Election 2016 Thread

[Scot Dutchy]

The Netherlands - not involved in any wars, except --

What are blathering about. The Netherlands has always been an active member of NATO and I never said anything about not taking part. What I was emphasising was starting the bloody wars. We usually came in when asked.

[Forty Two]

Coming in when asked is good? LOL. Why? Were the wars just?

And, which ones did the US "start"?

[L'Emmerdeur]

Since it's appropriate to judge a candidate by who its supporters are, take note that the Communist Part of the US strongly supports Hillary Clinton. I have not heard her disavow their support. Does she disavow the support of the group which calls for violent overthrow of the American government? http://peoplesworld.org/landslide-in-november/

I'm sure that you can cite evidence that the Communist Party USA "calls for violent overthrow of the American government." Assuming that this is all lies, I await your presentation of credible evidence supporting your assertion.

[Forty Two]

The Ku Kux Klan disavows violence on its official documents and publications, too.

Inherent in Communism is the violent overthrow of the government.

However, even failing that, the Communist party seeks the abolition of private property, and as Marx wrote the peaceful abolition of private property is not likely. Basic principles of communism also includes "Confiscation of the possessions of all emigrants and rebels against the majority of the people." So, you know, this is the kind of thing that communism is about. You know, like "An equal obligation on all members of society to work until such time as private property has been completely abolished. Formation of industrial armies, especially for agriculture." LOL love me them "industrial armies." https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/w ... in-com.htm

But, you can definitely talk about how the Communist Party USA is not really communist, and they have a kinder, gentler communism, that is pro-private property, against confiscatory taxation, won't create industrial armies, have no desire to confiscate the possessions of emigrants and rebels against the majority, etc. They probably reject all the major planks of the communist platform, and just are looking for everybody to be well off and have a good time.

The Communist Party USA is the same party that was funded by the Soviet Union, when the Soviet Union exist. Members of the Communist Party USA engaged in actual espionage for the Soviet Union against the US and such.

Now, the Communist Party USA sees the Democratic Party as leading the country in the "right direction" as the communists see it. So, we need to know if Hillary disavows the support of the Communist Party USA, because, even aside from the traditional violent overthrow stuff that communists are in favor if, the miserable ideology of communism is destructive to the nation.

[laklak]

Why doesn't the right embrace Hillary?

Hell, even Slick Willy doesn't embrace Hillary and he'd fuck a snake if somebody would hold it's head.

[Tyrannical]

Since it's appropriate to judge a candidate by who its supporters are, take note that the Communist Part of the US strongly supports Hillary Clinton. I have not heard her disavow their support. Does she disavow the support of the group which calls for violent overthrow of the American government? http://peoplesworld.org/landslide-in-november/

All politicians have people they'd rather disassociate with support the. It's a real mystery why actual communists would support hillary.

Now for trump, racists / kkk / white separatists support him for reasons I understand. Removal of illegal aliens, strict rules on muslim immigration, and avoiding foreign wars where we don't have a stake.

[Sean Hayden]

The KKK, the go to source on foreign policy.

I haven't heard or read too much about foreign policy that inspires confidence. I bet you guys can point to some though, please do. No, not just good ole Dunning-Kruger you bore; more a suspicion about the absurdley complicated and unpredictable nature of such things, combined with an appreciation of our love for putting it all together after the fact to impress all 'n sundry with our brilliance.

[Forty Two]

Yes, I agree - candidates should not have to disavow every asshole group that supports them. However, with Trump, he was expected to disavow, and even after he disavowed, the media kept asking him again and again -- nothing he said would stop them from, like dog to a bone, hanging on to the implication that Trump is the candidate of the Klan.

So, what's good for the goose is good for the gander. Hillary must be the candidate of the communists. Over more recent history, the overt strategy of communists and socialists has moved from "radical immediate change" to what's known as "incrementalism." They want to achieve their ends over time now, and that's why an avowed socialist like Bernie will turn his coat and tell everyone to support Hillary. She's not a socialist, but from the standpoint of the socialist, and the communist, she's headed in the right direction.

