fullback44 said:

---

Good answer.. so it's more about an authoritarian society than actual communism. I wouldn't think the super rich elites will give up capitalism, it's what got them there. Maybe they want to end capitalism for the peasants so they don't have any more competition? Just kicking this around. Thanks

---

You are correct sir. Look no further than the covid craziness and how it benefitted big box stores and Amazon, while independent mom & pop shops were forced to close and stay home for you know, their own good....

I pretty much call anything I don't like "marxist".

Universal healthcare? Marxist
Wealth redistribution? Marxist
Green New Deal? Marxist
Kim Mulkey? Marxist

frenchtoast said:

---

I pretty much call anything I don't like "marxist".

Universal healthcare? Marxist
Wealth redistribution? Marxist
Green New Deal? Marxist
Kim Mulkey? Marxist

---

I don't know about Kim Mulkey, but the first two are socialist policies that steal from earners/producers and help reduce / eliminate the middle class and the third one is massive misuse of trillions of dollars when we're already 35 trillion in debt that only benefits the politically elite and hurts people. All three of which create more government-dependent socialist voters. And socialism is a precursor to communism. Marxist ideology includes a bunch of tactics to get to communist power and control.

oh no said:

---

frenchtoast said:

---

I pretty much call anything I don't like "marxist".

Universal healthcare? Marxist
Wealth redistribution? Marxist
Green New Deal? Marxist
Kim Mulkey? Marxist

---

I don't know about Kim Mulkey, but the first two are socialist policies that steal from earners/producers and help reduce / eliminate the middle class and the third one is massive misuse of trillions of dollars when we're already 35 trillion in debt that only benefits the politically elite and hurts people. All three of which create more government-dependent socialist voters. And socialism is a precursor to communism. Marxist ideology includes a bunch of tactics to get to communist power and control.

---

Oh no? Marxist

frenchtoast said:

---

oh no said:

---

frenchtoast said:

---

I pretty much call anything I don't like "marxist".

Universal healthcare? Marxist

Wealth redistribution? Marxist
Green New Deal? Marxist
Kim Mulkey? Marxist

---

I don't know about Kim Mulkey, but the first two are socialist policies that steal from earners/producers and help reduce / eliminate the middle class and the third one is massive misuse of trillions of dollars when we're already 35 trillion in debt that only benefits the politically elite and hurts people. All three of which create more government-dependent socialist voters. And socialism is a precursor to communism. Marxist ideology includes a bunch of tactics to get to communist power and control.

---

Oh no? Marxist

---

Kim has MAGA written all over her. She can coach the round ball but she is an unlikeable rascal.

Bearpitbull said:

---

frenchtoast said:

---

oh no said:

---

frenchtoast said:

---

I pretty much call anything I don't like "marxist".

Universal healthcare? Marxist

Wealth redistribution? Marxist
Green New Deal? Marxist
Kim Mulkey? Marxist

---

I don't know about Kim Mulkey, but the first two are socialist policies that steal from earners/producers and help reduce / eliminate the middle class and the third one is massive misuse of trillions of dollars when we're already 35 trillion in debt that only benefits the politically elite and hurts people. All three of which create more government-dependent socialist voters. And socialism is a precursor to communism. Marxist ideology includes a bunch of tactics to get to communist power and control.

---

Oh no? Marxist

---

Kim has MAGA written all over her. She can coach the round ball but she is an unlikeable rascal.

---

there is no way someone who supports men playing women's sports is MAGA

fullback44 said:

---

So I have a question for someone that may know this answer, I do not know the answer

So if people in general think or say that some of the hard core Democrat elites and politicians are communists or are Marxist, then why are those same people the ones that are supporting the war in Ukriane who are actually fighting the real communists? To me this doesn't make one bit of sense? If these people are communists then why are they fighting a real communist country ?

Not all political postions make sense but this one is rather confusing to the average Joe (peasant ) like myself

---

Hey there OP,

Did you just arrive here from the year 1991 or earlier? Because the Soviet Union was dissolved on Dec 26, 1991 and the Communists lost control of every single former Soviet Republic.

