I am using win 10 new edge browser for this site....

 

And it bothers me that if Trump were to run Independent and take Republican votes with him, that corrupt, murderous bitch Clinton could be elected. It sucks that two terms suffering the Pretender in Chief wasn't enough time for the GOP to come up with one viable contender.

 

if that does happen then if the republicans are that worried about Clinton winning.....

The republicans can pull out of the race and send their votes to Trump the independent..............

that's the leverage Trump talks about trying to get a fair shake from the RNC which so far they say they are but have not............

 

I'm all set now. Some images were showing up, and some weren't. When I came to a pic that I actually posted and it wasn't showing up, I knew it had to be my pc. A simple reboot and voila!

 

Ok, anon-pen. Two things.



First: I'm the leader of the XNXX-right? Hey, newsflash: I was gone from this place for six months. (Believe me, I'm pretty much relieved that no one really noticed.) And I'm only back now because I'm testing the waters in the Story Forum. But it's even more fucked up over there than it was six months ago, so I suspect I'll soon be quietly going into hiatus again.

While I'm here, yes, this is entertaining.


Second thing: I don't pretend to know what's in your head, and I don't much care. What I'm trying to say is that you don't know yourself.

Bernie Sanders is a Communist. That's where we started, and I stand by it.

By challenging me to define Communism, you're playing into a tired schtick, because it is a trick question. I don't think you know that you're doing it. No one who uses that retort knows why they're doing it. The retort has become cliche.

Tell you what. You define it. I doubt you can.

DL tried to define it around a week ago. He failed, too. (And if DL can't define it, none of us can.)

Can I define it?

Not in a way that could possibly satisfy you or anyone else.


I could tell you I've read Animal Farm. I could tell you I've read the Communist Manifesto. I could tell you I once regularly accepted and read Revolutionary Worker in Harvard Square. I could tell you I've read lots of the formative work on communism, by some of the English utilitarian contemporaries of Marx (Mill, for instance). You'd only laugh at me if I did, though, because people today are programmed to think that the original meaning of the word has little or no contemporary relevance. Your laughter would be a programmed response, too.

Entire books are being written in academia, in political scientists are haggling over the differences between Socialism and Communism, and their etymologies. And you want a definition? Here? In one hundred words or less, I presume?


The fact is, NO ONE can define it in less than a book length, because the definition is being actively changed.


Ann Coulter recently said it best: she made the point (I'm paraphrasing) that even the left understands that the Communist label is roundly vilified as a bad thing, and being uncomfortable with the ambiguity between Socialism and Communism, the mainstream media is in the process of flipping the meaning so as to imply that if one accuses another of being a Communist, the accuser is the one labeled as a nut.


How do we label the accuser as a nut? By challenging her to define the word, showing that she doesn't know what she's talking about. To wit: "No, nut, Bernie Sanders isn't a Communist. Bernie Sanders is a Democratic Socialist! You nut!"


Bernie Sanders himself has been leading this cause for redefinition of terms, for decades. He is a self-avowed Democratic Socialist, and he splits hairs by stressing that he does not espouse Authoritarian Communism. Note the qualifier. Authoritarianism and Communism are two different things, so the qualifier is a hedge. Communism is an economic model defined by the application of labor and assets. Authoritarianism is a means of enforcing the model.


Marx himself did not anticipate the need for authoritarian enforcement. He saw Communism as utopia. Why would utopia need enforcement?


However, Marx did recognize that Socialism would be required as a stepping stone to Communism. Of course he never envisioned gulags. (Lenin showed us their necessity, when the proverbial rubber hit the road.) But Marx did recognize that people would need to be guided into buy-in. Socialism was considered a necessary waypoint on the Shining Path.


So. Take the "Authoritarian" qualifier out of the equation, since it has always been nothing but a red herring. Furthermore, reject "Democratic" as a qualifier for Socialist. Sanders tries to sweeten his stance by calling himself a Democratic Socialist or Social Democrat. But that's as nonsensical as the Authoritarian qualifier for Communism. Remove those qualifiers and you are left with Communism and Socialism. What are their differences? They are both applications of the principal of "from each according to his ability, and to each according to his needs" (which Sanders espouses); they both espouse systemic wealth redistribution (which Sanders has championed since the seventies), and they both call for revolutionary societal transformation (also supported by Sanders).


None of this constitutes a definition. I am only showing why no definition will satisfy everyone in an audience.


Nevertheless, those with common sense know that Socialism and Communism, classically (that is, back to Marx) differ only according to degree. They apply the same principles.