They changed to incrementalism because of the zeitgeist shift. The public is now pro-socialist, even without knowing what it is. The propaganda has shifted to view socialism as something like charity -- that it's just about making sure everyone has a nice life, with food, clothing, shelter and healthcare at a minimum level. I was watching the movie "Trumbo" the other day, and towards the beginning there is a scene where Dalton Trumbo is asked by his niece or granddaughter if he's a communist, and he says "yes." And, then the little girl asks him if that's bad, and he answers something to the effect of: well, if you're at school and you have a sandwich, and someone else at school doesn't have a sandwich, do you think it's good or bad to share your sandwich with that other child? She says it's good, and he tells her that's what communism is. I mean, I almost spit out my coke laughing at the sheer gall the movie producer/writer/director would have to suggest that communism is just another word for sharing. It's so ludicrous. But, that's what they've sold the American people on. Capitalism means that people try to destroy each other ,and socialism and communism mean being good, kind and sharing.

[Forty Two]

The KKK, the go to source on foreign policy.

I've haven't heard or read too much about foreign policy that inspires confidence. I bet you guys can point to some though, please do. No, not just good o'le Dunning-Kruger you bore; more a suspicion about the absurdley complicated and unpredictable nature of such things, combined with an apprection of our love for putting it all together after the fact to impress all 'n sundry with our brilliance.

Trump's foreign policy?

What are you on about?

His proposed foreign policies are as specific as Hillary's. And, Hillary's track record doesn't inspire much confidence. Maybe you can point to some things about Hillary's foreign policy platform that inspires confidence, not just good ole Dunning-Kruger stuff....

[Sean Hayden]

Relax, I'm not singling out Trump here. I meant opinions about foreign policy in general.

Edit: The Dunning-Kruger bit was directed at myself.

[Forty Two]

Oh, well, us laypeople can generally only speak in, well, generalities - overall policy approaches, rather than specifics, because, well, we don't have security clearance and we don't have all the information that politicians have access to.

But, why don't you provide your answer to your own question first, so we can see where you're going with this. What are your opinions about foreign policy in general?

[Sean Hayden]

You sound like you think I'm being arrogant. I've wondered for a long time now how people can be so confident in their opinions regarding things like foreign policy. Why should generalities make anyone confident enough to claim we are involved in too many wars to no benefit to ourselves for example? "No more foreign wars!".

Anyway, I asked for sources you guys respect. I wouldn't do that if I intended to be uppity.

[L'Emmerdeur]

The Ku Kux Klan disavows violence on its official documents and publications, too.

Inherent in Communism is the violent overthrow of the government.

So you cannot support your assertion that the Communist Party USA "calls for violent overthrow of the American government," and resort instead to generalized mumblings about what's "inherent in Communism" and comparison to the KKK. We know about the KKK's violent actions. Being unable to show any evidence that the Communist Party USA has called for the violent overthrow of the American government, can you at least cite evidence of violent actions taken by its members? You're not covering yourself in glory here, but maybe you can present something that shows you're not talking out of your ass.

[Hermit]

The Ku Kux Klan disavows violence on its official documents and publications, too.

Inherent in Communism is the violent overthrow of the government.

So you cannot support your assertion that the Communist Party USA "calls for violent overthrow of the American government," and resort instead to generalized mumblings about what's "inherent in Communism" and comparison to the KKK. We know about the KKK's violent actions. Being unable to show any evidence that the Communist Party USA has called for the violent overthrow of the American government, can you at least cite evidence of violent actions taken by its members? You're not covering yourself in glory here, but maybe you can present something that shows you're not talking out of your ass.

It's not true that the violent overthrow of the government is inherent in communism. It is true of Marxist communism. In Tsarist Russia it was known as Bolshevism. They were the revolutionary communists, and they finished up clobbering the reformist communists, also known as Mensheviks, in their rise to power. Numerically, communists who aimed to bring about the workers's paradise on earth by democratic, parliamentary reform have always been superior. The problem with them is that they were either rumbled by their revolutioinary opponents or morphed into becoming representatives for aspirants wanting to join the thoroughly capitalist middle classes.

[Brian Peacock]

Many, many political philosophies stake a normative claim to a Promised Land of Milk and Honey (can I get a 'Hallelujah!' brothers and sisters!), but it is those with an unshakeable certainty in the rectitude of their convictions who invariably believe not only that the ends justify the means, but that the means are an end in themselves. These are the one's to be wary of, regardless of their political philosophies.