Obama is a Communist - should we really vote for him? - Page 2

"You think that a couple people should run everyones life because they hold a lot of money well. That makes a lot of sense. Not really."

This line sums up everything about your point.

I'm not talking about what the system should be... go take an introductory philosophy course or read some Plato if you want that. It's too bad we all can't bend reality to the way we want it the moment we want to, right? Oh well, since we can't do that, might as well talk on some internet forums about how great it would all be! That's odd, that strikes me as a little bit LAZY!!!

Well since we can't we have it that way, I guess we'll just have to use what we got. You whining about the should's doesn't change the are's. Putting in time and effort and work has been known to change the are's sometimes... if it's directed thoughtfully.

This thread was never about utopias. If that's what you want to talk about, go make a thread about it. I presented an opinion about BO and since it went against your own personal biases, the facts flew out the window and utopias and name calling were hurled like bombs. Put some substance into what you write... back up the material with facts, give some reasons why you support BO, give some reasons why the stuff I say is BS, not just how you feel or what you think.

The tired undergraduate talk about utopias has become like nails on a chalkboard to me and it's irrelevant to this thread, so stop it.

awaken

What is socialism then?

I think socialism if done correctly should be very close to how the France runs its self (but not identical). I believe in a capitalistic market (its the only kind that works). I believe that people who work hard for their money should get more money. Where I differ is i believe is self-sustainability that free trade is a joke it can't work. It tends to cause slave labor. I think that if you make over 2 million dollars a year that you can afford to sacrifice 60-70% of your pay check and it you make 13,000 a year that 10-20% would be plenty high enough. I don't believe in national education. I think for poor people supplementing it with school for them would be fine. And giving a tax break to those who send there kids to private schools (or home school) them. Using money that wealthier people are going to spend on a life style that drives others to crime, instead of many sports cars and such maybe that money could be used to feed children, research aids, ect ... I know what i say sounds like a childish but it works and it really causes nations to be one. The majority of people that grow up with socialism in their home country and move to the United States move back when they are ready to retire. Because they feel that they are not viewed as trash their, but a member of the society.

How would you define an american?

Anyone with citizenship here (I know i should feel obligated to help immigrants) but i don't.


What are you're views on welfare?

I think welfare is very easily taken advantage of, In Norway they do things i don't know what there called but they check you twice a year to make sure that you are working and contributing to your community and government I.e. working its actually done through employers mostly. But the point is if your not trying you don't get the benefits that the government offers and if you are then you do. I don't think welfare should be used the way it is in the United States right now although i do think it is a good idea.

Chris

Who was president and who ran the senate during the 80's.

Or was Regan a communist

I have presented you with facts and you didn't respond to them. We are in a very similar situation to what happened during the late 70's early 80's. The only thing a nation can do is hope for another Clinton to take us out of this. And maybe "survive" a couple years prosperity.

You have said nothing either that makes him communist only a little socialist. If you are always talking about the "are's" then how do you know what to strive for. If you look at what works in the world NOW you'll see that they're simple changes that can be made to are government. Might just put us in the international market like national health care.

And a introduction of philosophy and plato so once again are you repeating what you've been told or have you thought this one out for yourself.

quote:

---

It's a matter of less corruption and ignorance, more on the side of ignorance

---

If you feel ignorance is the bigger difference, isn't curruption still the bigger issue?

quote:

---

Socialism is dumb. I've yet to see a good argument posed in favor of it.

---

Socialism like any term has varying base meanings and interpretations, regardless of what teachers may have taught you, these are NOT definitive terms.

"Socialism" is required to a degree for a SOCIETY to exist and function without becoming self destructive.

This is common sense when biases and prejudices derived from various sources, some perfectly rational, are removed.

I'm not even defending socialism the "ideology" , but the basics and independance of the term from the ideology.

Because like socialism or capitalism, when you have government enforcement of them, and NOT their counter balancing CONSERVATIVE yet PROGRESSIVE ideals of balanced and sustainable progress without the greed and over development that consumes all leaving no one left to benefit, then you end up with a form of tyranny, be it fascism or communism or some other form of sheer stupidism.

quote:

---

You claim that this is all stupid and tripe but you forget that you too are posting in it.

---

No, I said the point was moot and the debate ultimately pointless.

And yes, I am posting in it, standing in the "tripe" trying to clean it up.

