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 Socialist Mask of Marxism

page: 2
8
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 14 2012 @ 02:03 AM
link   

Originally posted by Southern Guardian
reply to post by ElectricUniverse
 


You haven't answered my question. What do you think socialism is? It's important we get your definition of what it is to discuss this topic further.


It's probably what Glenn Beck told her Socialism was.




posted on Jun, 14 2012 @ 02:05 AM
link   
electric universe is getting it some bit wrong.The plan of NWO endgame was a synthesis of fascism and socialism.Well the synthesis is now nearly complete. International finance has always supported international communism.

International finance and international communism came together in China and USA.



posted on Jun, 14 2012 @ 02:08 AM
link   
reply to post by FractalChaos13242017
 


libertarianism is the right way.Rest all are statist bull#.



posted on Jun, 14 2012 @ 03:43 AM
link   

Originally posted by ElectricUniverse

Originally posted by ColCurious

Inb4 ElectricUniverse slams you with a dubious quote-hammer.

Just an FYI and maybe this will answer your question:

ElectricUniverse thinks the Federal Republic of Germany is socialist or even on her way to communism (I don't remember exactly) which would consequently mean that communism IS working AND kicking your butt in almost every categorie lol.
Oh, and he/she thinks that right-wing Nazis are really left-wing extremists.


I actually stated present day Germany is getting closer and closer to socialism/fascism as well, and you can laugh all you want, your stupid laughs are not going to debunk that even Hitler proclaimed to be socialist, and every program he implemented was socialist...

You are just too stupid and can't see the trees in the forest right in front of you...



"We are socialists, we are enemies of today's capitalistic economic system for the exploitation of the economically weak, with its unfair salaries, with its unseemly evaluation of a human being according to wealth and property instead of responsibility and performance, and we are all determined to destroy this system under all conditions." --Adolf Hitler

(Speech of May 1, 1927. Quoted by Toland, 1976, p. 306)
...

THE COMMON INTEREST BEFORE SELF-INTEREST -
THAT IS THE SPIRIT OF THE PROGRAM. BREAKING OF THE THRALDOM OF INTEREST - THAT IS THE KERNEL OF NATIONAL SOCIALISM.

...

constitutionalistnc.tripod.com...

OMG, the above sounds so RIGHTWING.... NOT....



edit on 13-6-2012 by ElectricUniverse because: (no reason given)


1st of may, 1927...
Hitler, chooses to claim that they are socialists anyway on the 1st of may...
1st of may
You know, that international holiday, that started in america, that americans aren't allowed to celebrate because of "KOMMUNISM!"

Btw: There was a workers wing of the NSDAP, that's what the Röhm Putsch was about. They lost.



posted on Jun, 14 2012 @ 03:48 AM
link   

Originally posted by muse7
Socialism is evil!

I say we get rid of Medicare, SOCIAL security, and any Vet disability compensation!


LOL except that is not socialism, that would be liberalism.

Liberalism has been around almost as long as socialism, but liberalism does not advocate worker ownership, it supports capitalism with a social safety net. Big difference.

There was a distinct differences between the two pre WWII, post WWII the working class was sold the idea of social climbing and aiming to become middle class, rather than aiming for worker ownership. Liberalism became the new "socialism". Liberalism was always a middle class ideology, 'bleeding heart liberals'. Socialism was always of the working class, it's where it came from, not the establishment. The establishment simply appropriated left-wing terms in order to weaken the power of the working class. We're much easier to exploit if we don't realise there is an alternative to what they have forced on us.



posted on Jun, 14 2012 @ 03:53 AM
link   

Originally posted by ludwigvonmises003

libertarianism is the right way.Rest all are statist bull#.


In it's true original meaning yes you are right, or maybe you're left?...


As is well known, anarchists use the terms “libertarian”, “libertarian socialist” and “libertarian communist” as equivalent to “anarchist” and, similarly, “libertarian socialism” or “libertarian communism” as an alternative for “anarchism.” This is perfectly understandable, as the anarchist goal is freedom, liberty, and the ending of all hierarchical and authoritarian institutions and social relations.

