Jump to content
Political Discussion Forums

Recommended Posts

4 hours ago, OftenWrong said:

Just wondering, what are some examples of an "un-islamic act"?

I believe munkar means something evil or detestable.

Some examples of Un-Islamic acts are stealing, fornicating, killing unjustly and usury.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 556
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Canada is one of the LEAST racist countries in the world and actively works at stamping it out.  Why would you be overly concerned about racism in Canada when the MOST racist countries are Middle

This is like asking why some Canadians steal, or rape, or murder.

Probably similar to the reasons some Muslims are so loud about their hatred of non-Muslims, gays, Jews, etc.

Posted Images

4 hours ago, OftenWrong said:

Just wondering, what are some examples of an "un-islamic act"?

Disagreeing  or questioning with Maroc on anything. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

This thread serves as a vehicle to fart posing it as Islamic preachings. Why would anyone debate someonec whose agenda is to proselytize to Islam people. Its flammable man keep a distance with your cigarettes or as the British call them butts  fags.

Edited by Rue
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Rue said:

This thread

This was never a debate to begin with. I asked a simple question about racism I  Canada. Majority of you rushed first to deny there is a problem and then you began competing, apparently, on who can express the most racistic sentiments.

Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Marocc said:

This was never a debate to begin with. I asked a simple question about racism I  Canada. Majority of you rushed first to deny there is a problem and then you began competing, apparently, on who can express the most racistic sentiments.

No one denied there was racism in Canada.  No one.

And so far, the most racist comments have come from ......You.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Goddess said:

No one denied there was racism in Canada.  No one.

Let me be the first then.

Well...not an outright denial but a denial of the implication of the OP question that there is a lot of racism in Canada.

I think the "racist" slur is thrown around too much in too many spots where it doesn't actually apply.

There' s the old "Islam"  isn't a religion retort. Are you racist if you call the Coronavirus the "Kung Flu,"  or is that just a satirical term. How about if you call it the ChiCom virus? Are Chinese Communists a race now?

If you repeat the saying 'it's OK to be white,' are you a racist now? Or is the person who objects to it.

Then there's the 'racism of low expectations thing.' Who's the racist when the implication is you expect a minority to be judged by equal expectations to everybody and somebody calls you a racist for such a thought?

Too many times the term 'racist' is thrown at somebody but it doesn't mean what it's supposed to mean. A more accurate definition now in many cases seems to be "You said something I disagree with and you need to shut up."

It's more like when Antifa calls you a fascist. The term is slowly starting to lose its oomph.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
39 minutes ago, Goddess said:

No one denied there was racism in Canada.  No one.

Nor did I ever say they did. Your reading comprehension isn't much better from what it was last year.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Marocc said:

Nor did I ever say they did.

Quote from YOU:

58 minutes ago, Marocc said:

Majority of you rushed first to deny there is a problem

 

4 minutes ago, Marocc said:

Your reading comprehension isn't much better from what it was last year.

If you're going to take pot shots, invent  your own.  Dialamah accuses me of this all the time.

Troll.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/2/2020 at 6:41 PM, Independent1986 said:

Oh and that they did:

China: 82 million dead

USSR: more than 21 million dead

North Korea: 4.6 million dead

Vietnam: 3.8 million dead

Cambodia: 2.4 million dead

Afghanistan: 1.5 million dead

Yugoslavia: 1,172,000 dead

Germany: 815,000 dead

Mozambique: 729,000 dead

Ethiopia: 725,000 dead

Romania: 435,000 dead

Czechoslovakia: 262,082 dead

Venezuela: more than 252,000 dead

Poland: more than 235,000 dead

Hungary: 210,000 dead

Angola: 125,000 dead

Colombia: 105,419 dead

Albania: 100,000 dead

Rhodesia / Zimbabwe: more than 50,000 dead

Laos: 45,000 dead

Bulgaria: 31,150 dead

Cuba: 73,000 dead

Peru: 37,840 dead

Mongolia: 35,000 dead

Philippines: 22,799 dead

Greece: 15.401 dead

Most of us who lived through the Cold War era, have received the steady diet of "Evils of Communism" and related horseshit all of our lives. 

What has always been missing, is an honest accounting of the Evils of Capitalism! Especially now, a time when capitalism becomes increasingly ruthless and greedy in exercising its demands of sending more and more profits to the accumulators of capital and NOT to those working...including inventors and developers, who make it possible for capitalists to profit from the work of others! 

