America On Verge Of Communist Takeover, Says Former Castro Revolutionary

Originally posted by ThirdEyeofHorus
reply to post by ElectricUniverse

 

The Tea Party protested and got branded as terrorist in Brooks Bros clothing. lol it was kinda funny coming from Nancy Pelosi and Janet Napolitano, but nevertheless frustrating because even people here bought that lie. And people here spout the whole nonsense about the Koch Bros controlling the Tea Party. But I was there and I saw the many signs that said we were fed up with the commie/socialist nonsense in govt, and also that which is globalist which could be put in its own category. Once the Democrat Party was able to minimize the Tea Party as extremist gun clingerers with extremist Christian religion and some kinda backwoods mentality, the rest of the world bought into it. It is also interesting to note that one of the big Tea Party organizers is a reformed liberal by her own definition. So maybe it wasn't the Koch Bros but a reformed liberal who showed us the way, because really when did conservatives ever protest the govt?
We may end up paying for our protests in the end, as the govt is spying on all the people who speak up, and I imagine this goes for Occupiers too.

You are making things up, people dislike the Tea Party because they are blantant hypocrites
who largely backed W Bush's big government policies and liberty busting agenda for
nearly a decade.

It was like whores protesting against prostitution and you are either a fool or a liar if
you ignore that key to the anti Tea Party sentiment

Originally posted by Tiger5

Sad to say Captain Julio Lara knows nothing of socialist theory. He makes the elementary schoolboy error of mistaking totalitrianism for communism. Totalitarianism can come from a right or leftwing government.

He knows more about the REALITY of socialism and communism more than you ever will. You want to believe all the empty promises, the contradictions and lies that are socialism and communism? That is your problem.

Originally posted by Tiger5
There is no chance of a communist takeover occuring in the next 10 years. for the following reasons.

1) Communism has been thorughly discredited by Gorbachev.

Ooooh right... I forgot, just because he lied in front of cameras he stopped communism in Cuba, Burma/Myanmar, North Korea, China, Vietnam, and Venezuela among others... Phew, thanks for clearing that up...

Originally posted by Tiger5
2) The class struggle is at an all time low. Look at the number of strikes over the last 30 years and look a the declining trend which continues to this day.

Are you sure about that?...

Let's see some of the brainwashing, I mean adds used by the Occupy movement...



Notice the phrase which is being used constantly that "we are you 99%" with the name of a few people. Under it the very strange phrase "A Government is an entity which holds the monopolistic right to ninitiate FORCE", and if you look to the left of these two signs you see another sign for the socialist party... Very telling indeed.

Then we have videos of what the mayority fo the Occupy have to say...











Scroll to the right the following photo.









And then we have the logos that the official Occupy offices all around the U.S.A. have adopted...


www.lewrockwell.com...


news.anon210.com...


Shame, in the above you can't see the pretty RED words...
occupywallst.org...

Everywhere I look your movement has very similar logos to socialist/communist logos... I wonder why...

Perhaps they have something to do with logos like the following?...

Malaysian socialists clenched-fist logo approved

links.org.au...

Socialist Fist Logos










Soviet Fist

www.neofactionapparel.com...

But I guess socialists/communists have lost people instead of gaining more people, and more so very young and gullible ones such as the ones who voted for Obama.

Originally posted by Tiger5
In fact please look at any social indicator that a pot smoking pseudo revolutionary can quote and see the decline over time to date.

Really?... I guess Venezuela doesn't have a socialist, who after consolidating power even admitted to being a communist, known as Chavez...

Originally posted by Tiger5
How in gods name can the USA be on the verge of a communist takeover!!!!!!!

My god ATS has gone downhill fast!

How?... Just like other nations succumbed under socialism/communism...

BTW, who is going downhill without breaks and can't understand the position he/they are in are people like you...

A Central Bank is one of the planks of the communist manifesto...

Just like centralization of infraestructure is a couple of planks of the communist manifesto.

The Republic of The United States has been slowly transformed into a socialist/fascist nation with ideas taken even from communism.

Originally posted by Hefficide

I apologize for bad form and for not reading the entire thread before replying, but it's late here and I just wanted to make a point... Socialism, facism, communism,and Maoism ( among many others ) are all different forms of government or control.