Unfortunately, in the United States the term “libertarian” has become, since the 1970s, associated with the right-wing, i.e., supporters of “free-market” capitalism. That defenders of the hierarchy associated with private property seek to associate the term “libertarian” for their authoritarian system is both unfortunate and somewhat unbelievable to any genuine libertarian. Equally unfortunately, thanks to the power of money and the relative small size of the anarchist movement in America, this appropriation of the term has become, to a large extent, the default meaning there. Somewhat ironically, this results in some right-wing “libertarians” complaining that we genuine libertarians have “stolen” their name in order to associate our socialist ideas with it!


150 years of Libertarian

It's just more appropriation of left wing terms by the right-wing establishment.

You see fascism has become extremely sneaky, watch out comrades, blues under your beds...



edit on 6/14/2012 by ANOK because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 14 2012 @ 06:53 AM
link   
reply to post by ElectricUniverse
 



H.R. 1388 in which democrats, and Obama are not only giving power to something they call the corporation but they want American children from secondary, and some democrats are pushing for children of primary to also be a part of this, to work for free for the government for "Community Service"... In socialist/communist dictatorship the same programs were and are run, in Cuba every child starting from 11-12 years old has to work for the state FOR FREE in summer in what are actually labor camps...



Elementary and Secondary Students: H.R. 1388 establishes a "Summer of Service" program that would provide students who complete 100 hours of service a $500 education award (can be up to $1,000 if the student is disadvantaged). H.R 1388 also increases the cap that grantees can spend on administrative expenses from 5 percent to 6 percent.

H.R. 1388

This Bill, at least this section, has to do with the volunteer program AmeriCorps. It is not mandatory and there is no language in the Bill to suggest it is not voluntary. I am very careful with language in Bills. I was among the first and remain among the small group of people on ATS to be adamantly opposed to the NDAA because it's double speak means very dangerous things for Americans.

Regarding the Fascist Manifesto:
From your source which you conveniently left out or didn't take note of.


Origins of Italian Fascism

The classic definition of Italian Fascism applies to the latter part of the history of the movement in power, when Italy was firmly under the leadership of Benito Mussolini. Its initial political stance–in the June 1919 Manifesto–includes, however, many elements that would not be normally associated with fascism in the classic definition, including support for democracy (indeed, the fascist manifesto actually called for greater democratic rights) and a limited number of social ideas. All these were slowly abandoned over the following years, as fascism took its recognizable, anti-democratic form.

Originally, the leading committee of the Fascist Movement included both former Socialist Party members (among them Mussolini himself) and nationalists. The resulting manifesto, united in the common aim of overturning the existing system, reflects a clear compromise between these strands. Only subsequently did Mussolini establish outright leadership of the movement.

Given that Fascism is recognised (with a few exceptions) as being dictatorial, it is noteworthy that elements of the manifesto call for wider democracy. What was enacted during two decades of Fascist government was quite contrary in substance to the demands of the manifesto. During 21 years of Fascist government, not all manifesto pledges were achieved, and many were simply ignored; forgotten by the system. Interestingly, many elements were subsequently imposed by the Italian Republic during the post-Fascist era.


Mussolini, as did Hitler, seduced Socialists in the beginning. The same could easily be done by someone claiming to be Conservative and a supporter of Capitalism, they could promise a true free market with no regulations, they could claim to lower taxes or abolish them and within two years that person could support raising taxes, especially Corporate taxes, impose new regulations, implement new entitlement programs. If such a person were to do that wold they still be considered a Conservative? Or would the definition of Conservative simply change to suit the person?


Mussolini just added some of his ideas which is what makes this new branch of SOCIALISM as FASCISM...


No he did not just add a few of his own ideas, he completely flipped the script and went against that very manifesto and completely opposite Socialism.

Fascism is the culmination of an authoritarian Government with a Capitalist economy. It is the marriage of the two, with the government enforcing the authority of the capitalist owners of the wealth.

Socialism wants as little to do with Capitalism as possible with increasing degrees the further Left you go.
edit on 14-6-2012 by Kali74 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 14 2012 @ 10:26 AM
link   



posted on Jun, 14 2012 @ 10:46 AM
link   
reply to post by ElectricUniverse
 


Originally posted by ElectricUniverse
I actually stated present day Germany is getting closer and closer to socialism/fascism [...]

