you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]useless_aether 5 insightful - 3 fun5 insightful - 2 fun6 insightful - 3 fun -  (17 children)

yuri bezmenov told us years ago, there is no place to run after they take over the us. and it's true.

[–][deleted]  (16 children)

[deleted]

    [–][deleted] 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (15 children)

    Extremely interesting. This is a perfect explanation of why and how Americans have been brought to equate Socialism with Communism when they are in fact opposites. By conflating two opposites as "essentially the same thing" opposition to one through the other becomes impossible, and drifting a whole nation towards the objective, in this case COMMUNISM becomes extremely easy, since the populace helps and cheers it on...

    Sigh.

    [–]DffrntDrmmr 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (14 children)

    Americans have been brought to equate Socialism with Communism when they are in fact opposites.

    I've noticed you making this statement previously. It's obviously incorrect. From reading your words here I can't determine your (likely) ideological point.

    Regardless, socialism and communism were cojoined concepts and practices during the 20th century, during which Communist parties practiced socialism.

    Socialism and communism are not opposites.

    [–][deleted] 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (13 children)

    OK let me take it back from the start:

    1 - well over 100 years ago, A PLAN WAS DEVISED TO SUBVERT THE USA;

    2 - part of the plan requires that Americans cannot think themselves out of the impasse that will be generated for them;

    3 - for this their language will have to be altered, Newspeak must be implemented, devastating propaganda must subtly be made to enter their thinking patterns especially about politics and the economy;

    4 - [simplifying greatly] let's have Marx and Lenin declare that socialism lead to communism and then make them believe it because we know that will screw them up completely;

    5 - let's have the Americans think socialism is evil, thus SWALLOWING COMMUNIST PROPAGANDA and becoming unwitting believers in (((our))) values for them;

    Fast-forward to 2020, people repeat the COMMUNIST PROPAGANDA as if it were god's given truth: "Socialism leads to communism".

    Which is false. The true statement is: THE FALSE DEFINITION OF THE TERM SOCIALISM that you have been brought to believe lets you assert that "socialism leads to communism".

    But why is using a term with an engineered communist propaganda definition so devastating? Because the term has another use. It has a REAL MEANING which is EXTREMELY USEFUL in devising actual thought about political and economic questions. Just as in George Orwell's "1984" dystopian novel, changing the meaning of words makes thinking in certain terms impossible.

    As such, Americans are now incapable of escaping totalitarian communism because they have become die-hard fanatics, raging fanatics of communism, through their deep-seated convictions about "socialism" which is simply COMMUNISM. The actual definition of "socialism" which EVERYBODY ELSE KNOWS AND UNDERSTANDS is completely absent from American thought and speech. As such, they are now unable to mentally consider the full spectrum of political and economic possibilities. Checkmate.

    Let me repeat: the idea in your head that is the definition of the word "socialism" IS A LIE. It is COMMUNIST PROPAGANDA.

    YOU HAVE BEEN BRAINWASHED.

    And it's very easy to prove, too. But you won't have it. You'll look at my proof, then STFU and run away and never consider this stuff again because IT'S TOO HARD FOR YOU. Not that you are stupid, but because you have been BRAINWASHED TO AVOID THESE QUESTIONS AT ALL COST.

    [–]JasonCarswellPlatinum Foil Fedora 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (2 children)

    Naw.

    Changing the usage of a word only expands its definitions and makes it less precise. I understand pysops, doublethink, and manipulative inversions, but it doesn't negate the origins of the word, nor does it nullify its meaning among those who know how to use it properly. Literally and literally and figuratively.

    Marxist professor emeritus Richard D. Wolff can explain the 3 types of socialism to you...

    https://www.democracyatwork.info/eu_3_basic_kinds_of_socialism

    https://duckduckgo.com/?q=YouTube+Richard+Wolff+3+types+of+socialism

    I'm all for worker coops.

    [–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

    Yes, the usage of the word has changed dramatically, to the point where most English-speaking people recognize ONLY ONE OF THESE.

    The good professor talks about 3 types and that is nice. But he is still using the communist propaganda version of the term, which only as you say, muddies the waters.

    [–]JasonCarswellPlatinum Foil Fedora 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

    Just because "most English-speaking people recognize ONLY ONE OF THESE" does not make them right.

    I still don't know what you mean by "communist" because you haven't nailed it down.

    The only muddiness I see is your reasoning.

    [–]DffrntDrmmr 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (9 children)

    so·cial·ism
    noun
    a political and economic theory of social organization which advocates that the means of production, distribution, and exchange should be owned by the government.


    Communism refers to the political and economic ideologies that find their origin in Karl Marx’s theory of revolutionary socialism.

    [–][deleted] 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (5 children)

    Yep, that's the communist propaganda. Very good, you repeat communist propaganda well, and can quote documents made up of it.

    Well done, slave.

    [–]DffrntDrmmr 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

    You're a fool.

    [–]JasonCarswellPlatinum Foil Fedora 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (3 children)

    You sound like a shill. You've been muddying the waters, yet not clearly defining anything, being contrarian and negating, yet not proving anything yourself, and now you're calling people slaves.

    I have yet to read anything that makes sense from you. Without that, I will not continue, regardless of what quips you come out with.

    [–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

    So you are saying I didn't provide proof, WHICH NOBODY ASKED FOR, and that I'm not worth talking to because of that. Hm, OK then. You don't want to see proof I guess.

    [–]JasonCarswellPlatinum Foil Fedora 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (1 child)

    Absence of proof indicates you're a shill.

    You are dragging down the conversation as indicated here

    [–]JasonCarswellPlatinum Foil Fedora 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (2 children)

    Your extremely limited definition for socialism I would call Communism - all owned by the government, which would be great except that all governments are arbitrarily run by corruptible individuals who can profit from their position over others.

    It also does not account for other things like authentic democracy (not like rigged elections) in worker directed enterprises, aka worker co-operatives. What would you call those?

    Marx ideas were perverted by the Russians, Chinese, and Cubans - each in their own unique ways. Bringing Marx into it or having him define Communism is like blaming Henry Ford for Tesla Motors.

    [–]DffrntDrmmr 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

    The definition of socialism I shared is the correct definition, and the first and most prominent one finds if one googles "define socialism."

    You're guilty of letting your own grasp (or lack of) and what you read in social media muddle the proper definition of the word.

    [–]JasonCarswellPlatinum Foil Fedora 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

    I didn't say it was wrong, I said it was limited. Where ever you found that definition I'll wager there are more definitions. To say there is only one definition is clearly wrong as so much of these comments clearly indicate there is more than enough room for interpretation and misinterpretation.

    I recommend you go to one of the best authentic socialist sources for crystal clarity, Marxist professor Richard D. Wolff who can explain it to anyone willing to listen.

    https://www.democracyatwork.info/eu_3_basic_kinds_of_socialism

    https://duckduckgo.com/?q=YouTube+Richard+Wolff+3+types+of+socialism