- Joined
- Oct 28, 2019
- Messages
- 53,509
- Reaction score
- 36,861
- Location
- San Antonio
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Libertarian - Left
As has been pointed out by others. You have never read anything about marx. That is obvious by the lies you tell about what marx has said. It is relevant because all you are doing is spreading misinformation.
Of course it is ambiguous. It lacks content and given an actual understanding of marx you would know that the context is in talking about open revolution against the bourgeoisie. Not on how an economy should be run.
Your arguments are based on ignorance and the desire to spread fear .
He has no idea what marx said about anything. All he is interested in is telling lies and creating fear. It is no wonder trump won an election he is the role model for people like skychief.He also ignores the Marxist definition of “private property”.
In 1981, the top marginal income tax rate in the US was 70%. Were we a Marxist country then? Now it’s 37% Pelosi and Schumer are saying that we’ve gone too far in lowering the rate. Nothing at all wrong with or Marxist about that.Both Pelosi and Schumer use the class envy Marxist phrase "tax cuts for the rich"
Nobody suggested living in a country with no taxes. A classic Red Herring argument. Thanks.. . . You can whine about taxes all you want, but no one wants to live in a country with no taxes,
I never said (or even implied) that I don't want a Military. Another classic Straw-Man logical fallacy.that meaning no roads, no police, complete lawlessness, no military, etc. There is no government without taxes, just anarchy.
You wouldn’t like it either because that no tax country wouldn’t be around for long because without a military some authoritarian country like China would swoop in and we’d all be living under the rule of the Chinese Communist Party. Which is just what you say you don’t want!
That is patently false, and you should know that I don't need to refute the lies and nonsense which YOU (or others) fabricate.As has been pointed out by others. You have never read anything about marx.
Your constant lying and logical fallacies actually reveal how weak your (flawed) argument is. I really shouldn't need to explain that to you.That is obvious by the lies you tell about what marx has said.
You're making two huge mistakes - 1) you somehow think that I need to refute your lies and your logical fallacy nonsense. I don't.That is obvious by the lies you tell about what marx has said.
It is not ambiguous. The word Ambiguous means that a word or term could have different meanings. Marx's idiotic goal to "Abolish all private property" is so unbelievably stupid - no intelligent person would entertain such a notion. It's patently absurd, and no freedom loving person would want to live in a country where the Government prohibited a citizen from owning property.It is relevant because all you are doing is spreading misinformation.
Of course it is ambiguous.
Your arguments are based mostly on lies, logical fallacies, and profound lack of knowledge about simple terms such as private property. Your nonsensical posts are easily refuted, and just as easily dismissed.It lacks content and given an actual understanding of marx you would know that the context is in talking about open revolution against the bourgeoisie. Not on how an economy should be run.
Your arguments are based on ignorance and the desire to spread fear .
Marx and your knowledge of Marx have a gulf of infinite voids between them. What's more, a good summation of your knowledge of Marx might look like: @SkyChief 's knowledge of Marx = -100.Nobody suggested living in a country with no taxes. A classic Red Herring argument. Thanks.
I never said (or even implied) that I don't want a Military. Another classic Straw-Man logical fallacy.
Your post is mostly logical fallacy nonsense.
That is patently false, and you should know that I don't need to refute the lies and nonsense which YOU (or others) fabricate.
Your argument is based on lies, and logical fallacies, so that's why your nonsensical post need to be dismissed.
Your constant lying and logical fallacies actually reveal how weak your (flawed) argument is. I really shouldn't need to explain that to you.
You're making two huge mistakes - 1) you somehow think that I need to refute your lies and your logical fallacy nonsense. I don't.
2) you pretend to be better informed about Marxism than I am, and the BASIS for this is your false belief that haven't read Marx's work. I HAVE read Marx's work. So your false pretense is based on a false premise.
Your arguments are
It is not ambiguous. The word Ambiguous means that a word or term could have different meanings. Marx's idiotic goal to "Abolish all private property" is so unbelievably stupid - no intelligent person would entertain such a notion. It's patently absurd, and no freedom loving person would want to live in a country where the Government prohibited a citizen from owning property.
What an awful idea.
Marx was a subversive. Marxists and NeoMarxists are subversive. But Neo-Marxists are worse, in my opinion.
Your arguments are based mostly on lies, logical fallacies, and profound lack of knowledge about simple terms such as private property. Your nonsensical posts are easily refuted, and just as easily dismissed.
That is not an accurate description of Neo-Marxism. Neo-Marxism doesn't abandon the majority of Marx's teachings and for the most part does encourage the abolishment of private property. Neo-Marxism expands on Marxism which focuses mostly on economic ideological principals into other areas of society and power structures."The theory of Communism may be summed up in one sentence: Abolish all private property." - Karl Marx
The difference between Marxism and neo-Marxism is simple:
Marxism is the study and belief in Marxist ideals (i.e., private property should be abolished).
Neo-Marxism does not involve any study in Marx's teachings, however it holds the same fundamental belief that all private property should be abolished.
In your opinion, which is worse?
