Communism and Liberalism

[Anastasia13]

[quote name='KnightofChrist' date='Jan 4 2006, 01:36 AM']What does a nervous system have to do with making murder, murder?  The "stats" I have is that Abortion has killed over 40 million in the Untied Stats alone... thats ALOT more than the Jewish Holoicaust.  So with these stats is Abortion a Holocaust?

Well... if you know anything about our System of Goverment the 109th congress will be formed this year.  The 108th congress is the present congress... was formed two years ago (2004) two years before that 107th congress... two years before that 106th... two years before that 105th.. and two years before that 104th.  Do they not teach you things such as this in journalism school?
[right][snapback]845381[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]
I suppose so, but it might help to actually speak up here about something else from time to time. What you considered brainwashing from liberal media was in recent times actually largely places like here and theologyweb. (Next time I am not going to candidate debate threads there .)

Actually, exactly what year each congress is formed is not as relevant to most journalism classes. So no they don't teach that in at least most of the classes in the journalism program at the university I went to, nor in the integrated general ed their, nor in my community colleges History from the civil war on except from maybe one or two brief mentions somewhere of significance enough that I would remember a year and a congress and whether the congress was formed that year or the year before, nor again in my community colllege's intro to american politics.

[Anastasia13]

[quote name='KnightofChrist' date='Jan 3 2006, 11:57 PM']Here are the environmental accomplishments of the Republican Controlled 104th - 108th Congress...  I suspect you'll poo poo most of these actions...
[right][snapback]845351[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]
Only about two thirds as they don't deal more directly with human health which is the biggest reason I see for preserving the environment and my principal interest in it. Of these, the only emmisions related ones are a couple of recycling ones which are good things and the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century which I like. I also like the Food Quality Protection and although it's completely unrelated to what I had in mind, the Shark Conservation Act as finning seems a very crual thing to do. I did not realize that the death tax had an environmental impact.

You said liberals control the media. Beyond that, corporations control most of the main stream media. It's all about the money, right down to whether certain stories are really covered or not for their coporate bias and whether new peace or war breaking out grabs attention more.

[Anastasia13]

[quote name='Socrates' date='Dec 29 2005, 04:39 PM']Yeah, yeah, I've heard the whole Left-wing anti-McCarthy, "red-scare" spiel before.  I also have a B.A. in History, and have studied recent American history and the history of the Communist Revolution.
And the Communist threat was real.  Most lefty rants about the supposed horrors of "McCarthyism" and "witch-hunts" ignore the very real historical facts about the nature of Soviet Communism at the time, which was monstrously evil, and seriously sought to destroy its arch-rival America, and the entire American way of life, and sought nothing less than world-domination.  (And beleive me, there would have been absolutely NO first-amendment rights, or many other basic human rights, under a Communist system!)

There were indeed Communist spies infiltrating the U.S. government at this times, many of whom were exposed under "McCarthyism."
While it is indeed argubale that McCarthy sometimes went to far, and at times made of fool of himself, it is undeniable that the threat was real.
Liberals tend to act as though American Communists were just people with eccentric but harmless political views, but the truth is that they were [b]traitors[/b] to their country, working for America's number-one enemy!

I suggest you read the classic [url="http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0895267896/qid=1135901501/sr=2-1/ref=pd_bbs_b_2_1/002-2323353-4496057?s=books&v=glance&n=283155"][i]Witness[/i], by Whittaker Chambers,[/url]  a former Communist spy, who turned on his fellow Communists in the early '50s, for a true story of what was going on at that time.

I also suggest you read [url="http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/093188859X/ref=pd_rhf_p_2/002-2323353-4496057?%5Fencoding=UTF8&v=glance&n=283155"][i]The Rise & Fall Of the Communist Revolution[/i], by Warren H. Carroll[/url] for a history of Communism, and its true nature.  I'm warning you, it's not a pretty picture!
[right][snapback]839186[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]
I trust that former spy was making movies in Hollywood? McCarthyism was about more than whether or not we had spies after us. After your post, I decided to make inquiry to one more knowledgeable than myself.
[quote name='Tealaura' date=' a more conservative leaning 41 year old with a political science major, quote from Jan 3, 2006'][quote name='What I said']One other thing, how exaggerated are most of the claims about McCarthyism being bad and how much of a real threat was there at the time from communists or socialists?[/quote]

You're getting the two things confused. McCarthism was a response to the perceived threat - but how bad McCarthism was has little to do with the actual threat.

It's hard to exaggerate how bad McCarthism was - it was exactly the kind of mob psychology 'demogogery' that the Founders feared. Lives were destroyed on innuendo and suspicion - and Congressional hearings were unquestionably abused. there was no excuse for the abuses McCarthy and his ilk engaged in - and others allowed.

