Interesting. garandman made this reference in another thread. He apparently believes that all Democrats are Marxists?
Is this the prevailing thought on AR15.com?
If so, how did you come to the conclusion that Democrat = Marxist?
And no, you can't rant about how they want to take our guns away.
"From each according to their ability to each according to their need"
Democrats talk about rich people having money, but they want to take that money and use it to pay for healthcare for the poor
First, thanx for not trolling my post name with intentional mispelling. I knew you could do it.
Second, generally speaking, elements of the Republican Party has become the Democrat Party of thirty years ago, and elements of the Democrat Party have become Marxist.
Not all Dems are Marxists. But if you look at their politics and policies, many are nothing more than closet Marxists.
Not all of them are Communists, but certainly 75 percent of them are. Envy is the classic Marxist emotion.
Democrat = Kruschev was right! (we will bury you)
"We can't expect the American People to jump from Capitalism to Communism, but we can assist their elected leaders in giving them small doses of Socialism, until they awaken one day to find that they have Communism"
No problem grandmaboy... that's what you get when you do it to me first....
Wasn't it a democrat who Nikita squared off with during the Cuban missle crisis though?
"We are going to take things away from you for the common good." Hilliary Clinton.
(the quote may not be verbatim but she did say it)
YOu cannot legitimately ask a question and then RULE OUT an answer.
And it was also a democrat who cut taxes to SPUR economic growth.
I did it once.
You do it like a four year old, not knowing WHEN to let it go.
Yep, I heard her say it myself. She's thinking she's the queen bee and she doles out what ever she want's to us slaves. Sounds like every "true" Democrat I have met in the last 10 years.
And yes, they are marxist.
The Democrat of thirty years ago is NOT the Democrat of today.
Do you want to discuss today, or thity years ago? Make up your mind.
The GOP of today is very different too. It's definately NOT the Republican Party of Abraham Lincoln, Teddy Roosevelt, or Ronald Reagan even.
The harder left the left goes, the harder right the right goes, and I am sitting here in the middle wishing like hell I had a centerist third party choice.
Life just isn't fair, according to Democrats. Some people have it better than others. And it is up to Dems to equallize things, their calling in life.
Unfortunately, this is done more often by hamstringing the haves, than by actually helping the have nots.
Yes, Democrats ARE Marxists, and the current crop of Democratic "leadership" is scarey as hell.
When you walk like a Marxist, talk like a Marxist and act like a Marxist, I'd say that makes you a Marxist! So yes, I do feel that's what the democratic party is moving toward.
That's not always been the case. In fact, I would say much of it has came about over the past 10-15 years as the party moved from primarily the middle to the left. Heck, at one point in time we had 'Southern Democrats' who embodied much of what conservative Republicans do today. But those with strong values are slowly moving away from their roots and toward the radical leftist element.
But prior to now, the biggest collection of them were found among the hippies and radical leftists during the Vietnam era. I suppose it is their remnants and offspring that are causing all the problems today.
The Dems of today have adopted nearly every principle of Marxism and the Reps of today are nearly exactly were the Dems were forty years ago.
The Democrat ideal (today) is wealth redistribution to create a "better" society. This is undeniable. Virtually all Democrat economic ideas are based in Marxism, that all societal problems can be addressed by equalizing fortunes through force of government. Some republicans believe this as well. In recent years, the Democrat party has moved further left, and taken the Republican party leftward as well.
And I came to the conclusion that the Democrat Party was the vehicle for Marxism because I was once a Marxist.
There are other countries you can choose to live in.
Chances are they have internet access so you can continue to whine about Bush.
Course, BenD REFUSES to beleive this obvous truth,as it doesn't fit his agenda of bashing anyone and anything that represents Biblical Christianity.
Making onewonder if he thinks a Christian is allowed any say in gov't or political office.
Typical "tolerance crowd" tripe.
"In order to form the perfect Socialist State we must first dis-arm our enemy's."Sara Brady.
John the flipper Kerry's photo hangs in the People's Revolutionary Museum in Hanoi,as a HERO...and he is running for President of the US and IS endorsed by every communist movement on the globe.
Billy bobb klinton's selling of critical defense secrets and technology to Red China in exchange for suitcases of money delivered to the Oval office by "Diplomats" from Red China.
The "republicans are moving right" riff is quite a nice bit of propaganda. So accepted, yet so demonstrably false. Were it only true.
