Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Know Saul Alinsky And You Know Barack Obama And His [Marxist] Regime.

page: 4
17
<< 1  2  3   >>

log in

join

posted on Oct, 16 2013 @ 05:20 AM
link   
reply to post by YodHeVauHe
 


Obamacare is right-wing version of universal healthcare... Private companies still exist, everything is individual and regulated. That is where the issue lies.

Soviet Union had universal healthcare for example, it can be considered socialistic, although that is one of the socialistic parts that can and should be used in any advanced economy. Healthcare and capitalism don´t work together as healthcare has inelastic demand. Many European have successfully implemented it, including some post-Soviet countries.

I guess you are saying Europeans have no idea what they are doing and making the mistake for Marxist regime again, despite having far more first-hand experience with communism, whether as being a neighbour or even part of it, while most Americans have heard of from media, especially during the Cold War propaganda.

If you knew even a bit about USSR, you would see that current US is quite the opposite of what communism is, even Obamacare is far from what Marx wanted.
edit on 16-10-2013 by Cabin because: (no reason given)




posted on Oct, 16 2013 @ 05:20 AM
link   

beezzer
BO XIAN
It's re-branding. It's marketing.

Obama is a "right-winger" now. He's not a "socialist"
"Socialism" is good.
"Right-wingers" are bad.
"Freedom" means more government control.
"Terrorism" is disagreeing with your government.
"Patriotism" is paying taxes.


I could go on, but the point is, it' all the same. Just changing the name.


ABSOLUTELY INDEED.

"Terrorism" now equals patriots and their beliefs and actions . . . as well as veterans . . . as well as authentic Christians . . . as well as tea party members . . . as well as 2nd Amendment supporters . . . as well as those who support the Constitution . . . as well as those who dare to still fly the American Flag.

"Patriotism" is not equated with compliance with the globalist oligarchy and trashing of the USA! What an example of reality turned on its head . . .

The Biblical warning about this era calling evil good and black white has certainly come true.



posted on Oct, 16 2013 @ 05:23 AM
link   

Cabin
reply to post by YodHeVauHe
 

If you knew even a bit about USSR, you would see that current US is quite the opposite of what communism is.


THAT MUST

be WHY

defector after defector

and aged survivor after survivor of such tyrannies

have courageously voiced repeatedly . . . youtube etc. . . .


THEIR ALARM

for HOW MUCH

the USA IS RAPIDLY BECOMING JUST LIKE THE TYRANNIES THEY BARELY SURVIVED AT GREAT FEAR AND COST.

/sarc

LOLOLOL.

DOH!

Sigh.



posted on Oct, 16 2013 @ 05:26 AM
link   

Cabin
reply to post by YodHeVauHe
 


Obamacare is right-wing version of universal healthcare... Private companies still exist, everything is individual and regulated. That is where the issue lies.

Soviet Union had universal healthcare for example, it can be considered socialistic, although that is one of the socialistic parts that can and should be used in any advanced economy. Healthcare and capitalism don´t work together as healthcare has inelastic demand. Many European have successfully implemented it, including some post-Soviet countries.

I guess you are saying Europeans have no idea what they are doing and making the mistake for Marxist regime again, despite having far more first-hand experience with communism, whether as being a neighbour or even part of it, while most Americans have heard of from media, especially during the Cold War propaganda.

If you knew even a bit about USSR, you would see that current US is quite the opposite of what communism is, even Obamacare is far from what Marx wanted.
edit on 16-10-2013 by Cabin because: (no reason given)


You're missing the point. In the Soviet Union, everything was mandated by the government.

How is ordering the American people to purchase, any different?

We will be punished if we don't obey government and buy health insurance. And you don't see anything wrong with that?



posted on Oct, 16 2013 @ 05:39 AM
link   
reply to post by beezzer
 


{warning . . . satire follows}

Now now, Beezer . . . did you forget to take your Soma?

We see that yesterday you missed your compulsory exercise routine in front of your bi-directional TV screen. That will cost you a $50 fine. We have already deducted it from your running account (See the movie THX 1138). It will be doubled if you miss again within 30 days. If you miss it a 3rd time, you will be exterminated as too costly for the society to bother with. You might get your affairs in order just in case.

Also, Big Brother wants to warn you to be very prepared for your test at your local NEIGHBORLY CENTER. We expect to discover that you have flawlessly memorized the latest summary of the Dear Brother's weekly exhortation to the sheeple. Failure to do so will result in no Soylent Green for 24 hours. Failure to do so a 2nd time will result in no food for 72 hours. Failure to do so a 3rd time will result in our causing your chip implant to release it's toxin and relieve the society of having to bother with you further.

