Do people even know the meaning of communism instead of throwing it around to mean everything they don't like?
2020 US Elections | Biden certified as President | Dems control Congress
- Thread starter Raoul
- Start date
- Status
Yeah, communism is spreading in the Democratic Party. Alright
I can't tell if you're serious.
Is it your opinions that the Democratic party is at an ideological standstill or leaning increasingly more towards the center?
McCarthy reborn.
What did you expect in reply to your nonsensical post? The only thing spreading in that country is the fecking virus.Great argument
As in communism is spreading in the same party that rejected Sanders for Biden?
Every time I come into this thread I think to myself "it can't be any worse, surely?" and each time I look at a few videos and i'm proven wrong.
The big winner last night was Tim Scott - for simply coming across as vaguely normal.
No, wait, back up. Is YOUR opinion that they are leaning towards communism?
Looks to me like the progressive part of the party is leaning towards a Marxist view on national policy, yes. I don't know whether they're strong enough to actually hijack a Biden presidency though.
You think they're leaning more in the other direction?
Can you give me some examples of Marxist views and why these views make you think they're leaning towards communism? Especially in light of Biden being nominated? Any examples of Biden in particular?
I have not said anything about leaning in any direction, not sure why you are trying to move to that.
Well, you questioned my statement, then didn't want to answer my question and asked me a question in return, which I have now answered. I don't see why you're so opposed to answering? If you find it the idea of them moving further and further to the left ideologically that silly, sure you must think they're either be at a standstill or going the opposite direction?
The Green New Deal, openly refusing to comdemn violent rioting and looting by extreme left groups, just the fact that they openly had a hearing on reparations last year. More than enough for me. Not sure why you're asking me about Biden, I don't think he's a communist or even faintly Marxist in any way. Not that I think his views on anything will matter much even if he's elected.
Get ready for some right wing talking points from this dude.
This is where conservatives are in 2020, screaming that the communists are coming. Has there ever been a more cowardly ideology as conservatism? Fearful of everything so they hide under a blanket of hypocrisy.
Bullet point the communist ideals in the green new deal for me.
If you look at the major campaign items of this year I would say they are (in no particular order):
1. Gun control (b/c of course the R's bring it up)
2. Climate change
3. Universal healthcare
4. Racial equality
5. Basic human rights
6. Income inequality
7. Corporate greed.
I am sure I am missing quite a few, but these are what comes to mind. I bring this up because when I discuss politics with my republican friends(?) I can usually end the conversation by asking a single question:
Which side of this issue would Jesus have been on?
Usually ends in bluster (since they are all "devout christians" - small c on purpose) because they know exactly what the answer is but do not want to vocalize it. Blazing bunch of greedy hypocrites.
Wait, what? Communism spreading in the liberal party in the US? The feck are you talking about?
The green new deal is communist? Furthermore I cannot imagine democrats dont oppose violent rioting. I'm not sure you know what communism even is honestly.
As for your question, by nomitating Biden, the DNC have shown to be firmly in the center. More right wing economically than the most right wing partt in The Netherlands.
Speaking of leaning, how do you feel about the RNC leaning increasingly towards fascism?
Last edited:
Jaysus, what's this communist discussion?
Here in Norway the Democrats would be considered to be situated in the dark blue specter of the Norwegian Conservative Party (Høyre). At the outmost left in Parliament (one seat) we have a party called Red which is vaguely grounded in some of the marxist and communist ideas of the 60s and 70s, but they're basically socialists and I guess similar to what our labour party was 30-40 years ago. We do have an actual communist party and they're a very small bunch of nut jobs endorsing the 9-11 conspiracies.
Also, that video of Don Jr's wife is the craziest thing I've seen. I had to stop after 20 seconds.
Here in Norway the Democrats would be considered to be situated in the dark blue specter of the Norwegian Conservative Party (Høyre). At the outmost left in Parliament (one seat) we have a party called Red which is vaguely grounded in some of the marxist and communist ideas of the 60s and 70s, but they're basically socialists and I guess similar to what our labour party was 30-40 years ago. We do have an actual communist party and they're a very small bunch of nut jobs endorsing the 9-11 conspiracies.
Also, that video of Don Jr's wife is the craziest thing I've seen. I had to stop after 20 seconds.
None of these things are Marxist in any way or form. No, the Green New Deal is not Marxist. Americans desperately need some actual education on history and political theory.
No, the Green New Deal is not even remotely communist (neither was the original New Deal but that's another discussion). The Green New Deal is simply recognizing that science is real and climate change is real and something organized needs to be done. You can't let the laissez-faire free market resolve issues of climate change because it won't. It's a negative externality that is one of the massive blind spots to free market fundamentalism.
In fact, you need regulation and over-arching policies to even get capitalism to function remotely efficiently.