Of course when you're cruising leftward at 500mph, someone else moving only 50mph in the same direction does appear to be moving right.
but BenDover I have to disagree with your thought that the Republican party is going hard right. On some things yes, for instance gay marriage, but in the majority of things including the profligate spending that has been happening the last four years I believe that the Republicans are getting away from their roots.
The Democrats, Republicans, Libertarians, Greens, Commies or any other group do not and can not represent any person's total view. That is why the thought of political parties in general suck, I am an individual and I vote for individuals, not party tags.
SHHHH, Don't say it too loud or you will be accused of being part of the
"VAST RIGHT WING CONSPIRICY"
This has become the Dems dirty little secret, They have become Hard core Marxist Lenninist.
Remember what comrade Lennin said.
Democracy cannot work, Once the people begin to understand that they can vote themselves money from the treasury it is over!!
& What are the Dems offering!!!
+1 ya beat me to it
Too bad BenD.
Pretty much everyone here agrees with my assessment.
No opportunity to bash me or Christianity.
What we can expect to see next is you bash the ENTIRE SITE as being "too Christian."
Whatever than means.
Might take a little while, but it will happen
I don't believe that the Democrats are truly Marxist. I believe that they are actually Aristocratic rather than marxist. The keadership of the Democrat party are some of the richest people in the world! The Democrats show a "let them eat cake mentality", in order to keep the rabble in line.
The Welfare system is one of the greatest examples of this! The current welfare system was created by Johnson, a democrat. This is a system where poor people are paid by the government to not work, not achieve, and not grow. The result: crime ridden ghettos filled with people who are rabidly loyal to the Democrats. For the Democrats, this helps to solidify their power and removes any threat of competition for their wealth.
Imagine the effect that giving out welfare checks AND free health care will have! You could have all the benefits of having a job, without having to work! All you need to do is sit back and be cared for by the ultra rich power elite and vote Democrat! However, you will not be able to step out of line! In order to keep you safe you will not be allowed to own weapons. Any attempts to step out of line will bet suppressed by the government para-military police arganizations.
As you know, this was how Clinton operated.
BTW...BenDover, why the pro-democrat thread? I thought you said in the "Bush drove girlfriend to abortion" thread, you stated you were a member of the Republican party. What gives??
If one doesn't believe that there's been a shift to the left by the Democrats, one needs his head examined.
How much more left can you get and not be Marxist?
A. Socialized health care
B. Gun Registration and gun bans.
C. Taxing the "rich" at higher percentage rates than those less wealthy.
This isn't a pro-democrat thread so much as it is a thread to determin what the prevailing attitude here is regarding the comparison of all Democrats being Marxists (as garandbum affirmatively stated in another topic).
And I've been vindicated.
SOME of the D party are certainly dedicated Marxists.
The late Paul Wellstone comes to mind.
These people must be faught tooth-and-nail in order to keep our country as free as can be.
Their number is growing every year, it seems.
1) Social(ist) Security
a) Make 10,000 year- get 500 month SocSec
b) Make 40,000 year- get 750 month SocSec
=Redistribution of wealth= Marxist/Socialist
a) Make less than 20,000 year with 4 dependents pay ZERO Fed inc. tax
PLUS get 2500 back
b) Make 100,00 year tax pay 25,000 Fed inc tax
c) Top 20% income pay 80% of all Federal taxes
=Redistibution of wealth= Marxist/Socialist
3) Open Borders
1) Bring in Illegals to take away good middleclass-paying jobs
2) Put Illegals on Social Security
3) Put Americans out on the street
=Redistribution of wealth= Marxist/Socialist
4)Take away guns
"Socialism cannot thrive in the United States as long as we have an ARMED middle class"-Sarah Brady (Handgun Control Incorporated-Gungrabbers et al)
Take away the PEOPLE'S ABILITY to change goverment from Marxist/Socialist BACK to Capitalist Judeao-Christian Republic.
NEED I SAY MORE!
That sums it up pretty good right there.
You go first, define what you think a Marxist is. Try and leave the guns out when you discuss the Revolution.
I call them Socialists.
I have to say, I still disagree with the statement that the Democrats are Marxist.
Under Marxism, everyone would be equal, everyone would have as much as they need, and everyone would give what they have. Society would truly be run by the people. The wealth would be distributed EVENLY to ensure that there were no poor. Since everyone would get an equal slice of the pie, there would be no rich, to seize power and force their will on the poor and middle class.
This is where the Democrats stray from Marxism! Look at the most powerful people on the left:
- John Kerry - Came from a rich Family, and then married a Billionaire
- Mama Heinz - Big Ketchup, nuff said
- Ted Kennedy - Filthy rich from the Kennedy fortune, and probably still hasn't even spent the interest!