As for your lists of communist deathtolls, at least 90% .... likely more, is mostly numbers pulled out of thin air and cannot be supported by real evidence...just widespread agreement of other anti-communists. For example, death tolls of all kinds, famine, invasion by hostile nations( like Nazi Germany), insurgents, even deliberate malefeasance..such as the US Air Force flying over Korean fields during the Korean War and spraying farms with toxic chemicals to kill crops. Stuff that was only learned about long after the War was over, and is still information suppressed by mainstream media and academic sources, who just consign past wars to history as "We Meant Well" but things didn't turn out as planned....pure garbage! 

We are finding out now, in the Trump Era, what the true face of capitalism is, as it fails right before our eyes and destroys its financial and trading networks that will crash capitalism worldwide, right before our eyes!

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/2/2020 at 8:04 PM, Rue said:

Your attempt to lecture about Marx is hilarious is based on parroting what you read. Life is more than reading a text.  

Your words man ...they manifest a virgin  lecturing  someone who was raped what sexual intercourse is.....dude buy some clearasil.

 

 

Right, and I am not a scholar of Marxism or Marxian Economic Theory, but I get sick and tired of people who talk endlessly about Marx and communism and know absolutely nothing about either! 

My main point was that Marx spent most of his academic life studying and writing about how capitalism functions and should be expected to function/ NOT about how to set up a communist economy or state. 

For that matter, as soon as someone starts talking about Marxism and communist governments, I know they have no clue what they are talking about! Because Marx in the 1880's was proposing in his pamphlets - abolishing the state! The break between Karl Marx and Mikhail Bakunin (the founder of Revolutionary Anarchism) at the 2nd Socialist International, was Bakunin was preaching revolutionaries needed to abolish the state and hand off all of the state functions to local collectives...similar to how the revolutionaries who stormed Paris in the 1870's set up the Paris Commune. While Marx believed the state had to be run by a vanguard of revolutionary socialists until capitalist forces - whether business or traditional landowners were completely defeated. Whatever you make of it, you have to know what you're talking about to start with!  And I haven't met a single anti-communist who is not just talking out of his ass and gets offended when challenged by anyone who doesn't follow the same line of BS!

Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Right To Left said:

Most of us who lived through the Cold War era, have received the steady diet of "Evils of Communism" and related horseshit all of our lives. 

What has always been missing, is an honest accounting of the Evils of Capitalism! Especially now, a time when capitalism becomes increasingly ruthless and greedy in exercising its demands of sending more and more profits to the accumulators of capital and NOT to those working...including inventors and developers, who make it possible for capitalists to profit from the work of others! 

As for your lists of communist deathtolls, at least 90% .... likely more, is mostly numbers pulled out of thin air and cannot be supported by real evidence...just widespread agreement of other anti-communists. For example, death tolls of all kinds, famine, invasion by hostile nations( like Nazi Germany), insurgents, even deliberate malefeasance..such as the US Air Force flying over Korean fields during the Korean War and spraying farms with toxic chemicals to kill crops. Stuff that was only learned about long after the War was over, and is still information suppressed by mainstream media and academic sources, who just consign past wars to history as "We Meant Well" but things didn't turn out as planned....pure garbage! 

We are finding out now, in the Trump Era, what the true face of capitalism is, as it fails right before our eyes and destroys its financial and trading networks that will crash capitalism worldwide, right before our eyes!

 

1. Nazi Germany, the name is national SOCIALISM, you forgot to mention that aspect. It might work with university kids but not with me. Hitler was a socialist so he can also be added to those numbers, the only difference was that he wanted communism just for the Germans. Communism 2.0 version.

2. There is a difference between theory and practical use. I will share a story, my dad ran away during the communist era in Romania since the militia wanted to get him, when he had the interview with the Americans they asked him "how come when you grew up you did not fight against communism?". My dad replied: "did you read Das Kapital ? the theory is good but while I was growing up I matured and I realized that communism takes away human desire to succeed and that's why I am here to meet my potential". Anyways he liked Canada more for the same idea, to have freedom to meet his potential. 

I will add that Marx at one point was talking about sharing profit with the workers ?! Ok, but how about when is a risk factor, should the workers take the loss too ?

When I am not too tired from work and have lots of time on my hand like Marx did, there are so many things I can analyze from Karl, a drunk that never produced a service in his life and a man with no roots that denied his Jewish origins with hatred and created so much anti-Semitism in the world to this day. 