The real risk we face in America is different. Corporate Governmental structure, Ogliarchy... or totalitarianism ( police state ).

The downfall is that we've so polarized our views that we, in this country, tend to see sound social programs as gateways to communism. Then mishandling of these programs just adds fire to the flames. I do not believe American can ever be anything but what it is - a Representative Republic, The danger lay in that Republics can and do often take liberties that diminish freedoms.

~Heff

The problem is that a lot of people don't seem to understand that corporations and socialism/communism go very well together.

This is how fascism was invented by two socialists, Hitler, and Mussolini.

Meanwhile Hitler did not give power to the corporations but instead made himself the ruler of all corporations mandating what they should be making, Mussolini thought that class colloboration would succeed where class warfare did not.

Corporations are monopolies, and neither corporations nor monopolies can exist under a true capitalist/FREE MARKET economy.

Corporations/monopolies have consolidated or centralized power.

The most powerful corporation ever created is the Federal Reserve banks. A corporation controlled and owned by some of the riches families/bankers in the world.

Under socialism/communism you have to centralize part, or all infraestructure and that in itself is a corporation. One in which the government/state is in control of.

The most powerful corporation in the world, The Federal Reserve Banks, implemented regulations against businesses to control which businesses would succeed, and by how much they would succeed.

Corporations/monopolies and a capitalist/free market economy can't go hand in hand. It is not possible.

Originally posted by thepresident

You are making things up, people dislike the Tea Party because they are blantant hypocrites
who largely backed W Bush's big government policies and liberty busting agenda for
nearly a decade.

It was like whores protesting against prostitution and you are either a fool or a liar if
you ignore that key to the anti Tea Party sentiment

Let's see who is actually lying shall we?...

The Tea Party movement is an American political movement that advocates strict adherence to the United States Constitution (see Originalism),[1] reducing U.S. government spending and taxes,[2][3][3] and reduction of the U.S. national debt and federal budget deficit.[2] The movement is generally considered to be conservative,[4] libertarian,[5][6] and populist.[7][8][9] The movement has sponsored protests and supported political candidates since 2009.[10][11][12]

en.wikipedia.org...

It is obvious that the one lying, AGAIN, it is YOU...

Now please leave the discussion for grown and intelligent people, thank you.

reply to post by ElectricUniverse

Corporations are monopolies, and neither corporations nor monopolies can exist under a true capitalist/FREE MARKET economy.

I don't know about that... mid to late nineteenth century American history seems to suggest otherwise. Specifically with 19th century railroad monopolies. which managed to happen in a very unregulated free market.

~Heff

Originally posted by Hefficide

I don't know about that... mid to late nineteenth century American history seems to suggest otherwise. Specifically with 19th century railroad monopolies. which managed to happen in a very unregulated free market.

~Heff

If you remember the problem with certain railroads becoming monopolies was because the GOVERNMENT got involved and made those companies into monopolies.

The government decided to regulate who should get the contract, and that railroad company was given the entire contract, not to mention favoritism, including going against American citizens and in favor of the railroad.

This is what happens under socialism, and should have never have occurred in the Republic of the United States.

This is a perfect example of why too much government, and government intervention/regulation of businesses is a bad idea.

Originally posted by ElectricUniverse

Originally posted by Hefficide

I don't know about that... mid to late nineteenth century American history seems to suggest otherwise. Specifically with 19th century railroad monopolies. which managed to happen in a very unregulated free market.

~Heff

If you remember the problem with certain railroads becoming monopolies was because the GOVERNMENT got involved and made those companies into monopolies.

The government decided to regulate who should get the contract, and that railroad company was given the entire contract, not to mention favoritism, including going against American citizens and in favor of the railroad.

This is what happens under socialism, and should have never have occurred in the Republic of the United States.

This is a perfect example of why too much government, and government intervention/regulation of businesses is a bad idea.

edit on 10-8-2012 by ElectricUniverse because: (no reason given)

Should I pull a million examples of how lack of regulation has hurt people and then say, "all corporations should be completely regulated"?