Oh, and Beezer . . . while you are technically correct that we don't really care greatly what labels you use for our tyranny. We prefer that you get it right. And this week . . . the CORRECT GROUP THINK LABEL IS:

COMPULSARY SMOTHERING TOGETHERNESS.

Practice saying it with feeling and affection. You will be tested.

/satire

REFS:

NOVELS:

1984
ANIMAL FARM
BRAVE NEW WORLD

MOVIE (George Lucas' Master's Thesis):

THX 1138

Globalist quotes at the links often cited by me above.


THX 1138 youtube links:

www.youtube.com... .1ac.1.11.youtube.ztRlwvHZGw8



edit on 16/10/2013 by BO XIAN because: additions
edit on 16/10/2013 by BO XIAN because: additions
edit on 16/10/2013 by BO XIAN because: ditto



posted on Oct, 16 2013 @ 05:48 AM
link   
reply to post by BO XIAN
 


Well said!

People don't realize that the differences between a free country and a communist country are the laws!

In a free country, you have fewer laws and are able to self-determine what you want to do, how you want to do it, where you want to do it, when you want to so it.

In socialist, communist countries you have more laws that dictate what you do, your behavior, your speech, your actions.

It's not the ideology so much as it is the laws that propel the ideology.



posted on Oct, 16 2013 @ 05:50 AM
link   
reply to post by beezzer
 


THX THX for your kind reply.

INDEED.

Though I'd probably say that it's the tyrannical ideologies, greed, power-mongering, control freak stuff from hell . . . that foster the laws.

You are a treasure and a joy hereon. Thanks tons for your faithfully excellent contributions.

Blessings,



posted on Oct, 16 2013 @ 05:56 AM
link   
reply to post by beezzer
 


Technically, I am also forced to pay 10% of my salary for healthcare, although there are no insurance companies and if I am unemployed I do not have to pay anything. There are no deductibles and no contracts, just everyone puts 10% of their salary in the budget, government distributes it among hospitals and when someone needs help they get it without any extra costs.

In Soviet Union, there were far more forced things. Nearly everything was government owned. Farm houses were told how many animals they were legally allowed to have, inspection were uncommon. Every farmer was forced to sell their milk to kolkhoz, who distributed it. After finishing university you were forced to some place to work. You had not much option where you want to work, as everything was government owned, unless you had contacts as corruption was extrem. You could have easily told to go to the other side of the country and work there in some rural area. Free speech or religion were not allowed. You were not forced to pay taxes, as everyone were paid by the government and the profits went to government budget. Everybody were forced to work and given a house/apartment. Literature,TV everything was highly controlled that nothing negative is said and everything would be full of propaganda.

I do not say things overally were that bad. Basic needs costs - food, housing, books- were extremely cheap, cost nearly nothing, education did not cost anything, guaranteed job for everybody. To be honest, there are many older people in Post-Soviet countries who wish these days back as the new economies are not so strong yet and they can afford far less than back in the days, even when working.

But well, all that is another story, but as you can see, current US is very far from what USSR was like. Basically any taxation or law can be taken as government-mandated, government making the rules. That is what it is like in every country in the world.


I agree that Obamacare has its issues, although I would like to ask you a question : Would Democrats have been able to push through universal healthcare law in the current United States?

I personally highly doubt so.

1) There are many Republicans who are highly against it, even when at the end it might cost them less and remove any financial worries from health issues.
2) In the current economy losing possibly millions of jobs from insurance industry
3) Individualistic culture, very self-centered.



All that alone would make it nearly impossible to push something like that through, it would be political suicide for the party, even if in the long-run it might be far better solution for the nation.

I personally see the new healthcare a step close to universal healthcare. Currently is simply the beginning of this, the panic. Wait for a couple of years, until it fully takes effects and the markets settle. I still do believe it might work out quite well in the end, definitely better than the previous one, although it might take a couple if not more years for it to settle.
edit on 16-10-2013 by Cabin because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 16 2013 @ 06:02 AM
link   

Cabin

I would like to ask you a question : Would Democrats have been able to push through universal healthcare law in the current United States?

I personally highly doubt so.


Yes, I think they would. Many people want fewer freedoms, fewer responsibilities. They look at personal responsibility with disdain.

They just don't see the price for giving up the freedoms.



posted on Oct, 16 2013 @ 06:04 AM
link   
reply to post by beezzer
 


Should you take responsibility for today´s weather?

