It’s also accurate that our democratic republic is a balance of socialist and capitalistic policies and has been for generations. It’s great to question how far we want to go in a certain direction. It’s foolish to use SOCIALIST as some lame intended insult or the suggestion of evil.
THE SKY IS FALLING!!
Oh, yeah, I almost forgot! I used to hear rumors about some of those guys years ago. Thanks.
Well, the word “liberal” no longer serves the purpose; it is no longer scary enough. They’re just running “socialist” up the flagpole and see if anyone salutes.
Hey, its not like I wanted to! They just told me it was the only way to be sure I wouldn’t get my head stuffed full of rightarded horseshit. So far its working. Now, maybe thats not the real reason, maybe its just that I’m too smart. (I have reason to be suspicious of that premise…) But I’m not taking any chances! Look what happened to Dennis Miller!
We’re long past that stage-- they’ve been saluting all across this blessed land for some time now.
So what you’re saying is that one of the core principles of what America was founded on is exactly the same as one of the, if not the, core principles of Communism?
Glad we’ve got that sorted then.
The rest is all down to interpretation. Pursuit of happiness is clearly within Communist principles as communists believe that through Communism we shall all be provided for and hence happy. Liberty? Everyone has their own idea about that.
But as I tried to say and someone else put better than me, the principles of the common man between the late eighteenth century and the early twentieth century in the US were quite different from now. Much like in, say, the UK they used to think that anyone should be allowed to vote. Later women weren’t allowed to. Those were central viewpoints of the time and clearly incompatible with modern views. Anybody that thinks their western country is living up to the principles of 2-300 hundred years ago is clearly deluding themselves.
As if modern communists must subscribe to every sentence ever uttered by Marx. Jeez-o-peets, people! The 1950s called, they want their paranoia back.
How on earth does being a communist conflict with the founding of this country?
Sam, I wonder sometimes why you think you know better than we who live in the USA what American law, tradition, & values are about.
As if that’s so much more obnoxious than the War for American Independence, where we ran your Tory ancestors out of the country with violence.
Right there, I deny your major. Not all communists are Marxists. Even Marx was not a Marxist.
Wait, Sam. The United States is not the ideological project you want it to be. I guess you want it to be the bright & shining beacon of libertarian utopia that you can feel inspired by in boring ol’ Canadia. But we have to live here. And “what the United States stands for” must take a back seat to the actual interests & well-being of Americans. We are not here for you, Sam. We are not abstractions.
The ones in blue are ones that are not only not inconsistent with our constitution, but which in fact we have attempted.
#5 is weird. We do have “freedom of the press” but we also have publicly administered highways & airwaves. So I’m not sure whether that’s unconstitutional or something we’re doing anyway.
I don’t know what #3 & #4 mean.
#2 isn’t really impossible in this country. We have plenty of good Americans who would love an estate tax of 100%.
#6 is profoundly unlikely, but not strictly unconstitutional as far as I know, so long as land & industry are either purchased by the state or forfeited as a penalty for crimes.
#1, you’re right, that’s probably unconstitutional. Or at least unacceptable. Now, if it were most property rights? That would be OK, even on the right side of the aisle. We’re not really all conscientious libertarians.
The redistribution of population (#10) isn’t even done by most Leninist regimes, so that’s an odd qualification. Clearly, if that’s a trait of “Communists”, there are no “Communists” except the Khmer Rouge. Alex Jones doesn’t advocate that, therefore he is not a “Communist” either. He must have been just young & confused.
Being an young intellectual who calls himself a communist–or a fascist for that matter–is not the same as joining a racist gang & engaging in domestic terrorism. There is a huge difference between a young intellectual calling himself a communist–which is ordinary & innocuous, in this country–and someone actively joining the KKK. (Not that I care much if someone did join the KKK briefly.)
If you’re going to cut out everybody who flirted with communism or “radicalism” (such as it was in the 90s) in college or as a young adult, you’re going to cut out a crapload of very smart, politically-active people who have since wised up.
The Truther petition bothers me, but I’m also willing to believe that someone like Jones has dozens of petitions shoved at him every week, and he’s signed a few without reading them all that well. What did it matter, unless he planned to be a government appointee? (Oops.)
I suppose Glenn Beck has been up front about the fact that Jones co-founded Color of Change, the organization that has been pushing for advertisers to drop Beck’s show since his ridiculous remarks that Obama is a racist. I’m sure Beck would want to make it clear that he has a personal reason to oppose Jones. (Note: he may very well have said something about it. I’m sure not going to watch to find out.)
And if Republicans don’t want to be called assholes, they need to stop being such assholes.