DOH! It's About SOCIALISM !!!!

page: 1
5
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join

posted on Dec, 24 2012 @ 01:19 PM
link   
The world is piling onto America over their gun laws. The Second Amendment to be precise. EVERYBODY is telling us that we must ban guns in order to be safe. Well intentioned i am sure. I won't go into the pro's and con's of gun ownership. That has already been beaten to death. The elephant in the room is this quote that is literally the Liberal creed in order to create Socialism and destroy the two party system.

“Our main agenda is to have ALL guns banned. We must use whatever means possible. It doesn't matter if you have to distort facts or even lie. Our task of creating a socialist America can only succeed when those who would resist us have been totally disarmed.”

Sarah Brady quote

Creating Socialism in America is impossible as long as the Second Amendment exists. Actually as long as the Constitution exists in it's present form. The Constitution is literally protected by the Second Amendment so the gun issue is not as simplistic as people think. Once the Second Amendment is gone the entire Constitution falls apart and Socialism will hit us like a runaway train. Most Americans do not have a clue what Socialism would mean for America and the world in the long term.

So, ponder a bit longer before you give that knee jerk reaction credence. It is much more complicated than it appears on the surface.



+14 more 
posted on Dec, 24 2012 @ 01:33 PM
link   
Will people who have no idea what the word socialism means please stop using it. Explain to me how a gun ban some how leads to all the companies handing over control of and all sharing all their profits to the people? Maybe you mean a dictastorship or some other form of government. A simple idea of what socialism is the NFL. The teams have thing called profit sharing so the big market teams and small market teams all put their money in one big pot and spead it among the all the teams. Of course the idea of a true socialist economy does not seem possible, Just a true capitalist one does not. What we already have, as does most of the world, is a mixture of those and others. So please, stop using the word socialism like you know what it means.



posted on Dec, 24 2012 @ 01:35 PM
link   
reply to post by MrSpad
 





Socialism is an economic system characterised by social ownership of the means of production and co-operative management of the economy,[1] and a political philosophy advocating such a system. "Social ownership" may refer to cooperative enterprises, common ownership, state ownership, or citizen ownership of equity.[2] There are many varieties of socialism and there is no single definition encapsulating all of them.[3] They differ in the type of social ownership they advocate, the degree to which they rely on markets or planning, how management is to be organised within productive institutions, and the role of the state in constructing socialism.[4]

A socialist economic system would consist of a system of production and distribution organized to directly satisfy economic demands and human needs, so that goods and services would be produced directly for use instead of for private profit[5] driven by the accumulation of capital. Accounting would be based on physical quantities, a common physical magnitude, or a direct measure of labour-time in place of financial calculation.[6][7] Distribution would be based on the principle to each according to his contribution.


en.wikipedia.org...
edit on 24/12/12 by JAK because: Please source your quotes and use tags. Posting work written by others. **ALL MEMBERS READ**



posted on Dec, 24 2012 @ 01:48 PM
link   
Which form of Socialism will they choose? They obviously won't talk about it so how do we know? Maybe it would be good for America. That is however a huge leap of faith. I doubt 90% of Americans are willing to take that leap of faith.



posted on Dec, 24 2012 @ 01:57 PM
link   
Cut military spending to 2%, and use the money for free health, education, and energy. That is my idea of much needed socialism in America.



posted on Dec, 24 2012 @ 02:06 PM
link   
Call it socialism, fascism, dictatorship, communism, ismismism. . . .

Any true concerted effort to remove the 2nd Amendment will be basically the end to what we have in America.

What will it become?

Who knows.

But it'll no longer be the representative republic that we have now.



posted on Dec, 24 2012 @ 02:09 PM
link   
reply to post by trysts
 


Thank you for the reply. That sounds good....but the rest of the world is still a dangerous place. Quite a few want every American dead. We still have a need for defense. I agree we do spend too much though. Maybe we could meet somewhere near the middle to try it out. There will come a day when that will be possible i hope.



posted on Dec, 24 2012 @ 02:17 PM
link   
Y'all are so silly always worrying about the US going socialist.
The corporate lobby and the Military industrial complex are
and will forever be, the direction drivers in the USA.
Not a chance in hell we're going even Socialism lite.
Mc Carthy would be proud of your vigilance though.



posted on Dec, 24 2012 @ 02:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by MrSpad
Will people who have no idea what the word socialism means please stop using it. Explain to me how a gun ban some how leads to all the companies handing over control of and all sharing all their profits to the people? Maybe you mean a dictastorship or some other form of government. A simple idea of what socialism is the NFL. The teams have thing called profit sharing so the big market teams and small market teams all put their money in one big pot and spead it among the all the teams. Of course the idea of a true socialist economy does not seem possible, Just a true capitalist one does not. What we already have, as does most of the world, is a mixture of those and others. So please, stop using the word socialism like you know what it means.



You know that the Soviet Communist leadership admitted it would be a "dictatorship of the proletariat", but that there would necessarily be control at the top.