The reason why I said it was pointless and attempted to bring attention to this thought is because a debate about "left" and "right" without covering the corruption of both is the shell game too many are currently either ignorantly blowing hot air about or actually cowed into beleiving or limiting themselves to.

All of which allows for the continuance of both side's forms of what is ultimately the exact same bullshit.

You are of the mindset that ultimate freedom includes the allowed accumulation of infinite wealth, especially through the most legal or hard working means.

And you are right, any good dictator worth his salt will succeed in taking over the world....


What you and so many like you, or with your current mindest, forget, is that there is a point when the abundance of one has to come from others.

This point is where one ceases to accumulate excess and surplus and to compensate to keep up "profits" , begins to take the very base resources from the those which that enabled this excess to begin with.

There is a point when such ideology consumes itself sir, BOTH laziness AND obsessiveness are problems of imbalance.

Try being an unhindered capitalist when there is no one or nothing left to profit from.

Running a business that cares more about profits than business, a social concept meant to benefit all involved, is not really a business, it is an attempt to take wealth for one's self from others.

No degree of hard work makes that a morally justifiable action suitable for a civilized society.

Thieves and con artist are often damn hard workers.

quote:

---

you're probably one of the main contributors to the politics threads in general

---

Which is an astute observation, and hopefully someday you will recognize or at least have something to say about WHAT I'm posting.

The one sentence was a start, and I appreciate it, seriously.

Again, the tyranny, corruption, ignorance, apathy, and stupidity being the non pointless issues, not the argument of the forms or symptoms of tyranny or stupidity etc.

"This point is where one ceases to accumulate excess and surplus and to compensate to keep up "profits" , begins to take the very base resources from the those which that enabled this excess to begin with.

There is a point when such ideology consumes itself sir, BOTH laziness AND obsessiveness are problems of imbalance."

If it's bad business for the obsessive person to do this then the problem will work itself out. In the process of spreading your wisdom (assuming you're even right) you are not allowing people to make mistakes and learn. The people who are in immediate contact with these obsessive or lazy people will be other factors in helping to show the people of their faults. That's how life works, it's like a mirror, you know it's true.

Saying "you can't eat cookies every night for dinner" is enforce on a kid, but if they still don't get it when they're grown up, let them find their own truth through mistakes (again, words are cheap), don't suppress their desire to do such a thing, this will only lead to other destructive forms. I've found that first hand experience lasts much longer than "thou shalt not."

I think I see one of the big disagreements we're having here. I'm looking at the long-term cure for people. I see that change in a person's mindset is made through mistakes and re-evaluation whereas you all are looking at what the healthy form would be and saying "do this and you'll be healthy, have faith in it." But you really don't know for sure that it's right... you just have an inclination that that's how it would be.

You all see a man that's hungry and say "He's hungry!! Give him all these fish we caught and he won't be hungry anymore!" Whereas I see the same man and wave some fish in front of him (to make his mouth water) and then run around him (just for fun and because I can, because he's really hungry and doesn't have any energy to catch me) and then when he's really pissed off and feeling shitty about himself I say "You can watch me fish if you don't want to starve." And then he learned how to fish to spite me.

I do believe some laws need to be enforced. Laws that you cannot harm or kills another individual necessary. It's like telling a child not to drink Ajax from the bottom cabinet. It's too permanent for it to be a lesson to learn first hand and the only people who really want to do such things are usually very disturbed or ignorant. Not to mention I think you can agree there is something in (most of) us that knows that it's wrong as opposed to the much lesser degree of any kind of excess.

"Socialism like any term has varying base meanings and interpretations, regardless of what teachers may have taught you, these are NOT definitive terms."

Really? Gee golly! I didn't have a clue! On this thread the definition of socialism has been inferred. It was assumed that we were using the common use of the word, in its form as an ideal. The same with communism. Stop trying to nitpick.

Look, I'm not trying to be a prick either, sometimes it just comes more natural than anyone cares for, for I have yet to gain full control of my ego and my own insecurities, like being right about things that I don't have full access to information on, while having to rely on that which I do, as well as the common sense, intelligence, and courage granted to me in the face of such odds, all while allowing for the possibility and indeed hoping that I'm wrong.