Sanders is, and always has been, a Communist. Just like Ayers. Just like Liz Warren. He can call himself whatever he wants. It doesn't matter. He is a communist.

 

So... You can't define what a communist is, but you're certain that Bernie Sanders is one. Good for you.

 

When Americans think of Communism most think of a totalitarian government that owns all or most of the productive wealth.

When Karl Marx thought of communism he thought of an economy in which there would be no poverty, crime, and war, and in which everyone would share equally.

The best description of the Marxian ideal of communism I have encountered was John Lennon's song "Imagine." I will copy and paste the lyrics.

Imagine there's no heaven
It's easy if you try
No hell below us
Above us only sky
Imagine all the people
Living for today...

Imagine there's no countries
It isn't hard to do
Nothing to kill or die for
And no religion too
Imagine all the people
Living life in peace...
You may say I'm a dreamer
But I'm not the only one
I hope someday you'll join us
And the world will be as one

Imagine no possessions
I wonder if you can
No need for greed or hunger
A brotherhood of man
Imagine all the people
Sharing all the world...
You may say I'm a dreamer
But I'm not the only one
I hope someday you'll join us
And the world will live as one

Bernie Sanders does not desire Communism by the first definition. He knows that communism as described by John Lennon is not possible. Therefore Sanders is no more of a Communist nor a communist than you clarise are a fascist or a Nazi. At most he is a left wing Social Democrat in the tradition of Eugene Debs, Norman Thomas, and Michael Harrington.

 

So now, you're using song to express your opinions.

You really are needing to jump very high for those straws.

 

The best way to convince Trump not to run as a GOP candidate, or a third party candidate is to show him a spread sheet which details the cost of setting up a campaign staff in each of the 50 states and various territories, which will first of all insure he is actually on every state ballot, and then compete for votes. Included in this will be the cost of internal polls, which tell campaign managers where to spend the money. This is why modern President campaigns run into the hundreds of millions of dollars. All we have to do is wait and see if successful businessman Donald Trump thinks this is a wise use of his money.

 

Pretty enlightening and accurate assessment.

As I have said before, Trump is a money man.

 

As always, you've completely missed the point.

By the classical definition, he is a communist. Marx himself would have labeled him as such. What I mean when I say I can't define is that NO ONE CAN, because challengers will twist their position by any means necessary to form a denial. As you are doing right now.

I was quite serious earlier today when I told Aces that you had damned well better not be what is left of Kimiko.

 

I had an exchange with kimi baby earlier today.

 

Trump is a clown, and a clown's function is to distract the audience while the sets are being changed. As a clown, he is doing a fine job. Don't expect to see him on the high wire.

 

I'm sure you also believe that Obama is a Kenyan Communist Muslim, too.

 

There is no second definition of communism. The word is actively evolving, and it is a moving target. And you are dead wrong about what Sanders wants. He espoused classical Marxian principles throughout his career and still does today. He espouses the nationalization of resources and business assets. He espouses change on a revolutionary scale to achieve those methods. His goal is to produce a system of equitable distribution of wealth according to the needs of individuals regardless of their abilities and personal contributions.

Those goals and methods are hallmarks of classical Marxian communism.

If they also sound a lot like what the media calls "socialism," that is not because there is an objective difference, per se. As I said, the differences are only of degrees. Socialism and communism, as economic models divorced from their methods of enforcement, are much the same. Different only by degrees.

Don't give me more of your nonsense about democratic socialism. Of course that's what Sanders calls himself, but he's full of shit. I've already explained that the concatenation of those terms is a hedge and a dodge, as silly as "authoritarian communism." They are nonsense terms used by people like Sanders precisely because they know that the truth of their objectives is publicly unpalatable.

Sanders is a communist. Of course, so was John Lennon, the devil take his soul. Don't blame me for rocking his grave. You dragged him into this.

 

As usual you have nothing whatsoever to say.

 

You're the one refusing to explain how Sanders is a communist. You just claim he is, then back it up by putting words in Karl Marx' dead mouth.

 

I won't ask you to prove it because it's none of my business.

But I do want you to assure me that Kimi hasn't devolved into the fucking goofball I'm dealing with here. I can't believe I actually took the time to respond to him. What do I get for my troubles? Fucking DL, singing hymns and preparing to tell me all about Scandinavia.

Jesus H. Christ.

 

I like the imagery, but why the set change? What's the next act? They've got nothing for a main event, not that I can see.

 

And yet, all you do is offer an opinion as your proof of something you say...