Do you think Mao and Stalin deserve their popularity?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Communist_state
Now you do...if read it. You probably didn't though. Facts don't matter.

 

Thanks for including that wiki. That piece describes to a tee my overall analysis of the commie/marxist/socialist ideology(s) and agenda. Now if only the liblosers here could grasp just how dangerous their mother ideology(s) have been and continue to be. Seems like this new generation of progressives and alike haven't as yet appreciated Ronald Reagan's leadership skills in destroying much of communism back in the 80s. But hey, there's still time for them to get a rude awakening to the history of our times.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Communist_state#Disputed_or_mixed_governments
The US, its not on there.

 

Of course its not on there. America has had a capitalist economy from its inception up and until mr. hussein stepped up to the plate to offer his form of communism. It takes time for places like America to make it onto the wiki site as being a full fledged red diaper baby commie nation. You may not get to see it happen if there is a GOD above letting Romney bring back some sanity to the American shores.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_communist_parties
Don't see the Democratic party on there, and they've been around quite awhile. Also I find it hard to believe that you know anything about the president if you don't even know his last name.

 

The democrap party is no more. With mr. hussein as our most liberal postus in the history of our nation--the party has become a progressive/socialist party. Why do you keep yer head buried in the sand. Own up to the facts.

 

Facts, you've presented none.

 

Yeah, these last 3+ years of sheer destructive misery for our nation don't produce the facts. Okay, I forgot some of you choose to wear blinders throughout life. Carry on!

 

What corrupt government did Lenin overthrow? Are you talking about the Provisional Government or the Tsar? The government that Lenin established was in itself extraordinarily corrupt and totalitarian. It was also far from a popular movement.

 

I never said Obama was good, I said he wasn't a socialist, and the last three years don't prove otherwise.

 

You're kidding of course! Keep in mind that obama has the most liberal record in our history as a nation--even more to the left than FDR, and that's saying somehting. Obama is the epitome of socialism, period!

 

Liberalism is inherently NOT socialism. They are not compatible.

 

Common confusion with political parties. In the U.S, what people typically refer to as liberals have political ideologies that are more in line with socialism (though certainly NOT socialism). The classical political idea of liberalism on the other hand is, as you said, inherently NOT socialism. Unfortunately, most people become confused by the U.S. party system.

 

No dictator deserves attention because like all dictators they need power and use fear tactics to get it.

 

Compatible? They're the mirror image of one another. No differences whatsoever.

 

Classical liberalism is completely contradictory to socialism. John Locke and Karl Marx would not have been friends.

 

You're so right, but what we're comparing here is the similarities between socialism and modern day liberalism.

 

Be more clear then. Liberalism and conservatism in the U.S. mean very different things historically and even today in the rest of the world.

 

Yeah, I have no problem with that statement. But we were talking about comparing socialism with liberalism....not liberalism with conservatism.

 

why can't you americans stop misuing the words liberalism and conservatism? please, it's silly. no one's laughing anymore though. it's gone on long enough.

 

It is pushed through the media and academia to keep Americans voting in more of the same thing. Technically, Americans have had only neoliberals in power for nearly a century. But to teach the reality would be to expose the con that is American democracy.

 

So far as I am concerned, many major powers at some point in their respective histories had a regime or regimes that abused human rights in abhorrent ways. None of the leaders who led or played instrumental roles in those abuses deserve to possess any popularity nowadays, in my opinion, and among such personalities without a doubt would be Stalin and Mao.

 

They were monsters.