And would you mind to elaborate how you came to this conclusion? Please amuse me...

For the record, I oppose socialism and communism (this must be an oxymoron from your point of view), but IF your assessment is right, you have to choose whether Germany is indeed socialist/communist/fascist OR socialism/communism/fascism isn't working... because whatever you call our current system, it's working way better than the plutocracy you have in the U.S. right now.


Originally posted by ElectricUniverse
Hitler proclaimed to be socialist, and every program he implemented was socialist...

Proclaimed, yes.
You do know Hitler tried to kill all his socialist buddies after his takeover right? Why would he do that?
edit on 14-6-2012 by ColCurious because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 14 2012 @ 11:01 AM
link   
The following is my opinion as a member participating in this discussion.




Originally posted by ColCurious

You do know Hitler tried to kill all his socialist buddies after his takeover right? Why would he do that?



Why would Hitler "kill all his Socialist buddies"? Probably the same reason that Stalin killed many of his socialist buddies -- power. Both of these despotic leaders consolidated their power by eliminating their rivals or those who might prove to be obstacles in their pursuit of total dominance and control.

Whether tangible differences exist between fascism and communism is really quite immaterial. The human rights records of BOTH political ideologies have been printed in blood -- lots and lots of blood.
edit on 6/14/2012 by benevolent tyrant because: (no reason given)

edit on 6/14/2012 by benevolent tyrant because: to add "mod" tag and to make a text change
extra DIV



posted on Jun, 14 2012 @ 11:18 AM
link   
reply to post by benevolent tyrant
 


Originally posted by benevolent tyrant
Why would Hitler "kill all his Socialist buddies"? Probably the same reason that Stalin killed many of his socialist buddies -- power. Both of these despotic leaders consolidated their power by eliminating their or those who might prove to be obstacles in their pursuit of total dominance and control.

What kind of threat could a simple charlady, a vendor, or an engineer pose to a dictator like Hitler with his enormous security state?
Hitler killed thousands of average, everyday citizens who just happened to be liberals, social democrats or conservatives. He killed his political adversaries - including socialists.


Originally posted by benevolent tyrant
Whether tangible differences exist between fascism and communism is really quite immaterial. The human rights records of BOTH political ideologies have been printed in blood -- lots and lots of blood.

Agreed. Both ideologies are a threat to the free world. No argument here.



posted on Jun, 14 2012 @ 11:43 AM
link   
reply to post by benevolent tyrant
 


I think it's very relevant. We need to understand the paths that lead to these awful places so we don't tread them repeatedly. We also need to jam the propaganda machine so that we have a clear view of each path. In America, what is sacred to us? Second to the Constitution it is Capitalism, well for the majority. What the Right has failed to understand is that unchecked Capitalism can be as tyrannical as Despotic Socialism ever was ie, Stalin. Americans seem to understand the horrors of State Communism which is the Socialists demon but seem to be utterly clueless that Fascism is the equal but opposite, Capitalist's demon. No lesson will be learned without acknowledgement of truth and reality.



posted on Jun, 14 2012 @ 12:49 PM
link   
The following is my opinion as a member participating in this discussion.





Originally posted by ColCurious

Hitler killed thousands of average, everyday citizens who just happened to be liberals, social democrats or conservatives. He killed his political adversaries - including socialists.

.

hmmmmmmm...... I believe that I could simply remove Hitler's name from your -- quoted -- statement, replace it with Stalin's (or Kruschev's) and I would still be making a valid historic statement.
edit on 6/14/2012 by benevolent tyrant because: to insert "mod" disclaimer
extra DIV



posted on Jun, 14 2012 @ 01:37 PM
link   
The following is my opinion as a member participating in this discussion.