OR would it be better still, to look at each situation individually, like an an adult, not an ideologue, and make rational decisions?

I know it's easy to just follow your ideology, but it's also flawed, and not just a little flawed, but dangerously flawed.

Business should be rationally regulated, monopolies should be prevented and competition, and the national competitive edge, should be protected. Extremist ideology such as yours should be ignored.

Originally posted by longlostbrother

Should I pull a million examples of how lack of regulation has hurt people and then say, "all corporations should be completely regulated"?

Please go ahead and TRY... I will show you how regulations have been in place since 1913, and the 1930s, including regulations for WALL STREET, and NONE OF THEM STOPPED THE CRISES SINCE THEN...

Did ANY of these regulations stopped, or mitigated the Depression in the 1930s and subsequent Depressions or inflations?... No...

Were big businesses/corporations and all other problems stopped by all the "progressive" regulations put into law since 1913, including prohibition?... No...

Originally posted by longlostbrother
OR would it be better still, to look at each situation individually, like an an adult, not an ideologue, and make rational decisions?

Wow, is that your defense?... Really?... And you want to call yourself an adult?... Ok...whatever you say...

Originally posted by longlostbrother
I know it's easy to just follow your ideology, but it's also flawed, and not just a little flawed, but dangerously flawed.

If it was easy then there would have never been any UnConstitutional laws, or regulations put in place, but they were... Instead of fixing ANY problem "progressive democrats" made problems worse by giving all power to the banker elites through the Federal Reserve Act, the IRS as it exists with all its"progressive laws", and every regulation put in place which instead of stoping corporations from becoming too big, they stopped small businesses instead from competing with corporations...

Oh and btw, the Glass–Steagall Act, which was established in 1933 by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC), was repealed by President Clinton in 1999 through the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act... I know some leftwingers LOVE to claim it was "Republicans", when in fact it was a Democrat President who did so... Not that the Glass-Steagall Act helped in ANY way to stop big businesses/corporations from becoming bigger...

Did the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission of 1934, or the Securities Act of 1933, or the Trust Indenture Act of 1939, or the Investment Company Act of 1940, or the Investment Advisers Act of 1940, or the Sarbanes–Oxley Act of 2002, or ANY of the other statutes to regulate the nation's "stock and option exchanges"/Wall Street stopped the rampant corruption, or stopped ANY of the crisis the U.S. has gone through, including the present one?... NO...

So what makes you think that MORE regulations is going to help anyone except those who already have power?... More regulations only gives MORE POWER to the banker elites/elite rich families who are in control of the Federal Reserve banks...

Originally posted by longlostbrother
Business should be rationally regulated, monopolies should be prevented and competition, and the national competitive edge, should be protected. Extremist ideology such as yours should be ignored.

SUUUUURE... it has worked so well so far... So let's give the LARGEST CORPORATION IN THE WORLD, the Federal Reserve banks/banker elites/rich elite families even MORE power... Gotcha...

I think it would be better to say that the financial world would be better off with more effective regulation. The regulators at the moment are toothless and ineffective. I also think that regulation in terms of clean air acts have been very effective. I don't want to imagine what London would be like without them.

reply to post by AngryCymraeg


The problem is that what "ideologues" like longlostbrother can't understand is that ALL "regulations" only help the world banker elites/rich elite families to have MORE POWER through the Federal Reserve, and their lackeys.

What makes you think that "better" or "more effective regulations" will stop the corruption when those in power helped set up the corruption?

You don't solve a problem by giving more power to those who started the problems in the first place, you solve the problems by getting rid of those who made the problems possible...

Originally posted by dontreally
Completely disagree. You seem to think political systems fix human problems; they don't. Government exists for the people - for the sake of CONTROLLING that wildness inherent in human nature. That's why we have states. You cannot remedy the latter through the former; you cannot make bad people good by giving 'power to the workers; whoever administers the state will show themselves corrupt and as per every other political system, will showoff how ineffective a dissolute people can be.

Worker ownership, socialism, is an economic system not a political system.

I never said it would make people good. The problem with capitalism is it rewards people for being bad. It perpetuates bad Human traits.

I don't believe Humans need controlling. The only reason government controls people is to keep them passive, and excepting a system that is not in their best interest.