Russia is not Communist. Yes - there is corruption and oligarchy.... which is not all too different from Ukraine. But is is most certainly NOT Communist anymore.

The Communist lost the USSR, but the work of the KGB to infiltrate Western Institutions was largely successful, and have given rise to the modern political globalist left the Democrats and their liberal allies in Canada and Europe now support.

oh no said:

---

Bearpitbull said:

---

frenchtoast said:

---

oh no said:

---

frenchtoast said:

---

I pretty much call anything I don't like "marxist".

Universal healthcare? Marxist

Wealth redistribution? Marxist
Green New Deal? Marxist
Kim Mulkey? Marxist

---

I don't know about Kim Mulkey, but the first two are socialist policies that steal from earners/producers and help reduce / eliminate the middle class and the third one is massive misuse of trillions of dollars when we're already 35 trillion in debt that only benefits the politically elite and hurts people. All three of which create more government-dependent socialist voters. And socialism is a precursor to communism. Marxist ideology includes a bunch of tactics to get to communist power and control.

---

Oh no? Marxist

---

Kim has MAGA written all over her. She can coach the round ball but she is an unlikeable rascal.

---

there is no way someone who supports men playing women's sports is MAGA

---

fordmd said:

---

My retiring Ivy League physician partner, is intellectually bound to the belief redistribution of wealth is necessary to preserve the county-vehemently so.
The vast differential of wealth from top 1% to the rest of the nation is his argument.

He CANNOT fathom the inefficiency and corruption of big government. Despite being a bright guy.

NONE of his arguments pass muster in debate.

Bottom line, there are Marxists hiding all over the place in intellectual circles so out of touch despite bright minds… HOW DID THIS HAPPEN?

---

That is a good example of the hypocrisy of limousine liberals and really anyone who supports leftist ideology.

They want redistribution, but just not of their wealth. Instead have the govt, using force, take others property and redistribute it.

Conversations that I've had with dems that lead them to this conclusion, end with them saying "I guess you're right, BUT I JUST FEEL..."

Here is a good piece on Donald Harris' Marxist legacy/impact on Kamala. Excerpt:

Quote:

---

Kamala Harris's rhetoric often echoes the Marxist undertones of her father's. Recall a 2020 video of hers:
So there's a big difference between equality and equity. Equality suggests, "oh everyone should get the same amount." The problem with that, not everybody's starting out from the same place. So if we're all getting the same amount, but you started out back there and I started out over here, we could get the same amount, but you're still going to be that far back behind me. It's about giving people the resources and the support they need, so that everyone can be on equal footing, and then compete on equal footing. Equitable treatment means we all end up in the same place.

This focus on outcomes rather than opportunities is a key tenet of Marxist thought. The policy proposals she committed to in her 2020 run for the presidency, however nebulous they may seem, reflect this ideology. Medicare for All, a single-payer healthcare system, and the Green New Deal, with its massive government investment in green energy, are aimed at addressing supposed systemic inequities through state intervention. And her more recent attacks on "excessive profits," which she says should be regulated by way of price ceilings, echo a Marxian worldview that is not made less concerning by virtue of the policy's fuzzymindedness.

---

Quote:

---

Often this sort of cloudy policy proposal and vague rhetoric obscure our view of any specific solutions she is offering, but a Kamala Harris presidency would likely see the continued influence of her father's Marxist legacy, emphasizing equity, government intervention and onerous economic mandates from the top down. This ideological framework could significantly shape the nation's economic and social policies, steering them towards increased state control and economic centralization. If her recent announcements regarding taxes on capital gains and price caps mean anything, it's that she's far further down that path than many thought.

In the last few weeks, conservative talking heads have tried to pick apart Kamala Harris's incoherent statements particularly her use of the phrase "what can be, unburdened by what has been" for hints of her leftist ideology. They needn't look that hard. Shift focus from the inane debates on race and ethnicity and you'll remember that none of us live unburdened by our pasts. For Kamala Harris, that burden comes in the form of an intellectual heritage that her father Donald built on the back of Karl Marx. Look closer and you'll see an homage to it baked into every aspect of her public policy agenda.

---