But that doesn't mean the threat wasn't real - it was. communism had spread historically from within (spread by conquest was still relatively new for communism - and never terribly successful). There were active cells and vocal communists in the US at the time and they did find some sympathetic ears. The Rosenbergs had been convicted of betraying the US - and Oswald would have begun his interest in communism about that time.

Yeah, there was a real internal threat, but more of sabotage and betrayal than actual political revolution. Those forces simply weren't in place in the US at the time and the USSR's military capability and hostility probably actually made it much less likely that the US would turn politically to communism.
-T[/quote]

Edited January 4, 2006 by Light and Truth

[Akalyte]

[quote name='KnightofChrist' date='Jan 4 2006, 12:57 AM']What is sinful is Euthenasia, Abortion, and Homosexuality.  Be they Cons or Libs that support these sinful acts... and yes protecting the enviroment is good and helping the poor is better...BTW... I do recall seeing alot of Christian orgs. helping ppl hurt by the Hurricanes I do not recall seeing "great" Lib. orgs. like the ACLU, Or the Americans for Seperation of Church and State down there...


[right][snapback]845351[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]


no instead, they went along with Planned parenthood in handing out free condoms and offering free abortions.

[KnightofChrist]

[quote name='Light and Truth' date='Jan 4 2006, 11:11 AM']
I trust that former spy was making movies in Hollywood? McCarthyism was about more than whether or not we had spies after us. After your post, I decided to make inquiry to one more knowledgeable than myself.
You're getting the two things confused. McCarthism was a response to the perceived threat - but how bad McCarthism was has little to do with the actual threat.

It's hard to exaggerate how bad McCarthism was - it was exactly the kind of mob psychology 'demogogery' that the Founders feared. Lives were destroyed on innuendo and suspicion - and Congressional hearings were unquestionably abused. there was no excuse for the abuses McCarthy and his ilk engaged in - and others allowed.

But that doesn't mean the threat wasn't real - it was. communism had spread historically from within (spread by conquest was still relatively new for communism - and never terribly successful). There were active cells and vocal communists in the US at the time and they did find some sympathetic ears. The Rosenbergs had been convicted of betraying the US - and Oswald would have begun his interest in communism about that time.

Yeah, there was a real internal threat, but more of sabotage and betrayal than actual political revolution. Those forces simply weren't in place in the US at the time and the USSR's military capability and hostility probably actually made it much less likely that the US would turn politically to communism.
-T[/quote]
[right][snapback]845685[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

If communism is or was ever good in thought or in pratice go live in Communist China, Communist North Korea or any Communist Country and be a public Christain.. and see what happends to you. But you will not and you would not (not it your right mind) do that would you!? Communism is a enemy of Freedom. Please stop defending something you have no or little understanding of...

[Anastasia13]

[quote name='KnightofChrist' date='Jan 4 2006, 10:22 AM']If communism is or was ever good in thought or in pratice go live in Communist China, Communist North Korea or any Communist Country and be a public Christain.. and see what happends to you.  But you will not and you would not (not it your right mind) do that would you!?  Communism is a enemy of Freedom.  Please stop defending something you have no or little understanding of...
[right][snapback]845695[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]
I am not defending communism. In that post, I am distinguishing it from McCarthyism. That quote is from a political science major who would have a good understanding of it.

My understanding (forgive me if I am wrong here) it may have been a pretty ideal in some ways but it is fundamentally flawed in that it fails to acknowledge the nature of people as less than ideal and therefore cannot work as a good system of government. The manifesto I got from the library a couple years ago because I was curious about it is also one of the [i]stupidest[/i] books I have ever read.

Edited January 4, 2006 by Light and Truth

[Matty_boy]

Wow Light and Truth. That was a very fast post. I posted the "forget the environment" and immediately edited it and revised my statement, but you decided to use the unrevised version that only existed for a couple of minutes to argue against me. Look at the times even. Mine says it was edited at 1:21 yesterday, and you posted the qoute with a response 8 minutes later.

I revised it immediately meaning, what I said about forgetting the environment was wrong. That's why I changed it.

[Matty_boy]

[quote name='Socrates' date='Jan 3 2006, 08:56 PM']Obviously, you know nothing about the philosophy and history of Communism. 

Revolutionary violence is central and intrinsic to the whole philosophy of Marxist/Leninist Communism, not just something accidental to it. 
Communists believe in the necessity of violence to overthrow the "capitalists," and believe in continued violence even after the institution of the Communist state, to "purify" and further the Communist cause - hence the bloody history of "purges" and and violence against "deviationists" within the Communist party.
This reached its most horrific extremes in the so-called "Cultural Revolution" in Mao's China.