You should read about the revolution in Spain, and how successful the workers were without government.

"For the first time since the attempts to establish socialism in Russia, Hungary and Germany following the First World War, the revolutionary struggle of the Spanish workers demonstrates anew type of transformation from capitalist to collective modes of production, which despite its incomplete nature was carried out on an impressive scale." Karl Korsch - 1939.

Self-Management and the Spanish Revolution

We are not children that need a big brother to take care of us. Have faith in your, and your fellow mans, ability.

Show me an example where socialism has worked. It doesn't. An oligarchical class always develops. There always remains a disparity between the ultra wealthy - the elite - and the common classes.

It worked in Spain for two years very successfully. It failed because of the overwhelming forces of fascism.
That is why we must be very careful in understanding what is socialism, and what is fascism, in order to know what we're supporting. Most people support fascism without even realising it.

Capitalism doesn't work for the majority of people. It fails someone everyday.

And lets not forget about those ethical issues raised by Aristotle about the sheer unfairness of "democracy" (by which he meant socialism); the intellectually gifted are treated the same as the intellectually inferior. Ability is ignored, merit unrewarded. It's a system that necessarily incites recalcitrance from the educated classes against the mere workers.

No he didn't mean socialism, there was no such thing until the 1800's. What you claim is not true. Capitalism does not treat the intellectually gifted differently either, it supports those willing to play the game. Many intellectuals live in poverty because their interests don't lie in exploiting others for personal gain. Not all capitalists are intellectuals, many of them simply gain capital through family.

It seem wealthy people impress you? Wealth is not a judgement of character, nor intelligence.

Socialism is a dangerous infringement on individuality; how you think socialism can be so utopian - without a state at the helm - is beyond me.

Not at all, that is a complete fallacy. Why do you think we the people cannot run society without a state system is beyond me. Who ever said socialism is utopian? Not me. No economic system can be perfect, but socialism does solve the problem of one class being more economically powerful than another, giving them the power of control.

Do you really think capitalism is individualist? Go work for a corporation, and then come tell me how individual you feel. Capitalism promises you nothing other than, more than likely, you will spend your life working to make someone else profit. Capitalism is economic privilege, not free-markets. A class of people who's privileges are protected by government. Massive centralization of wealth, while those at the fringes starve. Rigid economic hierarchies who manipulate and control the market, not to supply needed resources, but to make sure resources make top profits. A system rigged by the capitalists, through state control and privilege, since it began in the 1750's.

I am extremely opposed to this chomskyite anarchist bs.

Great. I hope that works out well for you. Under a libertarian socialist society you would be free to allow yourself to be controlled and manipulated by another if that is your desire, while leaving the rest of us to have control and autonomy over our own lives.

Originally posted by ElectricUniverse
Corporations are monopolies, and neither corporations nor monopolies can exist under a true capitalist/FREE MARKET economy.

That is true, but why do you fail to realise that corporations are a capitalist invention?

Corporations are simply capitalists collectivizing their common interests in order to protect themselves. It is an inevitable result of capitalism, as it constantly evolves to protect itself.

But it hurts society as a whole because incorporated companies gain massive collective power, that they use to manipulate the state, and the market for their own gain. At the expense of the worker and the consumer.

You are right about corporations, you just have to get your definitions correct. Capitalists incorporating doesn't make them communist. Capitalism is simply the private ownership of the means of production, it comes in many flavours, and has no rules or morality. It does not guarantee your freedom.

I do not know if this has been posted.... Here is Obama's agenda in a nut shell.

Enjoy!

www.gettingamericaback.org...

And please forgive me for posting Waaaay out of the flow of things


I think this is from a little pamphlet called " Rules for Revolution" by David Horowitz.

Originally posted by radpetey
I do not know if this has been posted.... Here is Obama's agenda in a nut shell.

Enjoy!

www.gettingamericaback.org...

And please forgive me for posting Waaaay out of the flow of things

edit on 10-8-2012 by radpetey because: (no reason given)

Actually that shows the Real "flow of things" !!

Complete with all the codewords.

It's worth talking about and exposing the agendas.