3. I would agree with you that capitalism is going the wrong direction, is true, it is becoming so monopolistic that it does risk to look like communism which is a few people on top and the rest at the bottom so for sure there has to be changes for the better otherwise we will have people like yourself with red flags in the streets going after private property.

Edited by Independent1986
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Zeitgeist said:

Okay I don’t know why you’re bringing Constantine into this, as the Church predates him.

Because you were talking about Catholism. You made a comparison between religious leadership and an atheist leadership. I pointed out the leader at the time of establishing the roots of Catholism, the leader was a disbeliever. You went on to say how Christianity began. You don't want to talk about Catholism, do you?

13 hours ago, Zeitgeist said:

Catholic just means universal

Catholism is a name of a Christian denomination.

13 hours ago, Zeitgeist said:

Schisms or sects broke away from it.

If you use the term the way it was used when the New Testament was written, may be, but in today's world and today's language, as you should know, it isn't so.

13 hours ago, Zeitgeist said:

Yes there is Papal infallibility for believers, as there is belief in such infallibility for Shia Imams.

Not the same at all, imo. Papal infallibility is not even close to meaning infallibility in general.

13 hours ago, Zeitgeist said:

I’m not sure what your point is

Mostly to point out the errors in your logic.

13 hours ago, Zeitgeist said:

people in these positions that have not consistently acted in ways that could sensibly be called infallible,

No person can be consider infallible. It comes with the very definition of being human, that one is fallible.

On 5/6/2020 at 12:48 AM, Zeitgeist said:

Religious leaders in theocracies derive their power from people’s belief that the leaders know the thoughts and will of God.

1) Not 'religious leaders' in general have anything to do with this infallibility idea. 2) They don't derive their power from it if they did support themselves it. 3) This doesn't fit to Iran since no such Imam is alive now who could possibly be considered infallible. It is  it the leaders of that country who claim to be infallible. (If any of the imams actually claimed to be so themselves.)

Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, Marocc said:

Catholism is a name of a Christian denomination...Mostly to point out the errors in your logic.

IMHO errors in logic here might surround the idea of correlating Christianity to, occults, such as Catholicism or Catholism

Edited by Tdot
Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Marocc said:

Because you were talking about Catholism. You made a comparison between religious leadership and an atheist leadership. I pointed out the leader at the time of establishing the roots of Catholism, the leader was a disbeliever. You went on to say how Christianity began. You don't want to talk about Catholism, do you?

Catholism is a name of a Christian denomination.

If you use the term the way it was used when the New Testament was written, may be, but in today's world and today's language, as you should know, it isn't so.

Not the same at all, imo. Papal infallibility is not even close to meaning infallibility in general.

Mostly to point out the errors in your logic.

No person can be consider infallible. It comes with the very definition of being human, that one is fallible.

1) Not 'religious leaders' in general have anything to do with this infallibility idea. 2) They don't derive their power from it if they did support themselves it. 3) This doesn't fit to Iran since no such Imam is alive now who could possibly be considered infallible. It is  it the leaders of that country who claim to be infallible. (If any of the imams actually claimed to be so themselves.)

I don’t know where to begin with you.  The Catholic Church never broke away from itself.  The Church fathers formalized the cannon of scripture and the Catechism at various synods.  I’m not here to get into those details, as I can already tell that your knowledge of them is biased and thin.  You’re the one pointing to the supposed infallibility of Imams as something legitimate. Papal infallibility is a long-standing belief for Catholics, but it has often been doubted or questioned by Catholics. Again, believe what you will.  I’m not here to debate the validity of faiths.

With regard to Iran and other countries where the religious authority is essentially the state authority and democratic representation is weak, the courts are in the pockets of government, and rights aren’t enshrined (or if they are they are loosely interpreted or ignored), it should be no surprise that citizens are told how to live and controlled on the basis of the pronouncements of the religious authority.

Some would say that’s like putting your society at the mercy of witch doctors.  I wouldn’t say that, but I hope you see the danger in it.  Leaders in organizations are people.  There needs to be checks and accountability for authority.  

Edited by Zeitgeist
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, Marocc said:

This was never a debate to begin with. I asked a simple question about racism I  Canada. Majority of you rushed first to deny there is a problem and then you began competing, apparently, on who can express the most racistic sentiments.

You use it to engage in proseltyzation of your specific fudamentalist take on Islam. That is your right. It is my right to call this preaching farting.