Your OP: “Neo-Marxism does not involve any study in Marx's teachings”
Why are you deliberately lying?
You have made some really dumb arguments in this thread, but this one is pure ad hominem nonsense.He has no idea what marx said about anything. All he is interested in is telling lies and creating fear. It is no wonder trump won an election he is the role model for people like skychief.
You have made some really dumb arguments in this thread, but this one is pure ad hominem nonsense.
It is purely an attack on my character, and does has nothing whatsoever to do with the topic. You tried to discredit me by suggesting that my role model is Trump.
That's a bald-faced lie, and a really cheap ad hominem attack. That's what bad debaters typically do once they've realize that they are incapable of formulating a sensible argument -they attack the person, instead of the position.
Thanks for all of your logical fallacies and profoundly bad arguments in thread.
"The theory of Communism may be summed up in one sentence: Abolish all private property." - Karl Marx
The difference between Marxism and neo-Marxism is simple:
Marxism is the study and belief in Marxist ideals (i.e., private property should be abolished).
Neo-Marxism does not involve any study in Marx's teachings, however it holds the same fundamental belief that all private property should be abolished.
In your opinion, which is worse?
Worse for whom?"The theory of Communism may be summed up in one sentence: Abolish all private property." - Karl Marx
The difference between Marxism and neo-Marxism is simple:
Marxism is the study and belief in Marxist ideals (i.e., private property should be abolished).
Neo-Marxism does not involve any study in Marx's teachings, however it holds the same fundamental belief that all private property should be abolished.
In your opinion, which is worse?
Hardly an attack on your character . More of a good explanation of why you wish to misinform and create fear of marxism.You have made some really dumb arguments in this thread, but this one is pure ad hominem nonsense.
It is purely an attack on my character, and does has nothing whatsoever to do with the topic. You tried to discredit me by suggesting that my role model is Trump.
That's a bald-faced lie, and a really cheap ad hominem attack. That's what bad debaters typically do once they've realize that they are incapable of formulating a sensible argument -they attack the person, instead of the position.
Thanks for all of your logical fallacies and profoundly bad arguments in thread.
So you said:Nobody suggested living in a country with no taxes. A classic Red Herring argument. Thanks.
No taxes, no military. Or are you now fine with taxes?I never said (or even implied) that I don't want a Military. Another classic Straw-Man logical fallacy.
Also, as I said in response to your claim about the direction of the country that you did not reply to:Your post is mostly logical fallacy nonsense.
They're even calling for traffic lights at busy intersections. TYRANNYYYYY!!!!The Democrats are so far left that even Mao would say WTF.
"The theory of Communism may be summed up in one sentence: Abolish all private property." - Karl Marx
The difference between Marxism and neo-Marxism is simple:
Marxism is the study and belief in Marxist ideals (i.e., private property should be abolished).
Neo-Marxism does not involve any study in Marx's teachings, however it holds the same fundamental belief that all private property should be abolished.
In your opinion, which is worse?
Who cares about Marxism? No one is interested in Marxism. "Cultural marxism" is about watching out for vulnerable minorities and demographics in society. Are you against that?Nobody suggested living in a country with no taxes. A classic Red Herring argument. Thanks.
I never said (or even implied) that I don't want a Military. Another classic Straw-Man logical fallacy.
Your post is mostly logical fallacy nonsense.
That is patently false, and you should know that I don't need to refute the lies and nonsense which YOU (or others) fabricate.
Your argument is based on lies, and logical fallacies, so that's why your nonsensical post need to be dismissed.
Your constant lying and logical fallacies actually reveal how weak your (flawed) argument is. I really shouldn't need to explain that to you.
You're making two huge mistakes - 1) you somehow think that I need to refute your lies and your logical fallacy nonsense. I don't.
2) you pretend to be better informed about Marxism than I am, and the BASIS for this is your false belief that haven't read Marx's work. I HAVE read Marx's work. So your false pretense is based on a false premise.
Your arguments are
It is not ambiguous. The word Ambiguous means that a word or term could have different meanings. Marx's idiotic goal to "Abolish all private property" is so unbelievably stupid - no intelligent person would entertain such a notion. It's patently absurd, and no freedom loving person would want to live in a country where the Government prohibited a citizen from owning property.
What an awful idea.
Marx was a subversive. Marxists and NeoMarxists are subversive. But Neo-Marxists are worse, in my opinion because of the Psychoanalysis element.
Your arguments are based mostly on lies, logical fallacies, and profound lack of knowledge about simple terms such as private property. Your nonsensical posts are easily refuted, and just as easily dismissed.
And yet you lie about what he said by taking it out of context. If you had actually read any of his work then we can only assume your misinforming people is a deliberate attempt to lie about what he said.That is patently false, and you should know that I don't need to refute the lies and nonsense which YOU (or others) fabricate.
You cannot defend your lies so instead you blame others for what you yourself are really doing. Another classical trump tactic to pretend others other doing what he does himselfYour argument is based on lies, and logical fallacies, so that's why your nonsensical post need to be dismissed.