The Rules for Revolution

• CORRUPT THE YOUNG. Intensify their exposure to violence, sex and drugs. Draw them away from religion. Support a greater development of all of their superficialities.
  
  
• INFILTRATE THE EDUCATIONAL SYSTEM. Become deeply involved with the educational system of the nation. It must always be remembered that one of the first things that must be done in order to take and retain control, is to subvert and dominate the minds of the youth of the nation.
  
  
• GET CONTROL OF PUBLIC COMMUNICATION. Infiltrate the schools of journalism. Move into the areas of management of the metropolitan newspapers and the broadcast networks. Infiltrate the motion picture industry.
  
  
• DIVIDE AND CONQUER. Press for even greater divisions of the people into hostile groups. Divide them by race, nationality, sex religion, age, financial position, culture or anything else that can be used to create serious fractures within the social order.
  
  
• DESTROY RELIGION. Do all that can be done to remove religion from all public areas. Isolate all that remains and promote any competing alternates that can be used to eliminate whatever is left.
  
  
• USE LANGUAGE AS A WEAPON. Speak of supporting democracy (in the name of liberalism) and stand up for what you claim as good values, but use every method possible to pervert, destroy or take them over. Create the new order in their names, since Communism and Socialism are not always labels that are appreciated as are other terms.
  
  
• USE THE GULLIBLE AND IDEALISTIC. They are practically begging to be exploited in the name of whatever they feel emotionally attached to. Use what they think they believe, to better use them for your purposes.
  
  
• INCITE CIVIL DISOBEDIENCE. Create labor unrest and strikes whenever possible. Promote mob demonstrations and demands for everything that will undermine the national stability.
  
  
• DESTROY HUMAN VALUES. Do all that you can to undermine the old moral values. Recognize personal discipline and integrity as conditions that must be eradicated. Do not forget that chaos is the goal. To reach this goal, it will be necessary to strip away all inhibitions.
  
  
• COMMAND THE POLITICAL ARENA. Get into American politics and identify those who can be used and those who must be eliminated. Stop those who fight against the Communist and Socialist agenda with everything from character assassination, to any other creative fictions that can be deployed to put doubt in the minds of the voters.
  
  
• APPLY THE ART OF GRADUAL REDUCTION. Institute all the changes necessary to reduce the freedoms and rights of the people. Sudden removal is almost never possible. Gradual removal over extended periods of time can almost always be counted on to be successful.

Look Familiar ?

I wouldn't put too much faith in what David Horowitz says.

He's a very biased conservative policy advocate.

In fact why do any of you put faith in anything a person in power says? They have a vested interest in being biased.

It seems another source is warning something too.....


A very credible source says:

As NewsBusters has reported over the years, Venezuelan actress Maria Conchita Alonso is no fan of her native country's current despotic ruler Hugo Chavez.

During a Spreecast interview with Steve Malzberg Wednesday, Alonso said that if Barack Obama wins reelection in November, America would be making a step towards becoming like Chavez's Venezuela "in the near future" (video follows with transcript, relevant section at 17:40):

Maria Conchita Alonso: Obama Reelection Moves U.S. Towards Becoming Chavez's Venezuela

Alarming prophecy ?

Hmmm.

reply to post by xuenchen


We're just heading in the same direction we've been heading in for decades, more control over the state by and for capitalist interests.

Whatever Obama is doing now will be forgotten about soon enough, just as what Bush did is forgotten. But we will be closer to a global totalitarian system, controlled completely for capitalist interests.

Obama is not what he appears to be. Even Hitler fooled the working class into thinking he was for them, what he did once in power though showed his true agenda. After Bush government had to appear to have changed, drastically, in order to instill some confidence back into it. But the agenda continued, just not so much in the spotlight. It's easy for people to be fooled into thinking things have changed by changing the facade, and spotlighting different events.

Communism comes from the bottom, not the top. Totalitarianism comes from the top, whatever they call it. Authoritative systems appropriated working class left-wing terms in order to control. It's all about control. Capitalism has created the most controlling system there has ever been. Far more controlling than Russia, or China. You might be more wealthy, but they have your mind. They being the capitalist class. A lot more subtle, and a lot more effective, than the clunky control methods of the "communist" nations.

reply to post by xuenchen


They're all from the same initial source.

