How the democrat party become the party of hatred and division

Subtract "administration of the means of production" - is it still "socialism"?

MERRIAM-WEBSTER

"socialism noun
Save Word
To save this word, you'll need to log in.
Log In
so·cial·ism | \ ˈsō-shə-ˌli-zəm \
Definition of socialism
1 : any of various economic and political theories advocating collective or governmental ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods
2a : a system of society or group living in which there is no private property
b : a system or condition of society in which the means of production are owned and controlled by the state
3 : a stage of society in Marxist theory transitional between capitalism and communism and distinguished by unequal distribution of goods and pay according to work done"
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/socialism

 

It’s a step in the right direction.

 

OK .. So any Protest that turns violent is "Terrorism" - already you try to backtrack from your own position... so lets keep track.

A protest where there is property damage is not Terrorism - but a Protest where there is Violence - "such as someone getting squeezed by the Crowd as per the example you gave" is Terrorism.

What a joke

 

Yea right, just like this is a peaceful protest.

 

Are you going to believe that 93% were "peaceful" or your lying eyes?

 

You are confusing pure socialism with Socialist policy.

We don't have complete ownership by the State of the means of production - so it is not pure socialism -- one can look at it as "Partial Ownership" exerted through taxes.

Regardless - none of this changes the fact that wealth Redistribution - by definition - such as the one above - is Socialist Policy by definition -including the above definition - and includes the cash to pay those who administrate.

That cash comes from "Socialism" - Wealth Redistribution - take from some for the good of the many.

 

Oops! Censored AntiFa/BLM violence. Let's see if the Ministry of Truth has erased all the evidence:

 

Exactly... The history of the Democrat Party is full of racism and suppression.

 

There is plenty of documentation that has been scrapped up off of various social media platforms showing that the capitol riot had elements present that planned for more than a protest. I’m sure there were people there that only planned on demonstrating, but a good number that got inside planned to assault the capital building with political aims from the word go.

That, by definition, is Terrorism.

 

You have no clue what you are talking about. The whole purpose of Socialism is "wealth redistribution".

Explain to me a socialist system that does not have "wealth redistribution" as one of the core principles ?

The claim "if production isn't "Collectivized" there is no socialism" is abject nonsense on steroids. The reason for this is because if one uses some definition of Pure Socialism - there is no such society in existence .. so you have rendered the usage of the term meaningless w/r to western system.

Further - there is a difference between "Socialism" and "Socialist Policy" - something you have pointed out. This does not change the fact that Socialist Policy is a form of Socialism.

 

The cash comes from taxation. Every government does that.
Call it what you want, but at this point massive redistribution of wealth is desperately needed.

Replacing much of the socialist bureaucracy with Big Green Government Checks to meet specific critical human needs would, IMO, be far more popular across the spectrum than socialism/Democratism/GOPism/fascism etc.

 

There are not many of those true believers left. TG

 

Sure there were those who sought to take advantage of a protest - by say planning a bomb attack or some such thing. This would be terrorism - agreed.

That however does not make all the protestors "Terrorists" as has been implied by many seeking to lower the Terrorism bar to near zero - including branding the leaders of this protest inciters of terrorism - even though the leader in question had no involvement in the actions by those seeking to use the protest for the purposes of terrorism

Consider the Rule of Law principle - One person not to be punished for the actions of another.

Consider that as soon as we label something "Terrorism" the Rule of law and principle of justice hit the trash can along with normal constitutional protection of individuals from the state.

 

So you are saying that the numerous BLM and ANTIFA perps that were also involved in the Capitol entry are TERRORISTS ???

 

If I have 100 coins on a table, and say that 93% of them are dimes, does your ability to point out 7 pennies invalidate my statement?

 

Why would you think that I am against wealth redistribution ? that I don't think it is needed ? I am merely distinguishing between "Communism" and Socialist Policy.

The point being - those that call the the Blue side "Communists" on the basis of wealth redistribution - have no clue what they are talking about.

 

Yep. Not everyone there was a rioter however.

 

Total BS...

The South is full of current Democrats who had ancestors who were involved in lynchings and the KKK.

I happen to personally know many who are proud of the KKK medals hidden in their closets.

 

So what? Violent protests are common in America, and so far none of them amount to "terrorism".
Routine law enforcement can deal with violent protests whenever it is inclined to do so.

 

I’m not in favor of labeling all of the people present to be terrorists either, but for a significant number, the shoe fits.

 

Okay. What if the people involved are foreign Islamists?

 

Assuming they were involved in a planned effort to assault the capital, yes, but who are these BLM and ANTIFA perps you’re talking about? Got names?

 

Incorrect, your presence can be enough for you to be convicted of a crime.

Example we walk into a store, I pull a gun on the storekeeper, he shoots first and kills me, in most states you will be charged with my death as an accomplice.

 

More aptly called a welfare state.