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Rue said:

You use it to engage in proseltyzation of your specific fudamentalist take on Islam. That is your right. It is my right to call this preaching farting.

I see Mr. Rue like one of those good cops that show up when is needed :D

Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, Right To Left said:

Most of us who lived through the Cold War era, have received the steady diet of "Evils of Communism" and related horseshit all of our lives. 

What has always been missing, is an honest accounting of the Evils of Capitalism! Especially now, a time when capitalism becomes increasingly ruthless and greedy in exercising its demands of sending more and more profits to the accumulators of capital and NOT to those working...including inventors and developers, who make it possible for capitalists to profit from the work of others! 

As for your lists of communist deathtolls, at least 90% .... likely more, is mostly numbers pulled out of thin air and cannot be supported by real evidence...just widespread agreement of other anti-communists. For example, death tolls of all kinds, famine, invasion by hostile nations( like Nazi Germany), insurgents, even deliberate malefeasance..such as the US Air Force flying over Korean fields during the Korean War and spraying farms with toxic chemicals to kill crops. Stuff that was only learned about long after the War was over, and is still information suppressed by mainstream media and academic sources, who just consign past wars to history as "We Meant Well" but things didn't turn out as planned....pure garbage! 

We are finding out now, in the Trump Era, what the true face of capitalism is, as it fails right before our eyes and destroys its financial and trading networks that will crash capitalism worldwide, right before our eyes!

 

You trot out no's of dead pulled out of their context to exploit. You in fact trvialize thesecdeths as sports scores to repeat a mantra that you believe Marxism is better than capitalism.

However you do not show how that the numbers you use establish that point. You in fact have never done a comparison of communist economic plans to capitalist ones. You show no comparison of supply chain or project management, diversity and quality if items produced, wages, quality of life, anything.

 Can you just once subdtantiate with objective criteria anything you claim? A

May I also add you are extremely polite in response. Thank you! I have been on the forum a long time and get sarcastic. When someone like you ignores that and rises above it and does not get angry about it I acknowledge their superiority. I thank you for your courtesy and defer to it 

I disagree with your opinions but from what I can also see you are idealistic, well mannered, disciplined. I am the kind of professor that would push, confront, debate you like crazy but do so precisely as a sign of respect for your willingness to read and be respectful.

Please free to call me an imperialist neo reactionary Coca Cola slave. Hey seriously I have of course have issues with a society  excessively defined by material values...I am just not sure a centralized govenment addreses the spiritual or moral deficiencies of materialist thought. ..in fact iI believd it simply entrenches it in government elitists as opposed to privately owned ones. 

The fact is socialist and free market economies have the same issues such as incompetence, redundancy, corruption, ethical deficiency and humanity, pollution, health and safety  compromises, product liabilility, lack of accountability for decisions, prevention of free and open discussions, human rights violations....but please let's be realistic, other than Denmark which is the closest thing to benevolent socialism today...is there any other example and do you really think it could work outside Denmark with larger populations and land mass?

Edited by Rue
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Rue said:

You trot out no's of dead pulled out of their context to exploit. You in fact trvializec these deaths as sports scores to repeat a mantra that you believe Marxism is better than capitalism. You do not show how t hgt d numbers you use establish that point. You in fact have never done a comparison of communist economic plans to capitalist ones. You show no comparison of supply chain or project management, diversity and quality if items produced, wages, quality of life, anything.

You parrot sites where clearly the authors like you never ran a business, employed people. In fact the more you write the more adolescent pimples show up in your words. Can you judt once subdtantiate with objective criteria anything you claim? Are you that devoid of discourse you can not provide anything to support any of your rhetoric? 

Thank you for bringing an academic point of view to this, myself on this topic of communism emotion takes over and it creeps over into what I write.

I am so sick of people telling me about the good of communism but they were not there or they did not have families to tell them the tragedies: to wait in line 2 hours for one egg, to come from school and to be careful what you say because your landlord will report you and you end up in a prison, to come home from work as a teacher, tired but you open the fridge and is no food because someone decided to enforce "the equality between the classes". 

Capitalism with its flaws provides even for our poorest which it should because we have to value humanity, there's nobody that dies of hunger on the contrary look here what capitalism does: San Francisco gives free drugs, alcohol to homeless quarantining in hotels. Where is the money coming from ? From Karl Marx ?

"Insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results"

Edited by Independent1986
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Rue said:

You use it to engage in proseltyzation

If I did, what would be the difference between me proselytising Islam and you proselytising Atheism?

Link to post
Share on other sites

If you, when discussing racism in Canada, put less focus on the targets of the racism, the discussion could have little focus on Islam or on any particular nationality.

https://www.thestar.com/news/canada/2020/04/27/one-in-5-canadians-think-its-not-safe-to-sit-beside-an-asian-person-on-the-bus-according-to-recent-poll.html

"The poll was conducted just days after Vancouver police reported what it described as a “racially motivated and despicable” attack on a 92-year old man who was assaulted and shoved to the ground outside a convenience store.

That incident is only one in a long list of examples of coronavirus-related racism in Canada, said Go."

"And in a poll conducted in mid-March, Research Co. found three in five Canadians believe it is unacceptable to refer to COVID-19 as the “Chinese virus.”"

Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, Marocc said:

 

"And in a poll conducted in mid-March, Research Co. found three in five Canadians believe it is unacceptable to refer to COVID-19 as the “Chinese virus.”"

That's right!! I agree! It should be called the 'China-GOVT Virus'!

Edited by Tdot
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Marocc said:

If I did, what would be the difference between me proselytising Islam and you proselytising Atheism?

I am not an atheist and I have never preached to anyone my religious beliefs as you do Islam. The fact I disagree with your fundamentalist Islamic views does not make me an atheist or anything else just in disagreement with your view on how you attempt to use Islam to proselytize  we infidel on this forum...but it is now nice to know if someone does not accept your version of Islam they are automatically an atheist.

I now on behalf of you tell all the forum who disagrees with you: YOU ATHEIST BASTARDS KISS A CAMEL'S BEHIND.

You are welcome.

Just in the name of cultural awareness it could also be a water buffalo, horse, goat, pig dog, llama, platypus, wombat, polar bear, moose, baboon,.

I am open minded with my animal references.   I kiss them all myself. I would kiss a dolphin's or whale's ass but they swim too fast. 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Tdot said:

That's right!! I agree! It should be called the 'China-GOVT Virus'!

Oh there we go its settled. World peace.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Rue said:

You trot out no's of dead pulled out of their context to exploit. You in fact trvialize thesecdeths as sports scores to repeat a mantra that you believe Marxism is better than capitalism.

However you do not show how that the numbers you use establish that point. You in fact have never done a comparison of communist economic plans to capitalist ones. You show no comparison of supply chain or project management, diversity and quality if items produced, wages, quality of life, anything.

 Can you just once subdtantiate with objective criteria anything you claim? A

May I also add you are extremely polite in response. Thank you! I have been on the forum a long time and get sarcastic. When someone like you ignores that and rises above it and does not get angry about it I acknowledge their superiority. I thank you for your courtesy and defer to it 

I disagree with your opinions but from what I can also see you are idealistic, well mannered, disciplined. I am the kind of professor that would push, confront, debate you like crazy but do so precisely as a sign of respect for your willingness to read and be respectful.

Please free to call me an imperialist neo reactionary Coca Cola slave. Hey seriously I have of course have issues with a society  excessively defined by material values...I am just not sure a centralized govenment addreses the spiritual or moral deficiencies of materialist thought. ..in fact iI believd it simply entrenches it in government elitists as opposed to privately owned ones. 

The fact is socialist and free market economies have the same issues such as incompetence, redundancy, corruption, ethical deficiency and humanity, pollution, health and safety  compromises, product liabilility, lack of accountability for decisions, prevention of free and open discussions, human rights violations....but please let's be realistic, other than Denmark which is the closest thing to benevolent socialism today...is there any other example and do you really think it could work outside Denmark with larger populations and land mass?

Thank you. I have noticed ever since I got my first computer and went online in the late 90's, that the internet has been rife with bad or abusive behavior from many sides. And it seems to have only gotten worse since the 2010's, with these social media monopolies applying their arbitrary conduct codes and rules. People seem to act more civil when they are face to face and fear that they might suffer consequences for being abusive! As for substantiating my claims -- I was presenting a general overall position on where I see things going today, plus I'm not too happy with the way this forum sets up quotes....it seems to make a mess when you try to post text after providing links and short quotes. So, I've erased a few posts already, that I couldn't get to come out right and decided to give up on and try again later.