reply to post by Kali74
 

Of course “understanding” Socialism / Communism / Marxism and, yes, National Socialism is important. We definitely do not want to repeat many of the historic lessons learned from the inception and incorporation of these philosophical systems. And while one can argue the finer points of the philosophical difference that might exist between these systems or upon which might be relatively “better or worse”, we can all agree that the “reigns” of Hitler , Stalin, Kruschev, Mao, Pol Pot, Castro and their “ilk” have often been devastating for opponents and proponents alike.


edit on 6/14/2012 by benevolent tyrant because: to insert "mod" disclaimer
extra DIV



posted on Jun, 14 2012 @ 01:59 PM
link   
reply to post by benevolent tyrant
 


I absolutely agree, one really isn't worse or better than the other. It's like asking which is better, to break your right leg or your left? I guess I'm being a stickler with this issue to draw attention to the paths because I believe one of the things that got us here is the knee jerk hatred/fear of anything Left or Socialist.



posted on Jun, 14 2012 @ 04:58 PM
link   
You are all arguing Kings and Queens.

People in power on both sides simply use those terms to control people.

Socialism came from the working class, not from an authority. It was a movement of the people, and became an increasing threat to the capitalist class, concluding in 1936 with the revolution in Spain.

Europe was moving fast into fascism and the working class were becoming a huge threat to the capitalist class.

Then we got WWII where most of the working class were sent to war. This decimated the working class. Post war the solidarity and power of the working class was almost completely gone. Then the state propaganda machine went into full service convincing the working class to be social climbers instead of socialists. Work to become middle class, compete instead of cooperate with fellow workers. Liberalism became the new "socialism".

Liberalism, capitalism with a social safety net. But the people have to pay for the safety net, so the capitalist class not only lessened the threat of workers revolting, but they made them pay for it.

The democrats are the liberals, they are not socialist. In the UK we had a Liberal Party before we had a Labour Party. The Socialists apposed the Liberals because they supported capitalism. The working class never wanted government hand-outs, they wanted full ownership and control of the means of production.

Liberalism is not socialism. Liberalism is not left-wing, it is right of center.



posted on Jun, 14 2012 @ 08:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by Southern Guardian

You haven't answered my question. What do you think socialism is? It's important we get your definition of what it is to discuss this topic further.


Wow... How many times do I need to repeat myself?... Socialism, when the means of production, and all infraestructure is owned and controlled by the STATE... Under socialism, there is centralization of power, and infraestructure and the means of production is "nationalized"...

Now, there are many branches of socialism simply because deep inside EVERY ONE of you, who is in one or another branch of socialism, is a control freak...

I AM CERTAIN, that every one of you who falls in one or another branch of socialism would like for EVERYONE to do something that YOU think is right, but without giving people the right to choose themselves...

From "WE HAVE GOT TO DO SOMETHING ABOUT CLIMATE CHANGE", to "people must do Community Service because it is for the good of all" or some other excuse that YOU feel is necessary...

The difference between EVERY PERSON who falls in between one or another branch of socialism, including all forms of communism, and everyone else, is that you ALL want to FORCE people to do what YOU FEEL IS RIGHT...

The excuses to FORCE people to do your will are many, including "for the good of the Earth"... Which btw I AM CERTAIN none of you really know...

The reason why there are SO MANY BRANCHES of socialism/communism, is because once in a while one of your leaders decides to add, or change something about their view on socialism. From Marx, Trosky,Stalin, Lenin, Hitler, Mussolini, Mao, castro, and everyone in between.

Hitler and the NAZIS did it with National Socialism, forming Fascism, as well as Mussolini's National Socialism under corporate mandates which btw is the form of socialism/fascism that the world elites want to implement globally at this moment.


edit on 14-6-2012 by ElectricUniverse because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 14 2012 @ 08:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by ANOK
...
Socialism came from the working class, not from an authority. It was a movement of the people, and became an increasing threat to the capitalist class, concluding in 1936 with the revolution in Spain.
...


AGAIN...during that Spanish revolution you admire so much, the reds, which included ALL socialists and communists, except the Basques, decided to start murdering the clergy, killing innocent priests, nuns, and even regular people who the REDS thought were religious... They burned churches, cathedrals, and every religious figure they could find...

