince us that what is good for us, is actually the opposite.

What's my point? Simply that what you think of as Communism and Capitalism, both in reality do not exist. There are two different groups within humanity, broadly speaking; A 5% demographic of psychopaths, and the rest of us.

These psychopaths are not capable of empathy, compassion, or even happiness, for the most part. They are motivated by one thing and one thing only; and that is the fact that the only psychological gratification they are able to derive, comes from a justified (in their minds) belief that they are inherently superior to everyone else. The single main reason why they aren't going to tolerate equality, more than anything else, is because it is the diametric opposite of elitism, which is the one thing they crave more than life itself.

As a result of this, every governmental, economic, or social system that has ever been devised, has ultimately led to the same outcome. The psychopaths in positions of wealth and power, and everyone else face down in the mud. Capitalism, Communism, monarchy, fascism, call it whatever you like; the result is the same. Go and read about what happened in Russia under Stalin; it still ended up being a stratified mess involving favouritism and a certain demographic who lorded it over everyone else, exactly as exists under what is referred to as Capitalism.

The psychopaths like the name Capitalism more, because it gives them more latitude. There's less cognitive dissonance between Capitalist theory and psychopathic reality, than there has been with most systems. Capitalist ideology presupposes the idea that humanity in general is inherently psychopathic, which is exactly what the psychopaths want us to believe. They don't have any problem with you swallowing the Marxist Kool-Aid either, though, because that helps them reach their objectives equally well...just in a different way. Capitalism is the straight road to the psychopaths winning, whereas Marxism is the scenic route, but either way, the destination is entirely the same.

Mao and Stalin were both psychopaths. They ruled their countries in exactly the same way as any other psychopath who has ever existed, and yet because of what the name of their supposed ideology was, equality as an entire idea has now been supposedly completely discredited. If that isn't the very definition of a strawman argument, then I'm not sure what is.

That, however, is the entire reason why I also won't go near anybody who self-identifies as a socialist with a barge pole, because they consciously and deliberately identify with the Marxist strawman themselves.

TL;DR - Communism/Socialism != equality. If you've got issues with equality, that's fine; but please at least be clear on what you're attacking, before you start attacking it.
edit on 30-1-2012 by petrus4 because: (no reason given)

edit on 30-1-2012 by petrus4 because: (no reason given)




posted on Jan, 30 2012 @ 09:01 PM
link   
Pure communism is like pure capitalism: it is far too optimistic about humanity, humanity's nature, and the human condition in general.

Pure, unadulterated communism in practice is actually worse than pure, unadulterated capitalism, though they both create a nightmare scenario.

Also, you get a star for the "tl;dr" tag. Mucho awesome!
edit on 30-1-2012 by AnIntellectualRedneck because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 30 2012 @ 09:04 PM
link   
I'm convinced that 99% of people don't even know the meaning of the word communism and socialism.



posted on Jan, 30 2012 @ 09:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by AnIntellectualRedneck
Pure communism is like pure capitalism: it is far too optimistic about humanity, humanity's nature, and the human condition in general.


I think they are only too optimistic about the psychopaths. Most economic systems we've come up with would work, if it wasn't for the psychopaths.

Then again, however, Hitler said that he was only ever able to get anywhere because of the vulnerabilities that even non-psychopaths have, which he was able to exploit; so we do need to take some responsibility ourselves.



posted on Jan, 30 2012 @ 09:11 PM
link   
reply to post by petrus4
 


Stop blaming the victim. You don't blame the woman for getting raped so don't blame the citizen for getting another form of rape.

It would be like putting the blame on me or your neighbor because the NDAA bill got signed. I had 0 power over that other than writing the representatives.



posted on Jan, 30 2012 @ 09:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by mnmcandiez
reply to post by petrus4
 


Stop blaming the victim. You don't blame the woman for getting raped so don't blame the citizen for getting another form of rape.

It would be like putting the blame on me or your neighbor because the NDAA bill got signed. I had 0 power over that other than writing the representatives.


So what are we supposed to do, then? Just concede helplessness, as we are passively herded into the FEMA camps?



posted on Jan, 30 2012 @ 09:42 PM
link   
Lets take that kids with the biscuit analogy a little farther..

And we'll use an allowance for example because no one would deny a kid food, right?

So the first kid(A) is well-mannered, does his homework, keeps his room clean, etc. Perfect kid.

And the other kid(B) is a spoiled brat, won't lift a finger to help, cusses at his mom, etc.

At the end of the week, who would you give an allowance, and how much?



posted on Jan, 30 2012 @ 10:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by rbnhd76
And the other kid(B) is a spoiled brat, won't lift a finger to help, cusses at his mom, etc.

At the end of the week, who would you give an allowance, and how much?


I would probably first want to try and determine the cause of child B's behaviour. I don't tend to believe that aggressive or aberrant behaviour occurs in a vacuum, or for no reason. I know that when I acted out or experienced stress myself when I was younger, it usually had a lot to do with the behaviour of my parents, as well. Since moving away from them, I've been a lot more relaxed than in the past; and my tendencies to behave more positively, and not to feel a need to indulge in drugs or alcohol, have increased accordingly.

So certainly, giving a child a lesser allowance for bad behaviour might be one possible strategy for dealing with the problem; but even if I did do that, I don't think that is *all* I would do. I think that is probably a little too simplistic.



posted on Jan, 31 2012 @ 12:20 AM
link   
reply to post by petrus4
 


Uhh no, of course you resist tyranny. But don't blame the average joe for their tyrannical governments, as they aren't the one committing the crime the leaders are.


edit on 1/31/2012 by mnmcandiez because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
6

log in

join