I bothered posting in this thread not just because the topic is of interest to me, but because you put some real time, effort, thought, and energy into your original post and towards debates with others, showing that you care about the topic and have enough brains to possibly have a meaningful conversation about it, perhaps even teach and learn on the topic.

quote:

---

If it's bad business for the obsessive person to do this then the problem will work itself out.

---

In a system that is not corrupt, manipulated into ignorance, and apatheticly docile by design, perhaps.

And even under those circumstances you may be correct, however, armaggedon will work itself out too, some of just try to avoid that extreme.

"Don't worry dear, Hitler may be obsessive, but it will work itself out."

You may think this an extreme analogy in referrence to business, but that would show just how ignorant of the reality of the problem you may be. And for the record I don't use the term ignorant as slanderous.

quote:

---

you are not allowing people to make mistakes and learn. The people who are in immediate contact with these obsessive or lazy people will be other factors in helping to show the people of their faults. That's how life works, it's like a mirror, you know it's true

---

In a perfect world and a perfect mirror, perhaps.

Again, what is not being factored here is systemic corruption and the manufactured ignorance and apathy, a very warped mirror indeed.

If you sit in a dining room to eat with a large group of people, and one person takes far more than they need, that is easy to see, calculate, and address by those around them.

The instant you begin to refer to business, especially one that grows larger than a community, things get far more complicated, thereby increasing the potential to nullifiy your rather simplified theory.

And when you fail to address corruption you fail to address a system designed to nullify just such natural balances.

That is why this isn't a point or argument about making mistakes and learning, its about malicious intent.

Taking this discussion to smaller businesses from Presidential elections skews the point all together.

Businesses are most definitely part of the discussion, but we are talking global corporations that are only designed for profit and have a revolving door of influence in and out of government, a proverbial back door fascism/communism.

All of which equals tyrannical control of the masses by the few running corporations and governments, and finance/banking in general, the far too often closeted skeleton controlling them both to begin with.

quote:

---

I think I see one of the big disagreements we're having here. I'm looking at the long-term cure for people. I see that change in a person's mindset is made through mistakes and re-evaluation whereas you all are looking at what the healthy form would be and saying "do this and you'll be healthy, have faith in it." But you really don't know for sure that it's right... you just have an inclination that that's how it would be.

---

Not at all, I'm saying, hey, there is a way bigger picture that you are completely ignoring that needs to be addressed and acted upon, this is why I bother with such vigor to break through to those who proclaim themselves to be advocates of the notion of being actively involved in such matters as politics and social issues.

quote:

---

You all see a man that's hungry and say "He's hungry!! Give him all these fish we caught and he won't be hungry anymore!" Whereas I see the same man and wave some fish in front of him (to make his mouth water) and then run around him (just for fun and because I can, because he's really hungry and doesn't have any energy to catch me) and then when he's really pissed off and feeling shitty about himself I say "You can watch me fish if you don't want to starve." And then he learned how to fish to spite me.

---

Be wary of lumping me into stereotypes.

Again, what I'm saying is nothing of either sort. This analogy is pointless again if ignoring the modern day system of life, and then more importantly the corruption of it.

Without that you are missing the perspective of those who are saying...

"Haha, look at those fools willingly giving away all of their hard earnings all the while making sure they do it to our set limitations to alot our shares."

and...

"Haha, look at those other fools taking and taking and taking still within our preset limitations taking more than they can ever use giving even more vast amounts to us all while helping to take from others so we don't have to."

Because what both parties fail to see is that they are fishing in a controlled environment that is set to increase profits for the minority by controlling all sides and the fishing hole to begin with.

They create dependance and demand upon them by taking control of the resources through both means of communism, monopolistic government control of corporate distribution, and fascism, monopolistic corporate control of distribution with government protection and collusion.

This is the left right shell game that are two hands of the same body of corruption and control over them both. The source of the problem.

Which is the financial and banking cartels that control both corporations and governments by controlling the issuance and taxation of money that both are fundamentally reliant upon.

Honestly, I would prefer you don't respond to me at this point unless it is to remark on that aspect of the conversation, I don't want to offend you by calling any other remarks pointless.

You're clearly big into conspiracy theories and, I honestly can't say for sure that I know the answer, maybe you're right. Let's assume you are. What do you propose we do about it then?

Good lord, where to start.

First and foremost, education, clearing up theories over facts. Exposing people to "alternative" ideas, reality, history and what have you without subjection to ridicule and even prosecution for asking questions and seeking truth.