This pattern of violence was there from the beginning of Communism, and has existed in every Communist state.
This comes from the violent revolutionary philosophy of Communism's ancestor, the bloody French Revolution.

Saying Communists murder is not at all like saying,  "Hitler had brown hair. Hitler killed Jews. Brown-haired people kill Jews."

It's more like saying, "Hitler was a Nazi. Hitler killed Jews. Nazis kill Jews."

The atrocious violence of both Nazis and Communists came directly from their evil and godless ideologies.
To say otherwise shows deep ignorance (or denial) of the facts.
[right][snapback]845112[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

I didn't say a thing about my knowledge of communism or any such thing. I was merely pointing out that your reasoning was flawed in that you stated that it killing is a requirement for communism. I NEVER said that there have not been any communists that have killed. I merely said it wasn't a requirement. That was the point I was trying to make which got lost in your knee-jerk elitist attack.

Furthermore, MARXISM advocates violence to overthrow the government, but Marx did not invent [url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_communism#Early_Communism"]communism[/url]. It has been around for centuries, he was a strong proponent, but not the creator. The whole idea behind communism is communally owned property (as posted above) which was illustrated in Thomas Moore's "Utopia".

"Communism refers to a theoretical system of social organization and a political movement based on common ownership of the means of production. As a political movement, communism seeks to establish a classless society. A major force in world politics since the early 20th century, modern communism is generally associated with The Communist Manifesto of Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels, according to which the capitalist profit-based system of private ownership is replaced by a communist society in which the means of production are communally owned."

"According to Marxism, this process may be initiated by the revolutionary overthrow of the bourgeoisie, then passes through a transitional state period marked by the preparatory stage of socialism known as the dictatorship of the proletariat. Pure communism which is stateless has never been implemented, it remains theoretical: communism is, in Marxist theory, the end-state, or the result of state-socialism. The word is now mainly understood to refer to the political, economic, and social theory of Marxist thinkers, or life under conditions of Communist party rule. Other thinkers that were predecessors or contemporaries of Marx, such as several anarchists, called themselves communist, but had alternate methods to Marxism to reach a classless society."

BTW. I have a BA in Political Science from Benedictine College, so I'm pretty sure I know what I'm talking about, Knight.

Edited January 4, 2006 by Matty_boy

[Anastasia13]

[quote name='Matty_boy' date='Jan 4 2006, 01:30 PM']Wow Light and Truth.  That was a very fast post.  I posted the "forget the environment" and immediately edited it and revised my statement, but you decided to use the unrevised version that only existed for a couple of minutes to argue against me.  Look at the times even.  Mine says it was edited at 1:21 yesterday, and you posted the qoute with a response 8 minutes later. 

I revised it immediately meaning, what I said about forgetting the environment was wrong.  That's why I changed it.
[right][snapback]845866[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]
Wow, somehow I did not realize that.

[quote name='Matty_boy' date='Jan 3 2006, 12:17 PM']I agree that the environment is something to think about, but it is far from trumping the propigation of the culture of death and the philosophy of moral relativism.  The libs are all about killing anyone that is of no use to them, abortion, euthanasia, infanticide, etc.  Of course they want to save the violent criminals.  They also try so hard to abolish God and make each person their own god.  But as long as the environment is saved, we're okay. 

I think I'd rather die in a smog infested acid-rain environment in a state of grace than live in a place with a beautiful blue sky, green grass and trees, clean air, but where human dignity is determined by the functionality of the individual.
[right][snapback]844621[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]
I'm sure that there are a few exceptions to that all liberals and I want both, clean air, human dignity all the things that support and protect life.

Edited January 5, 2006 by Light and Truth

[KnightofChrist]

Matty boy - "BTW. I have a BA in Political Science from Benedictine College, so I'm pretty sure I know what I'm talking about, Knight."

If you mean my statement along the lines "you should not talk about communism since you know very little about it"

Was Not to you Matt. I was speaking to Truth and Light... please forgive me for the misunderstanding... something wierd happend with the "quote" thing....But I with all my heart DO NOT agree with you Matt about Communism.

Peace in Christ.

[Akalyte]

[quote name='Lounge Daddy' date='Dec 27 2005, 02:46 AM']lets stay on track, Liberal...

First read Akalyte's [url="http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1848/03/24.htm"]POST[/url]
you read the 1963 Liberal goals [url="http://www.glennbeck.com/news/03212002.shtml"]HERE[/url]... tell me who furthered the goals in our society more?        ... the Conservatives?.. ha!
and which anti-Christian, anti-Church, anti-Semitic, Atheistic  Communist goals were achieved by the Liberal movement... 
EVERY ONE OF THEM - THANKS TO THE LIBERALS

every one of these objectives were plowed into the mainstream society and spread globally by the Liberal "thought" (or Liberal “lack of thought”)
as well as Liberal word…
The Liberal movement is the Anti-American movement

[b]LIBERALS! its not too late to join the winning team[/b]
Go conservative 
[right][snapback]836754[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]


dude! Type "communist goals" in google and watch how many hits you get...