In many cases the health is similar, as you have no control over many diseases, which are genetic. It might be your health and your body, but the genes you inherited from your parents decide your health largely.

What about freedom from people profiteering from your health issues? What about the freedom from worries about whether the next surgery might bankrupt your family?

The world is not that black and white.
edit on 16-10-2013 by Cabin because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 16 2013 @ 06:07 AM
link   

Cabin
reply to post by beezzer
 


Should you take responsibility for today´s weather?

In many cases the health is similar, as you have no control over many diseases, which are genetic. It might be your health and your body, but the genes you inherited from your parents decide your health largely.
edit on 16-10-2013 by Cabin because: (no reason given)


Yes, I should take responsibility for the weather. If it is raining, I use an umbrella. Snowing? I dress warmer. Sunny, I dress cooler.

I don't need, nor do I want government TELLING ME how to dress, how to respond to the weather!



posted on Oct, 16 2013 @ 06:08 AM
link   
reply to post by BO XIAN
 


That's all complete nonsense. Name one Marxist policy of the current UK government.



posted on Oct, 16 2013 @ 06:43 AM
link   
reply to post by bastion
 


A maximum number of people at the public trough {that the political system and public awareness might tolerate} regardless of practical realities . . . even, mystifyingly, people who are dedicated to destroying the UK.

Akin to the same idiocies in the USA.



posted on Oct, 16 2013 @ 07:01 AM
link   
reply to post by BO XIAN
 


You mean welfare? Marx was a major critic of a welfare state (see his Communist League address) as it's both monetary and class based so fails the Marxist test. Plus it's a product of failed capitalist policies, allows failed policies to continue. If Marxism was in place we'd have 100% employment so wouldn't need it.

The current government blame people on welfare for being on it, instead of introducing legislation to raise employment - which is what a Marxist policy would do.

See not Marxist in the slightest.
edit on 16-10-2013 by bastion because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 16 2013 @ 10:33 AM
link   
reply to post by bastion
 



Uhhhhhhh who funded Marx?

Who funded Marx's spread and conquest of Russia?

Who funded and insured Mao's conquest of China?

Who sold you the idea, the folly that Marxism is some sort of pure utopian ideology with the least shred of functionality?

What do the masses on the planet think of when they think of

"Marxism?"

How many galactic clusters worth of distance is the definition used by the masses when they think of "Marxism"

from your daffynitionary utopian "Marxism" that has never seen a shred of reality on the planet and never will?

I don't know what fantasy land your philosophical constructions lie in but it doesn't seem to be the standard one most of the rest of us inhabit in 4D time/space.



posted on Oct, 16 2013 @ 12:10 PM
link   
reply to post by BO XIAN
 


I'm using Marxism as in the philosophy laid out by Marx and Engels. If people enough people call a chicken a horse, it doesn't mean a chicken and a horse are the same thing.

I don't think Marxism is in any way practical and never claimed it would be (but thanks for trying to put words in my mouth). I only claimed that saying Obama/the democrats are Marxist is laughable. Would be great if it was possible but (human) nature is not equal s no societal structure based on total equality will ever function.



posted on Oct, 16 2013 @ 09:26 PM
link   
reply to post by bastion
 



Ahhhhhhhhhh . . . soooooo, you are using a philosophical fantasy never observed in human social or political contexts

to "refute"

a discussion of the Marxist characteristics of the global oligarchy's global government more and more overtly building and increasingly ready to spring forth more brazenly on the world stage as a bastardized form of Marxism wedded to a bastardized form of monopolistic capitalism just as the globalists have long planned and designed to be the case.

Cute.

A fantasy to "refute" what 10's of millions of people know about Marxism, socialism and all such ilk from the painful demonstrations of the last century.

How . . . . mystifyingly obtuse to the max.



posted on Oct, 17 2013 @ 07:22 AM
link   
Well yeah. It's the difference between having a grounded view on politics based on facts, and a nonsensical one that relies solely n misappropriation of terminology and rampant hyperbole to try and mask the fact their argument lacks any substance as when someone has to go to such lengths to avoid taking about the topic at hand, you know even the don't have faith in their own opinion.

If those '10 million people' had bothered to read Marx they'd know he was oligarchies and capital are the complete opposite of Marxism and would know it's not relevant in the slightest and is being used to hide the fact the Republicans have been up to seeing as they've thrown democracy out the window and held the government to ransom to impose their own ideology on the public.
edit on 17-10-2013 by bastion because: (no reason given)






top topics



 
17
<< 1  2  3   >>

log in

join