 I myself, have no academic credentials to speak of. I just have had a lifetime of great interest in a wide range of subjects, that as my wife says's:' don't seem to be all that useful for earning more money or starting a more lucrative career.'

Be that as it may, I have been happy with my income level most of my adult life, except for when our kids were younger and I felt the need to work a lot more overtime to avoid taking on too much debt.

I look forward to discussing some of the subjects I've touched on in greater detail, if that's what you wish.

The biggest problem I see today in all political and economic debates is what some writer termed "the Shrinking of the Overton Window," which seems to be a fancy way of saying that the range of debate has shrunk drastically over recent decades because of media consolidation, corporations taking over university departments. As Marxian economist - Richard Wolfe says 'he would have never been able to get hired/let alone hold down a job as an economics professor today because of his 'radical' views, even with his Harvard and Yale education. It's like after the fall of the Soviet Union, there was universal agreement among those who counted, that the collapse was because of communist ideology alone, and meant that capitalism was a superior economic system. And there seems to be a lot of hysterical screaming and accusations now that capitalism has led our world into the greatest crisis in history.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, Independent1986 said:

1. Nazi Germany, the name is national SOCIALISM, you forgot to mention that aspect. It might work with university kids but not with me. Hitler was a socialist so he can also be added to those numbers, the only difference was that he wanted communism just for the Germans. Communism 2.0 version.

2. There is a difference between theory and practical use. I will share a story, my dad ran away during the communist era in Romania since the militia wanted to get him, when he had the interview with the Americans they asked him "how come when you grew up you did not fight against communism?". My dad replied: "did you read Das Kapital ? the theory is good but while I was growing up I matured and I realized that communism takes away human desire to succeed and that's why I am here to meet my potential". Anyways he liked Canada more for the same idea, to have freedom to meet his potential. 

I will add that Marx at one point was talking about sharing profit with the workers ?! Ok, but how about when is a risk factor, should the workers take the loss too ?

When I am not too tired from work and have lots of time on my hand like Marx did, there are so many things I can analyze from Karl, a drunk that never produced a service in his life and a man with no roots that denied his Jewish origins with hatred and created so much anti-Semitism in the world to this day. 

3. I would agree with you that capitalism is going the wrong direction, is true, it is becoming so monopolistic that it does risk to look like communism which is a few people on top and the rest at the bottom so for sure there has to be changes for the better otherwise we will have people like yourself with red flags in the streets going after private property.

1. You've never read any history of early 20th century Germany or Hitler in particular. Because, he took the lead of a nationalist socialist political party because he was well aware that socialism was too popular during a time when capitalism...especially banking was closely tied to Jewish identity in most people's minds, and the first thing he did when Hindenburg made him leader was to ban unions...not a 'socialist' thing to do obviously.

2. Both the US and Canada had lists of communist party members at the end of WWII.And those lists were used to screen out communists, while nazis and nazi sympathizers (which were in high number in Nazi-collaborative states like Romania, Ukraine and others, were able to pass through. The only thing that might raise the alarm bells was if a Nazi collaborator had been a commander at one of the prison death camps. Other than that, the US Government brought over all of the Nazi scientists they could rustle up (Operation Paperclip) and all through the post-war years, were paranoid and encourage paranoia among Hollywood and other entertainment media of reds under the beds. So, I noticed that the 2nd generation of Eastern Europeans I grew up and went to school with were all anti-communists, but that didn't mean that those who stayed behind were also anti-communists! 

From my background, my father was an older WWII enlistee than most (age 27) so he took more notice of the shift in media messaging about Russians and about communism after the War ended than most of his fellow soldiers who were 18 to 20 years old when they first went to Europe. Sure, the pro-Russian newsreels and even regular movies didn't say much of anything about communism, but they sure as hell were happy that the Russians were winning the war against the Germans on the Eastern Front! But that all ended as soon as the war was over....like it was a planned doublecross. 

3.If you read Marx's grand work - Capital, he makes a case that capitalism inevitably leads towards monopolization. In the 20th century, there were several reform movements that broke up monopolies....starting with Teddy Roosevelt, who felt he had to act against Rockefeller, Carnegie, Vanderbilt and other monopolists and break up their industries to restore competition. But the reactionary right started creating libertarian propaganda that demanded an end to all government regulation and interference in business practices. So is the present day consolidation of business an error, or just an inevitability, because the leading capitalists decided in the 60's that they needed to start finding ways to use their money to overwhelm a democratic system.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Announcements




×
×
  • Create New...