[Tata126]

Don't forget that the early Church was a Communist system, in which everybody worked and shared the fruits of their labors.

I don't think Matty_boy was stating an opinion, Knight, to be agreed or disagreed with, I think he was stating a fact, and I don't think it had anything to do with him condoning Communism. Matt may of course correct me if he does in fact condone Communism.

And Mr. Knight, your arguments would be a lot more persuasive if you defined your terms, just to let us know exactly what you think Communism is, and what about it you're arguing against. Because in all the politics courses I've taken, I've understood it to be an economic system in which everybody shares the goods they produce. It's directly opposed to Capitalism. The economic system itself has nothing to do with abortion (I respect that it's a favorite rant of yours, but it's not germane to every issue that can be discussed ) or the environment, or many other political issues. In practice, it has often had to do with them, but if you want to rant about Marxism as it was in practice, just specify that you're not talking about a Utopian society or a theoretical economic system.

[Socrates]

[quote name='Matty_boy' date='Jan 4 2006, 02:35 PM']I didn't say a thing about my knowledge of communism or any such thing.  I was merely pointing out that your reasoning was flawed in that you stated that it killing is a requirement for communism.  I NEVER said that there have not been any communists that have killed.  I merely said it wasn't a requirement.  That was the point I was trying to make which got lost in your knee-jerk elitist attack.

Furthermore, MARXISM advocates violence to overthrow the government, but Marx did not invent [url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_communism#Early_Communism"]communism[/url].  It has been around for centuries, he was a strong proponent, but not the creator.  The whole idea behind communism is communally owned property (as posted above) which was illustrated in Thomas Moore's "Utopia". 

"Communism refers to a theoretical system of social organization and a political movement based on common ownership of the means of production. As a political movement, communism seeks to establish a classless society. A major force in world politics since the early 20th century, modern communism is generally associated with The Communist Manifesto of Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels, according to which the capitalist profit-based system of private ownership is replaced by a communist society in which the means of production are communally owned."

"According to Marxism, this process may be initiated by the revolutionary overthrow of the bourgeoisie, then passes through a transitional state period marked by the preparatory stage of socialism known as the dictatorship of the proletariat. Pure communism which is stateless has never been implemented, it remains theoretical: communism is, in Marxist theory, the end-state, or the result of state-socialism. The word is now mainly understood to refer to the political, economic, and social theory of Marxist thinkers, or life under conditions of Communist party rule. Other thinkers that were predecessors or contemporaries of Marx, such as several anarchists, called themselves communist, but had alternate methods to Marxism to reach a classless society."

BTW.  I have a BA in Political Science from Benedictine College, so I'm pretty sure I know what I'm talking about, Knight.
[right][snapback]845871[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]
First of all, I'm Socrates. KnightofChrist and I are two different people, so let's not confuse us and our respective arguments.

Secondly, the term "Communism" is usually used to refer to Marxist/Leninist Communism. All Communist states in history have been followers (to varying degrees) of the Marxist/Leninist ideology.
This is Communism as it has actually existed and been practiced, so it is natural that this is what people should discuss when discussing Communism, not some imaginary theoretical utopia that has never existed (and never can exist.) And "Utopia" means "Nowhere." St. Thomas Moore was well aware that this society could never exist in the real world.

Third, Communism can never work successfully on a large scale, and is wrong because it denies man's basic right to private property.

[Lounge Daddy]

[quote name='Socrates' date='Jan 4 2006, 11:12 PM']
Third, Communism can never work successfully on a large scale, and is wrong because it denies man's basic right to private property.
[right][snapback]846229[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

cough – "eminent domain" – cough –

[Matty_boy]

[quote name='KnightofChrist' date='Jan 4 2006, 08:01 PM']Matty boy - "BTW. I have a BA in Political Science from Benedictine College, so I'm pretty sure I know what I'm talking about, Knight."

If you mean my statement along the lines "you should not talk about communism since you know very little about it"

Was Not to you Matt. I was speaking to Truth and Light... please forgive me for the misunderstanding... something wierd happend with the "quote" thing....But I with all my heart DO NOT agree with you Matt about Communism.

Peace in Christ
[right][snapback]846116[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

Ah, got it. Did you read the link that I posted? Did I link correctly? Karl Marx did not invent Communism, he morphed it into Marxism. Read Aristotle's politics.