- George Soros - Multi-Billionaire
- John Edwards - Multi-Millionaire
- Bill Clinton - politician who wrote a book and became a Multi-Millionaire
- Hillary Clinton - politician who also wrote a book and also became Multi-Millionaire
And the list goes on and on. Don't let their social welfare programs fool you, the Democrats are not interested in giving everyone an equal piece of the pie. Don't let their taxation fool you, they can afford it because it buys them power, and they will get most of it back anyways! The Democrats are NOT Marxists. They are elitests who want to keep the rabble quiet while keeping the money and the power in the hands of a select few.
THere is a difference between theoretical marxism, and how it actually works out in practice.
Per the writings of Karl Marx, Marxism exists NOWHERE in the world. Due to the deviant nature of man, it cannot work.
But in practice, Marxism is rampant. The Dems are practical, tho not theoretical, Marxists.
Since this thread has run it's course, I have a question. Where did this quote come from?
Here is a long diatribe I wrote a few months ago about the Green party. There's some comments about Dems in there as well, as they pretty much share the same philosophy. The end result is the same - Marxism of some kind or another:
As elections draw nearer, I thought I would take a few moments of your time
to impress on you the danger of voting for the most dangerous of political
parties in this country today. It is my opinion, but I think you might just
realize the danger yourself after you read this summary.
That party is the GREEN PARTY USA, fronted by Ralph Nader.
Surprised? Thought they're only for a cleaner environment? You might be
surprised. The following quotes are directly from their website. The
direct link to their platform is http://www.greenparty.org/Platform.html
so you can read it yourself if you would like.
There has been some change to the platform from the 2000 election campaign,
but most of their worst/most dangerous ideas are still there. I will cover
the highlights from each topic and let you be the judge:
You might wonder who pays for all of this socialist goodness. Your answers will
come later. I especially enjoyed he lifelong public education freebie. There's
an incentive to get you working.
Community assemblies? I believe that based on their description, the Russian word
is more appropriate. What is that word? SOVIET. We'll need those after we throw
the Constitution out the window after abolishing the aristocratic Senate. They
called it "Imperialist" in their last platform.
Another thing that really frightens me. The US probably has the world's richest supply
of foodstuffs in the entire world. WE FEED THE WORLD. Granted, we may use synthetic
fertilizers and the like, but we aren't hungry. What do you think would happen to our
foodsupply if these guys ran the country? Be very, VERY frightened.
Here we have it then. They may try to hide under the guise of protecting the environment, but
here they spell out for you what they really are: COMMUNISTS. Let's summarize their ideas:
* Close down businesses if they aren't serving the public interest (who decides?)
* Break up any business with a 10% market share.
* Mandatory breakup of the largest 500 companies and reorganize them into worker cooperatives.
* Encourage the same breakup of small to medium businesses.
* Break up the largest 200 banks into democratic (what does that mean?) publicly-owned
These policies, if implemented, would bring financial ruin on the entire country. The
reasons big businesses are successful is due to their efficiency. As consumers, we
have an economic vote already. They're proposing mandatory shutdowns/breakups of those
in the business world who have figured out how to do it right.
Let's summarize again:
* 100% tax on income over 10 times the minimum wage, along with huge confiscatory taxes on
inheritance, personal wealth and commodities trading.
* Establish labor time required to make a product and use that figure to determine the
actual market price.
The second bullet is all nice and cute, but it simply re-words the ideas of a pretty famous
philosopher and his ideas of CAPITAL and LABOR: Karl Marx. His idea? Communism. Need I say
I'm not going to say much here, as these are subject to your own personal beliefs, but I would
like to address the issue of African American Reparations. I realize that this is a touchy
subject, since I'm caucasian and it's easy to throw the "racist" label around, but I would
like the following questions answered:
1) Who gets the money? Can they prove they were directly injured by the slave trade?
2) Who pays the money? I am an immigrant from Germany, and I have none of my family
participated in the US slave trade. Do I have to pay? What about other Americans
who have no connection whatsoever?
3) Who owes the money? What about Africans and dark-skionned Arabs which actively participated
in the slave trade?
4) What about the descendants of Union soldiers whose lives were sacrificed to free
5) If the country is doing so well today partially due to slavery, then haven't
African-Americans who live in that society also benefitted from slavery? Do they
Mumia Abu-Jamal killed a police officer. Not only did he shoot him once from close distance,
but he bent over the helpless officer and emptied his gun into him. That's the kind of
people we need to support. Peltier was convicted in the shooting deaths of two FBI agents.