Who cares though? Understand what communism is, understand history, understand what is going on, and it doesn't matter what some article claims, you will be able to figure it out for yourself.

Originally posted by ANOK

That is true, but why do you fail to realise that corporations are a capitalist invention?

Sorry but they are not. Corporations "collectivize", and this has nothing to do with capitalism. Corporations are an invention of socialism/communism. Why do you think that corporate moguls invested in socialist/communist revolutions like the Bolshevick revolution?... Why do you think that the world elites are trying to implement a One World socialist/fascist system?... because it destroys their power?... No. Socialism/fascism/communism in fact make corporations stronger. Under socialism they are usually called "cooperative enterprises".

Originally posted by ANOK
Corporations are simply capitalists collectivizing their common interests in order to protect themselves. It is an inevitable result of capitalism, as it constantly evolves to protect itself.

Corporations are an inevitable result of socialism, or too much government getting involved/regulating the market.

Originally posted by ANOK
..
I don't believe Humans need controlling. The only reason government controls people is to keep them passive, and excepting a system that is not in their best interest.

You should read about the revolution in Spain, and how successful the workers were without government.
...
It worked in Spain for two years very successfully. It failed because of the overwhelming forces of fascism.
That is why we must be very careful in understanding what is socialism, and what is fascism, in order to know what we're supporting. Most people support fascism without even realising it.

Capitalism doesn't work for the majority of people. It fails someone everyday.
...

Now, everyone should read what ANOK claims in the above because it shows his true identity, and the true goal that people like him want.

I have tried to inform him before about the truth of the "Red revolution", which in Spain is called to this day the "Red Terror" or "Terror Rojo" because socialists, communists and other leftwingers set out to MURDER tens of thousands of people who were capitalists, and even religious, including many clergy... But ANOK continues claiming "it was great for everyone" when in fact it wasn't.

Even leftwingers sources show at least partially the truth as to what happened during the "Red Terror" in Spain in 1939. But new socialists like ANOK, write/talk about that time as if it was the best thing that happened in the world, when in fact leftwingers committed atrocities in just a couple of months.

The murder spree by the reds lasted about two months, it happened during summer of 1939.

This is the truth that new socialists like ANOK don't want you to know about. But ANOK is not the only new socialist who has tried to re-write the truth about the "Red Terror" in Spain, and other atrocities committed by other leftwingers.

The Red Terror(3) in Spain (Spanish: Terror Rojo en España) is the name given by historians to various acts committed "by sections of nearly all the leftist groups"[4][5] such as the killing of tens of thousands of people (including 6,832(6) members of the Catholic clergy, the vast majority in the summer of 1936 in the wake of the military rising), as well as attacks on landowners, industrialists, and politicians, and the desecration and burning of monasteries and churches.[6] News of the military coup unleashed a social revolutionary response and no republican region escaped revolutionary and anticlerical violence - though in the Basque Country this was minimal.[7]
...
Some estimates of the Red Terror range from 38,000(11) to 72,344 lives.(12) Paul Preston, speaking in 2012 at the time of the publication of his book The Spanish Holocaust, put the figure at a little under 50,000.
...
Historian Julio de la Cueva has written that, "despite the fact that the Church...suffer[ed] appalling persecution" in the Loyalist rearguard, the events have so far met not only with "the embarrassing partiality of ecclesiastical scholars, but also with the embarrassed silence or attempts at justification of a large number of historians and memoirists.
...

en.wikipedia.org...(Spain)

Within 2 months the reds, which consisted of socialists, communists and other leftwingers, murdered from 38,000 people to over 72,000 people. Simply for being capitalists, you didn't have to be rich, and for being religious, or clergy.

Because of these atrocities, the rise of Francisco Franco was assured, and Franco set up to eradicate the reds for the crimes they committed, as well as going after leftwinger sympathizers who had helped point out people who were capitalists or religious and were executed by the Reds.

The new socialists, and communists like to claim that socialism/communism has "never truly been tried" because they know that once people understand the atrocities that happen under a socialist/communist system, most people will not accept these systems at all.