Loach, thanks for your response. I do know how having bunches of kin involved can slow things down and that personalities in one family can be very different. I know how dear home territory can be to a family and also how greedy grubby hands can be when the idea of deep pockets beckons.
That’s awful about the horses.
You are right. A more sympathetic character does make it easier.
I’ve had two friends lose houses to eminent domain. One lost a house in a pleasant neighborhood to an extention of Vanderbilt University. A track now stands where her house was. The other friend lost a beautiful old family home to “new and improved” roads.
I will say that some of the city’s wealthier old families lost homes when that particular road was improved. It’s not always just those without funds who are victimized.
The Republican right are communists. It’s an Association - no, a Collusion of the wealthiest and most radical. Every conformed person is a Republican and can see the obvious advantage of a land grab. Steal, Develop, Profit.
Fascism has nothing to do with Marxism. The Italian and German fascists of the 1920’s were anti-Communist (just like they were anti-liberal and anti-rational). Fascism has some “corporatist” elements, like Mussolini’s idea of dividing society into seven corporations, but they were never put into practice by fascist governments. Fascism is about as anti-Marxist as you can possibly get.
When I saw the OP title, I assumed correctly that it was going to complain about Democratic governmental abuse. After all, Democrats + Abuse = Communism :rolleyes:. It would be almost as tiring as constantly equating the Republicans with Fascism (except that of course in this eminent domain case it would be more true.)
But I agree that almost all instances of ED takings that wind up in the hands of private parties are abuse, if not outright corruption. There might be scattered instances of towns thinking they are going to build a public works project, then simply changing their minds, but I’m pretty sure they’re fairly rare.
Not to say, however, that all ED takings for actual public use are always justified. But I think we need some legislation (on the level of state constitutional amendments) in order to curb ED takings for private benefit.
Fascists say that, but once they get power, you have the same strutting parades and endless propaganda and secret arrests as under any communist dictatorship. Despite varying philosophies, if a member of the government objects to the existence of a particular citizen, that citizen’s treatment will be exactly the same.
The ideological differences are mere window-dressing.
Oakminster, I still don’t understand why you think the OP grossly misrepresents the situation. I couldn’t find much information about the case and had to go with that story but I’ve yet to hear any evidence that contradicts it. Loach’s additional color doesn’t contradict or even mitigate the story.
Loach, I’m just curious - What about the Halpers’ did you not like? Also, is it possible the animal abuse charges were trumped up to harass?
Well dearie, I do know history. And even politics. In fact, thats what I got my big ole learning degree in.
This is not communism.
Repeat
THIS IS NOT COMMUNISM.
For all the reasons, people in this thread have listed. You being condescending and ignorant does not make it anymore communist than me waving a magic wand. Deal with it.
Don’t communist regimes generally keep what they nationalize? The accusation here is that the county wants to take the land and sell it to a private developer. That sort of collusion between government and industry is a hallmark of facism, not communism, at least as far as I understand things.
How much experience do you have in dealing with actual communism in practice, as opposed to the idealized academic version? Just curious.
If you want to get especially fussy, “this” is (potentially) totalitarianism, which has in recent decades comprised an ill-defined smushing of fascism and communism.
Idealized academic version, naturally. And to be honest, not a whole lot of experience compared to other things. Comparitive politics wasn’t really my thing.
Well actually that’s a good point and one I neglected to comment on. I could argue that the USSR and China and the other modern communist countries were closer to practicing a type of general totalitarism with different varientations depending on the situation of their particular country. It happens that they called it communism. Does the definition of an ideology change just because countries latch onto it as a symbol and corrupt it for their own reasons? Maybe, but thats a whole other debate.
In this instance, the government taking land and (in theory), selling it to corporate entities, might classify as being closer to Italian fascism. (just an educated guess). A communist country would want to have nothing to do with any corporation or private business(cuz there wouldn’t be any.)
It just irritates me when people starting throwing out the Communist boogyman whenever its something they don’t agree with.
Well, we didn’t type all those messages to the SDMB 'til our keyboards filled with blood to just roll out the welcome mat for the Reds.
Anyway, I wouldn’t harp on the selling to corporations bit. The motivation of the confiscating government agency is irrelevant, be it to sell the land for turn it over to some people’s committee for collective farming. I can certainly understand the need for roads and power-lines and whatnot for the common good, but when the privilege is being exercised to the obvious benefit of a relatively small number of persons (for their profit or to let them exercise nutty ideas about central planning) who just happen to have a closer relationship (through bribery or contributions or other influence) to the government than the original landowners, wariness is perfectly justified.
Well yeah, it probably doesn’t matter in the end, but I have to imagine that people would be far more forgiving if a park pops up on the Halper’s farm as opposed to a Wal-Mart.
The Party, in a Communist state, is as much of a for-profit corporation as it is a government. The only difference to business between Fascism and Communism is that in Fascism the monopolies are allowed to keep a kind of token independent existence, whereas in Communism the monopoly powers exercised by the government are more blatant. Both systems are predicated upon the utter governmental control of every aspect of life.
So, what was your point? You know, as opposed to the one on the top of your head.
Good comeback, potzie. I’ve (and others) have explained why you’re wrong.
It’s still shitty, whether its communist or fascist or whatever. If you stop acting like an ass, maybe I could focus on your point and debate like a rational human being. As it is, I’ve said my piece and I’ve got nothing more to add to the debate.
Derleth, the thing you’re talking about is bad but it’s not communism. Except in the sense that some people define communism as “any political system or decision I don’t agree with”. And of course some people define fascism the exact same way, so the confusion between the two is understandable.
But communism (and fascism) actually has a real meaning. And rest assured, there is no communism going on in New Jersey.