How the democrat party become the party of hatred and division

ROFL - you want to pull a post - because you disagree with a claim. You need to hide your authoritarian leanings better.

While I agree that the OP does not support the claim - so we have no idea what is being referred to - because the claim offends your sensibilities - and necessary illusion bubble - is no reason to claim that it is "Propaganda".

 

Propaganda Alert!

Not even Crazy Bernie supports communism.

 

So now you are going to pretend not to understand the concept -

What part of - Just because a Protest is not Peaceful - does not make it "Terrorism" - non sequitur fallacy - do you not understand ?

 

What example?

 

The Protest on the Capital - mentioned in the post you are responding to ?!

 

The riot. Gotcha.

 

I’d say that the argument can be made that it was.

 

Any violent protest is an act propagated to instill fear in a community - thus yes, it is terrorism. Whether it's being done
by Antifa idiots or MAGA idiots.

 

One man’s terrorist is another man’s freedom fighter.

 

Yes, socialism involves the redistribution of wealth, but every form of government can choose to redistribute wealth.
IMO, at this point more wealth distribution and less socialism could form the basis of a very viable 3rd party that would attract many if not most Democrats, Republicans and socialists.

 

Thank you for clarifying your definition of terrorism a little better = Any protest that ends up leading to violence or destruction of property is now "Terrorism"

This is Authoritarianism on Steroids.

 

We've done it since 1787. Wealth distribution is what government does through the tax system.

 

Yes .. I called it a riot. Do you disagree ? Was it not a riot ?

 

I’m all for equitable distribution of the nation’s wealth, but “less socialism” confuses me. Does that mean “more X”?
Other than that confusing bit, I’m on board.

 

Correct - Wealth Redistribution is Socialist Policy - " Socialism"

 

Do you believe there’s a difference between a protest that gets out of hand leading to violence and an attack that makes use of a protest?

 

Socialism is collectivizing production, and even Bernie Sanders has backed away from talk about taking over business.

 

No the act of violent protest is terrorism. Any protestor who doesn't participate in the violence is not a terrorist. Try again.

 

Neither AntiFa/BLM nor MAGA are terrorist organizations.
There has been some violence associated with MAGA protests.
Almost all AntiFa/BLM protests have been violent, but all of that violence is still relatively insignificant.

Labelling political opposition as terrorists is a call for a political purge and very dangerous.

 

How the Gov't spends "redistributes" the cash it collects - does not change that this wealth redistribution is "Socialism"

If you are taking less from people - businesses - it is less socialism .. if you are taking more - it is more.

Some want to claim "Military is not Socialism" .. this is completely false .. the money to support the military comes from Socialism.

The question is "who wants to take more from your pocket" or the pocket of someone else "

The problem with the use of terms like "Communism" - is that Communism was both Socialism - but also Dictatorial Totalitarianism .. a hard core police state.

Now some may argue that Blue is now moving towards this more authoritarian Police State - and continues to increase Gov't power - this is merely continuing on with Red Policy.

"The Devil is found not where Red and Blue disagree" - - but on that in which they agree.

 

Wealth redistribution may be an objective of socialists, but it isn't socialism per se. If production isn't collectivized, there is no socialism.

 

Anti-trust, and tax laws are a better way to deal with the robber barons.

 

What do you think you are doing every time you call a Democrat a Communist? What did you think
was going on when 30% of Republicans believed Obama was a Muslim Terrorist?

Friggin' Hatfields and McCoys. We should just hire a commission from Switzerland to run the country at this point.

 

You’re incorrect about BLM protests and how often they turn violent.

 

Definitely - but some make no sense outside of specific example - and this is one of them.

This whole question is about these differences - what the distinctions are - What do we call "Terrorism" and what do we not.

And what does it mean when we call something Terrorism ? As soon as something is labeled Terrorism - the regular rules of Justice go out the window - giving the State a whole bunch more power -and the rights of citizens are stripped away.

So lets lower this bar to a protest that gets rowdy in any way ---- .. sure - good move .. and pretend that this is not a big step towards totalitarianism in the process.