Lenin argued that in an underdeveloped country such as Russia, the capitalist class would remain a threat even after a successful socialist revolution.[16] As a result, he advocated the repression of those elements of the capitalist class that took up arms against the new soviet government, writing that as long as classes existed, a state would need to exist to exercise the democratic rule of one class (in his view, the working class) over the other (the capitalist class).[16]


The use of violence, terror and rule of single communist party was criticised by Karl Kautsky, Rosa Luxemburg and Mikhail Bakunin. In response Lenin accused Kautsky of being a "renegade" and "liberal"[17] and these socialist movements that did not support the Bolshevik party line were condemned by the Communist International and called social fascism.



The Bolsheviks in 1917–1924 did not claim to have achieved a communist society; in contrast the preamble to the 1977 Constitution (Fundamental Law) of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (the “Brezhnev Constitution”), stated that the 1917 Revolution established the dictatorship of the proletariat as “a society of true democracy”, and that “the supreme goal of the Soviet state is the building of a classless, communist society in which there will be public, communist self-government”.


en.wikipedia.org...

It is always the battle cry of socialists that a so-called classless society would somehow evolve after the dictatorship of the proletariat wages battle against the bourgeoisie. In reality, someone has the reins of control and leadership and the State never withers away.

If you look at the Globalist State being created now by UN Agenda 21 and other UN globalist entities, someone is still going to be at the top dictating who gets what resources.
Would the proponents of Socialism please refrain from using the old strawman argument that anti Socialists don't know what it is?



posted on Dec, 24 2012 @ 02:32 PM
link   
reply to post by sealing
 


Thank you for the reply. Vigilant, that is a really good word. Obviously i am not part of the elite in the know. I study a lot and hopefully this is a false flag. If it is, no harm done. "Dreams of my father" gives me pause though.



posted on Dec, 24 2012 @ 02:33 PM
link   
reply to post by ThirdEyeofHorus
 


Thank you. Great contribution.



posted on Dec, 24 2012 @ 02:34 PM
link   
reply to post by jimmiec
 


Hi, jimmeic.
I don't believe that people around the world want to murder Americans. I think they know that the U.S. government decides matters, not the people. I believe the world wants this country to stop being an aggressive force for corporate and imperialist interests. I think most people in the world who are not wishing for the world's end, are hoping for a new direction in American foreign policy. One based upon empathy, not selfishness.



posted on Dec, 24 2012 @ 02:35 PM
link   
OMG even posting the definition of Socialism you missed it, not by a little... by a lot. The very first sentence... Socialism is an ECONOMIC system. Furthermore you seem to have no clue that Liberalism is nothing close to Socialism. Please read a book.

ETA The 2nd Amendment isn't going anywhere, but even if it were... what the hell would that have to do with the ECONOMY?
edit on 24-12-2012 by Kali74 because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 24 2012 @ 02:40 PM
link   
“Our main agenda is to have ALL guns banned. We must use whatever means possible. It doesn't matter if you have to distort facts or even lie. Our task of creating a socialist America can only succeed when those who would resist us have been totally disarmed.” Sarah Brady quote

That says it all. Those words should make every hair on the back of your neck stand up.

Our 2A is insurance. You don't need it till you NEED it. It is vital to our Life and our Liberty.
edit on 24-12-2012 by queenofswords because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 24 2012 @ 02:40 PM
link   
reply to post by trysts
 


You may be right. The media sure loves to bombard us with pictures of them burning our flag and calling for our deaths. I think everyone can agree that government does not represent us as a whole. Thank you for the reply.



posted on Dec, 24 2012 @ 02:44 PM
link   
reply to post by queenofswords
 


Yes, It is disheartening that the majority of Democrats do not know what they are buying into. I doubt they understand what the current administrations goals really are.



posted on Dec, 24 2012 @ 02:51 PM
link   
reply to post by Kali74
 


Thank you for the reply. The economy of a country is literally it's heart and soul. Without a healthy economy Liberalism does not work, no form of government works really. It would be become totalitarian. I don't believe they want Liberalism per say. The Sarah Brady quote pretty much nails what they want. Which form do they want? I don't know. They probably don't know. It would probably end up full of unintended consequences like every feel good policy they force on us though.



posted on Dec, 24 2012 @ 02:53 PM
link   
reply to post by beezzer
 


Thank you for the reply. You nailed it. Your contribution is appreciated.



posted on Dec, 24 2012 @ 02:58 PM
link   
Unfortunately i must go for now. Could some kind, like minded individual please tend this thread for me for a couple hours? I normally do not leave one unattended but something has come up. It is a bit much to ask i know and i understand if it is too much to ask of anyone. Gotta ask though. We must be vigilant! Love that word.



posted on Dec, 24 2012 @ 03:00 PM
link   
reply to post by jimmiec
 


I'll be up for a bit. I have to wait for the child to fall asleep before Santa comes.






new topics
 
5
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join