But you do so because you can do nothing to back your own claimsYour constant lying and logical fallacies actually reveal how weak your (flawed) argument is. I really shouldn't need to explain that to you.
Then we can only assume yours is a deliberate attempt to misinform.You're making two huge mistakes - 1) you somehow think that I need to refute your lies and your logical fallacy nonsense. I don't.
2) you pretend to be better informed about Marxism than I am, and the BASIS for this is your false belief that haven't read Marx's work. I HAVE read Marx's work. So your false pretense is based on a false premise.
Only because you are making the attempt to create a really stupid interpretation and then insist it is the only interpretation.Your arguments are
It is not ambiguous. The word Ambiguous means that a word or term could have different meanings. Marx's idiotic goal to "Abolish all private property" is so unbelievably stupid - no intelligent person would entertain such a notion. It's patently absurd, and no freedom loving person would want to live in a country where the Government prohibited a citizen from owning property.
True, you really are awful at lying.What an awful idea.
You have done nothing to refute what I have said except to deny, deny , deny. Not even credible the idea that you refute anything. All you do is give us a pity speech about how you are being misunderstood.Marx was a subversive. Marxists and NeoMarxists are subversive. But Neo-Marxists are worse, in my opinion because of the Psychoanalysis element.
Your arguments are based mostly on lies, logical fallacies, and profound lack of knowledge about simple terms such as private property. Your nonsensical posts are easily refuted, and just as easily dismissed.
I did. It's an honest sentiment shared by many good Americans.So you said:
“Any collectivist ideology which relies on a centralized, confiscatory mandate (income Tax, 2nd plank of Communist Manifesto) is by definition authoritarian, and every American who loves liberty and freedom should work against Communism and socialism.”
That's a false assumption. I am not against taxes. Of course there needs to be taxes to maintain government and the federal Courts. and the military, infrastructure, etc. . .That was what my comment was in response to. \It certainly sounds like you are against taxes (a centralized, confiscatory mandate)!
Some taxes yes, some taxes, no.We certainly rely on that. You say every American should work against that. Or are you now saying that you support the Communist Manifesto?
What’s the deal! What exactly are you saying? You can’t have it both ways. No taxes, no military. Or are you now fine with taxes?
BS. Of course there is. Marxists and NeoMarxists were mocked and ridiculed 30 years ago for their subversive ideology. Today they've infiltrated government at all levels -we have many Marxists in Congress. These nincompoops are making our LAWS. That should be a wake-up call for all freedom loving Americans.Also, as I said in response to your claim about the direction of the country that you did not reply to:
There is no surge of Marxism (according to you the idea that private property should be abolished) in America.
Nor is there a surge towards socialism…that being government ownership of the means of production.
You you you you you you you you you you you - LOL you said the word 'you' SIXTEEN TIMES in your dumb post!!And yet you lie about what he said by taking it out of context. If you had actually read any of his work then we can only assume your misinforming people is a deliberate attempt to lie about what he said.
You cannot defend your lies so instead you blame others for what you yourself are really doing. Another classical trump tactic to pretend others other doing what he does himself
But you do so because you can do nothing to back your own claims
Then we can only assume yours is a deliberate attempt to misinform.
Only because you are making the attempt to create a really stupid interpretation and then insist it is the only interpretation.
Marx made that comment speaking about revolution. It has nothing to do with his philosophy of economics. Either you lack the nous to figure out the difference between his writings on revolution and his writing on economics or you are deliberately trying to misinform people about what and why he wrote soemething.
True, you really are awful at lying.
You have done nothing to refute what I have said except to deny, deny , deny. Not even credible the idea that you refute anything. All you do is give us a pity speech about how you are being misunderstood.
Education and healthcare are the most basic infrastructure of any modern developed economy. They are being gutted at every level as "socialism" and "Marxism". They just want lots of factory workers working like mindless drones.I did. It's an honest sentiment shared by many good Americans.
That's a false assumption. I am not against taxes. Of course there needs to be taxes to maintain government and the federal Courts. and the military, infrastructure, etc. . .
It's an honest sentiment shared by many good Americans.
Those things are not really "Basic infrastructure".Education and healthcare are the most basic infrastructure of any modern developed economy.
LOLThey are being gutted at every level as "socialism" and "Marxism". They just want lots of factory workers working like mindless drones.
We'll be fine. Government has become too large, and too powerful. Our lawmakers pass laws which undermine our liberty and freedom, and makes the government even MORE powerful.America is not going to do well like this.
So then you are for a centralized, confiscatory mandate, the one you said all Americans should oppose.I did. It's an honest sentiment shared by many good Americans.
That's a false assumption. I am not against taxes. Of course there needs to be taxes to maintain government and the federal Courts. and the military, infrastructure, etc. . .
So then you are for a centralized, confiscatory mandate, the one you said all Americans should oppose.Some taxes yes, some taxes, no.
BS. Of course there is. Marxists and NeoMarxists were mocked and ridiculed 30 years ago for their subversive ideology. Today they've infiltrated government at all levels -we have many Marxists in Congress. These nincompoops are making our LAWS. That should be a wake-up call for all freedom loving Americans.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?