Hmmm. I wonder how much that would cost????
Where to begin? Gut the military, pay for the rest of the world's problems (it's only going
to cost $40 billion after all, and we'll have a huge amount of money from all those
nice citizens working like crazy so their income can be confiscated by the mandatory
100% tax and all, along with all the wild economic success we'll all be living in after
all the businesses and banks have been turned into democratic worker cooperatives...).
Pull out all of the places where communist insurgencies are taking place. More stuff like
Friends, make no mistake about this: The "Green" Party is controlled by communists. They
should more aptly be named the "Red" party. Do not believe that this is only a minor
part of their platform. Their entire idea structure is centered on communism
(they removed a reference to their desire to abolish money from their last
platform among other things) and that is what they propose for the rest of us.
All of the grand ideas they have cost money, money we constantly create and cosume
in our society. They make the assumption that their policy would continue to
provide them with a means of creating money, but how will that be the case when
economic ruin ensues? "In the vast library of socialist theory there is hardly
a chapter devoted to the creation of wealth - to what will cause human beings to
work and to innovate, and to what will make their efforts efficient. Socialism is
a plan of morally sanctioned theft. It is about dividing up what others have created.
Consequently, socialist economies don't work: they create poverty instead of wealth."
Think about it. What's your incentive to keep working if you aren't going to make more
money? Why should you be more innovative when there's no reward? Socialism ignores
our own human feelings and pretends that we'll do all these things for the greater good.
What is there for the left to divide up when there's nothing created anymore?
I implore you to think through their ideas and determine what the result of implementing
those ideas would be. Don't think for one minute that what the Green Party proposes is NOT
communism. Please compare their platform to the ideas of all failed communist regimes,
and see how much variance there really is. Assuming we implement these ideas, here are
some of the things that we can look forward to, based on what history has told us:
* Official Soviet statistics indicate that following 70 years of socialism, 40% of the Soviet
population and 79% of its older population live in poverty. Judged against western
standards, most of its population lives in poverty
* The per-capita income in the Soviet Union was 1/7 that of the United States, about equal
to Communist China.
* In 1989, there was rationing of meat and bread in the USSR in peacetime. The rations indicate
that the red meat intake for a Soviet citizen was about half that during the time of
the czar in 1913.
* Two thirds of households had no hot water and a third had no running water at all.
* According to Izvestia, a typical working class family of four was forced to live for
eight years in a single eight-by-eight foot room before marginally better accomodations
were made available.
* After 60 years of industrialization, the per capita output of nonmilitary goods and
services places the USSR somewhere between 50th and 60th among the nations of the world.
* More than 70% of the Soviet atmosphere was polluted with 5 times the permissible limit
of toxic chmicals. 30% of all Soviet foods contained hazardous pesticides.
* Before forced collectivization of Russian farms under communist rule, Russia had been
the "breadbasket of Europe," supplying 40% of the world's wheat exports in the bumper
crop years of 1909 and 1910. 50 years after the socialist future, the Soviet Union
had become a net importer of grain, unable to produce enough food for its own
The reason for all this is that the IDEA of socialism itself is monstrously wrong,
imposed on society by an intellectual elite, an idea so passionately believed in yet
so profoundly mistaken that it has caused more misery and suffering than any single
force in history.
Whereas the czarist police had several agents at the height of its power, the
Bolchevist Cheka (forerunner to the KGB) began its career with several hundred
thousand and operated completely outside the law. Under czarist rule, from 1876
to 1904, there had been 486 executions. This would soon change under Bolshevik
rule: 16,000 executions between June 1918 and October 1919. This was only a
drop in the bucket. At the height of the political terror in the late 1930's,
executions occured at the rate of 20,000 a MONTH.
Millions were executed for political "crimes", and many millions more starved
due to the ruthless econimic policies implemented. Not only in the Soviet Union,
but in other progressive socialist regimes around the globe: There were two
million dead in Cambodia alone after the Khmer Rouge's time in power. Add in the
number of dead in China due to the "cultural revolutions" there, and you are
in the HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS DEAD.
Now it may seem strange to bring up these harsh realities and at the same time
be discussing the Green Party. Surely they have no such intent and those other
societies must have done "socialism all wrong".