It is absolutely true that information and knowledge is power.

That seems to be the initial key, there is a stigma to what is actually fairly sensible to such basic information and perspective.

I can't believe how many people fight about "knowing" something that is clearly marked "national security".

I think people need to be reminded that its ok to admit to not knowing (ignorance), but it isn't so ok to make important decisions while not knowing.

And that if we are going to be "electing" people to "rule", and making, enforcing, and following laws as a democratic republic, then we have to be properly informed.

It has always befuddled me the double standard of the taboo of what is often maliciously deemed "conspiracy theory" about one's own governments and seats of power and influence yet sold so easily about "villans" abroad, usually to justify acts of aggression.

Oh, the details I could go into, like how so many of these "villans" were created or ifluenced by us to begin with, how terrorism is one of OUR greatest tools, etc. etc.

If the people are faced with decisions of war in particular, they need to demand access to information, but this is also irrelevant because such actions should only be used in self defense in the face of truly self evident threats.

What about the defense of others? Well you had better be damn sure you know what is going on before you start stepping in that puddle, and given the restrictions of "national security" you had better be damned sure you won't be allowed to know, and had better realize that you are left trusting those in power.

And if you had proper access to, or even look into what is NOW available of, prior "national security" history you would know that trust shouldn't be inherent.

And pre-emption has been sold through fear as a method to justify attacking that which is not a threat to self defense.

Then there is the debate of freedom vs security.

There is the quote of those who will give up freedom for security deserve neither.

This is because it is our responsibility, we must be educated, and involved, and demand such opportunity to be so at all times, which is far more plausible in a society not bent on slavishly attempting to meet the bottom line, profit.

It is very easy to try to pass this responsiblity off to our "govnernment" for a plethora of reasons.

Which only decreases our access to involevement and information.

Which relegates us to bickering about nonsense such as which corrupt figurehead to have to listen and or bow to or bitch about for the next four to eight years.

Look, you obviously allow for the possibility that where I'm coming from MAY hold some substance, which honestly makes you a more intelligent and honest person not completely dominated by the wills and words of others.

If you truly care and want to educate yourself on such matters because you don't want to be wrong, a tool of others, enlaved, ingnorant, ect.

Then I suggest you put all beliefs you may hold aside about this world we live in, and start with "core truths" and investigations into inklings of intuition as you mentioned of "knowing" right from wrong.

Take the opportunity to educate yourself on ALL available sides of an argument, even those most opposite of the positions you may currently hold, also , and sometimes more importantly, including those most ridiculed and denounced as kooks or conspiratorial.

The analogy of the man behind the curtian is oh so apt here.

Take a puppet show, you can focus on the puppet show and the drama of the left and right, or you can focus on the man behind the curtain running the show using both to his own end, which is capturing you, your imagination, perhaps your money for being allowed to watch or even participate.

But keep in mind that there are always more than just two sides to any story.

And if you want a starting point, there is actually one worth its weight in gold.

It is, cui bono, who benefits, most easily and sufficiently sought through the term, follow the money.

Nothing I can say other than as a summarization of information gathered is ultimately of any use to you.

That is why one of my personally preferred things to do when seeking such truths is to seek sources and insider information.

Which makes me feel the need to provide this link again.

http://www.captaincynic.com/thread/36405/conspiracy-confessions.htm#3640
5

But there is oh so much more. CIA, FBI, a veritable alphabet soup of whistle blowers and insider info.

YOU have to look for yourself and judge for yourself.

Because we are all faced with the problems of restriction and manipulation of information and knowledge, including intentional misinformation designed to further confuse fact from fiction and often to dicredict actual whistleblowers and insiders.

I certainly can't speak for others, but I can tell you that all my life's questioning of purpose and reality in general was never more clarified and crystalized or at least given direction and meaning as when applied to practical politics and social structure in recognition of the battle between corruption/enslavement and freedom and natural balance.

I never thought reality would ever become more enthralling than fiction untill I realized that the basis for my favorite fiction was indeed fact.

I'll take enlightenment over enslavement or blind faith any day.

Alright i did a little reading, Obama holds some policies that ... yeah.

He has a less aggressive policies when it comes to giving out home loans that the bush administration. Thats also in reference to private and government run banks.

His belief on how wall street should be ran, well its not really there. He believes in very little or no market regulation in stocks.