The REDS murdered also bosses, ceos, landowners, capitalists, and politicians... Also, the mere suspicion that an individual could be religious was enough for your idols to murder that person... In a couple of months your idols murdered from 38,000 -100,000 people... This caused the rise of Franco, and since most Spaniards were, and are religious, the people turned against the REDS real fast, except a few sympathizers.

Because of the actions of the REDS in which they decided to murder innocent people for being capitalists, or religious, Franco went after every RED and simpathizer he could find...


edit on 14-6-2012 by ElectricUniverse because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 14 2012 @ 08:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by ElectricUniverse

Originally posted by Southern Guardian

You haven't answered my question. What do you think socialism is? It's important we get your definition of what it is to discuss this topic further.


Wow... How many times do I need to repeat myself?... Socialism, when the means of production, and all infraestructure is owned and controlled by the STATE... Under socialism, there is centralization of power, and infraestructure and the means of production is "nationalized"...

Slight nitpick: allow me to pull up a diagram of the intersection between the Monsanto corporation and the US government.


This indeed falls under "the means of production... owned and controlled by the state" and "centralization of power" and "infrastructure and the means of production is 'nationalized'". You must have accidentally transposed your definitions of "socialism" and "capitalism".


Now, there are many branches of socialism simply because deep inside EVERY ONE of you, who is in one or another branch of socialism, is a control freak...

I AM CERTAIN, that every one of you who falls in one or another branch of socialism would like for EVERYONE to do something that YOU think is right, but without giving people the right to choose themselves...

Quite a generalization. It sounds like the only control freak in this thread is in your very own mirror.


From "WE HAVE GOT TO DO SOMETHING ABOUT CLIMATE CHANGE", to "people must do Community Service because it is for the good of all" or some other excuse that YOU feel is necessary...

Socialists do like to suggest things. But it is capitalists who enforce their will using the barrel of a gun. Perhaps it threatens their power. Insecurity issues?

 

For your information, I will not respond to you in this thread because you've proven yourself quite unreasonable. Don't even bother.



posted on Jun, 14 2012 @ 08:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by Tadeusz

This indeed falls under "the means of production... owned and controlled by the state" and "centralization of power" and "infrastructure and the means of production is 'nationalized'". You must have accidentally transposed your definitions of "socialism" and "capitalism".


It is not news that the Republic of the United States has been slowly transformed into a socialist state. From the creation of a central bank, the Feds, which Progressive Democrats under Woodrow Wilson decided to implement. To Progressive Taxes, when Woodrow Wilson, a Progressive Democrat, and a Democratic Congress funded the IRS and all it's Progressive taxes as they exist today, to other legislation which gave not only the power of the economy to a few banker elites, the Feds, but gave also power to large corporations.


Originally posted by Tadeusz
Quite a generalization. It sounds like the only control freak in this thread is in your very own mirror.


Me?... naaa I want people to be able to CHOOSE of their own free will, not to be FORCED because some people believe "it is the right thing to do"...

If you fall in one or another branch of socialism, do tell us what you think should be FORCED on people, and for what excuse YOU think it should be done...

I am CERTAIN you can think of one or two...


Originally posted by Tadeusz
Socialists do like to suggest things. But it is capitalists who enforce their will using the barrel of a gun. Perhaps it threatens their power. Insecurity issues?


Socialists suggest?....
Really?... You don't want "everyone to do something about Climate change because you feel it is right"?...

You don't want more taxes on certain people, just because you say so?... (btw, I am not one of those people...)

You don't want to FORCE environmental policies on everyone because "you feel it is the right thing to do"?...

You don't want to FORCE people to do something else because "YOU think it is the right thing to do"?...

Anyway, It is not because of Capitalism that certain people, more so in the U.S. like to own and bear arms which is a RIGTH... We want the ability to own and bear arms so people like you can't FORCE us to do your will "because you feel it's right"...


Originally posted by Tadeusz
For your information, I will not respond to you in this thread because you've proven yourself quite unreasonable. Don't even bother.


Of course, you don't want debate, you want people to hear what YOU want, but you don't want me to respond to you... TYPICAL CONTROL FREAK...



edit on 14-6-2012 by ElectricUniverse because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
8
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join