So powerful is the socialist fantasy that they cannot abide by the only industrial
system that is democratic and works. The remedy for these deficiencies clearly
outlined in their party platform - abolishing private property and the economic
market - will lead to the same catastrophy today as it did in 1917. Consider
what one of Karl Marx's own contemporaries wrote in 1872:
"This government will not content itself with administering and governing the
masses politically, as all governments do today. It will also administer the
masses economically, concentrating in the hands of the State the production
and the division of wealth, the cultivation of land... All that will demand
... the reign of scientific intelligence, the most aritstocratic, despotic,
arrogant and elitist of regimes. There will be a new class, a new hierarchy...
the world will be divided into a minority ruling in the name of knowledge,
and an immense ignorant majority. And then, woe unto the mass of ignorant
ones!" (Mikhail Bakunin)
The effor to create a socialist utopia has failed again and again, creating
monstrosities instead. The Soviet Union. Vietnam. Cambodia. Niceragua. China.
Cuba. The list goes on.
These horrors were predictable, even as they predict a similar reality
of what were to happen in our own country if a political force such as this
were to gain power.
"For behind the revolutionary pursuit of the impossible ideal lies a deep
hatred for the human norm, an unquenchable desire for its annihilation.
It was the inhumanity of our radical ambition that made the evil of the
communist epoch so total. Self-hatred is the dark side of the ambition
to exceed all previous human possibility, and the ultimate root of the
revolutionary ideal. TERROR IS THE NECESSARY MEANS FOR AN AGENDA WHOSE
AIM IS TO ERASE THE PAST AND REMAKE THE HUMAN SOULD. THE TOTALITARIAN
STATE WAS NOT AN ABBERATION OF THE PROGRESSIVE SPIRIT, BUT ITS CONSUMMATION."
[Edited to put quotes in quotations]
They are WHATEVER will get them back in power.
Sometimes they give the harcore Marxists the podium. Occasionally they slip up and let a decent guy like Joe Lieberman elbow his way to the microphone.
He promptly gets yanked back down.
Thus if they ain't Marxist thru and thru, its only a matter fo time.
If by practical Marxism you mean totalitarian Aristocracy with "socialism" and iron fisted rule for the under classes, then yes they would be practical Marxists.
But in reality, they have absolutely no intentions whatsoeverm of becoming our "comrades"! They are above us, and they intend to stay there!!!
I guess the best way to define it is by looking at the Ten Measures of Marxism.
They are with them right down the line.
Unfortunately, so are some RINOs.
I saw a representative of the Communist party endorse Clinton for president. I have read where the Communist party endorsed Kerry. I am sure that the Communist endorsed Gore. Is that proof enough?
I am reminded of a line from Shakespere, A rose by any other name would smell as sweet.
Well the converse is also true. A Pile of Cow shit processed becomes manure, but it's still shit.
Most of the "democrats" would tell you that "I am not a marxist". But they also have no idea what a Marxist is.
The democrats and many republicans believe that higher taxes paid by a few are OK. While in reality these people are the most productive members of the society. Nevermind that all these politicians and their now dependant lot keep their hand out for more. They remind me a ticks on a hound dog.
I think that about sums it up.
Yep. And true to the Manifesto / Little Red Book, the socialist Po-Mo bastards have spent the last 40yrs subverting our University and Media systems. Can't swing a dead cat without hitting some dipshit spouting 'all viewpoints are equal', 'there is no right or wrong', 'if you are Male and White you are Evil / Guilty'.
Here's an interesting list, the "Progressive Caucus"
Dennis Kucinich D-OH, officer
Barbara Lee D-CA, officer
Lynn Woolsey D-CA, officer
Peter DeFazio D-OR, officer
Jesse Jackson, Jr D-IL
Major Owens D-NY, officer
Bernie Sanders D-VT, officer
Hilda Solis, D-CA, officer
Neil Abercrombie D-HI, member
Tammy Baldwin D-WI, member
Xavier Becerra D-CA, member
Corrine Brown D-FL, member
Sherrod Brown D-OH, member
Michael Capuano D-MA, member
Julia Carson D-IN, member
William "Lacy" Clay D-MO, member
John Conyers D-MI, member
Danny Davis D-IL, member
Rosa DeLauro D-CN, member
Lane Evans D-IL, member
Read the rest of the 34 more members on the list, many of which are the "usual suspects" in gun control legislation, for example. Yes. These Democrats are Socialists - admittedly socialist. Read some of their "Issues" papers. They are elected officials in a Democratic Republic who swear to uphold and defend the Constitution, yet they believe in socialism, which is antithetical to the the Constitution.
Are all Democrats Marxist/socialists? Certainly not. But you don't find Republicans in the overwhelming majority on that list, do you?