And protests over long-standing institutional racism isn't communism either, not even a similar issue. And the violence was started by far-right-wing extremists trying to discredit protestors and start their race war. Fascism in the Republican party is really the bigger concern
https://theintercept.com/2020/07/15/george-floyd-protests-police-far-right-antifa/
https://www.businessinsider.com/3-b...s-george-floyd-protest-riot-conspiracy-2020-6
How on earth would Biden's views not matter even if he is President? Have you observed US politics for the past 60 years? The President matters, and matters a lot. The incumbent's party rarely does anything significant that isn't driven by the White House itself.
Why do you even bother replying when you have no interest in anything else than your go to bait and switch?
It's a thread dedicated to bashing Trump, so obviously numerous good and bad counter arguments are to be expected, but you're really in a league of your own when it comes to being a dishonest debater. You dodge questions under the pretext of wanting to clarify something I said, and after I make an effort to clarify my view you again dodge and simply bring up something unrelated I wrote about a month ago? Seriously, grow up.
I don't disagree with that in itself. But he's a half senile old man, and I don't think he'll be the driving force behind the policies coming out of the White House if he's even still President in a few years.
One of the cofounders of BLM calls herself a trained Marxist. You don't have to openly cite Lenin and comrade everyone to be a Marxist.
@pierrethesnack Having contrasting opinions is fun, but I wish we would get one who could form 1 single cohorent argument instead of opening with a ridiculous statement and trying to switch topics when called out for it.
Your opening post claimed the democrat party is moving towards communism. The examples you've listed so far are rubbish. The leader of BLM is not a democratic politician. If the Democrat nominee (Biden) is somehow irrelevant than so is a member of BLM. Give us an example of communist policy that's being advocated by the democrats. Either that, or admit your first post was simply aimed at riling people up (which it did magnificently).
Your opening post claimed the democrat party is moving towards communism. The examples you've listed so far are rubbish. The leader of BLM is not a democratic politician. If the Democrat nominee (Biden) is somehow irrelevant than so is a member of BLM. Give us an example of communist policy that's being advocated by the democrats. Either that, or admit your first post was simply aimed at riling people up (which it did magnificently).
I disagree with that assessment. He is too old to an energetic president, and he's certainly started to lose a few steps intellectually in recent years. But unless that deteriorates further, historically Joe Biden has been a guy who has opinions about all the major policy issues (whether you find those good, bad, terrible, uninformed is another issue). I don't think that when you combine someone who has their own views with the power that is currently afforded the US presidency, that you get much else other than that person ultimately having to be in agreement with any major legislation that will be passed. Put another way, I think that even if devolves into a really poor mental state, unless they remove him/he resigns then even his senile ideas will still carry more weight than any other cabinet member or democratic member of congress that is opposed.
Besides that, the core of Biden's cabinet-level and similar personnel are much more from the centrist part of the party than the more progressive wing. Even if he's slowing down and delegating more to them than a President has in the recent past, it's not AOC or Sanders who will therefore be the drivers of policy.
Who or what will be the driving force then?
That still doesn't mean the Green New Deal or a hearing on reparations for slavery are Marxist things. You don't have to openly cite Lenin to be Marxist but you have to advocate for abolishing private ownership of the means of production at the very least. You're not Marxist without that.
The "refusing to condemn violence and looting" is a simple lie, of course. From Joe Biden through James Clyburn to Ted Wheeler, plenty of Democrats condemned violence and looting.
I do believe the ideological foundation for communism is becoming increasingly popular in the Democratic party. Sure, saying it is leaning towards actual communism is very hyperbolic, just like when people openly call the Republicans fascist and racist.
I don't agree that the examples are trash. Failure from Democratic leaders to condemn and stop mass violence in looting by far left extremist groups tells me either that they are incometent or that they feel ideologically uanble to confront it. I think it's the last, because the mindset in these groups is shared by many people in the progressive part of the party.
Also, just to clarify, I am not complaining about the debate climate in general. Calling my opinions rubbish and a dozen sarcastic comments are all part of civilized debate as far as I'm concerned. The only thing I don't understand is pretending you want to debate only to dodge and ridicule, like a certain poster always does.
Im more than happy to debate without being a cnut, mind. I just didnt think you were looking for that by your opening post.
Im sure there are members of the DNC with extreme views, but they're in the fringes. By nominating a rather conservative democrat like Biden I'd say they' firmly staying in the center.
What do the opinions of the co-founder of the BLM organization have to do with the Democratic Party though? They're not connected organizations. Yes, Democrats support BLM, but the slogan, not the organization. As was discussed extensively in another thread, those two are separate: you can support the general idea behind the BLM slogan without caring for the BLM organization (which came second and didn't create the slogan).
If you truly think that the left wing of the DNC (which isn't dominant, as evidenced by Biden's win and their lack of speaking time at the DNC convention; even Republicans got to say more!) is getting its inspiration from communism, what do you think about northern and western European politics? Cause the left wing of the DNC would merely be a centre-left party in, say, Scandinavian countries.
The problem here is that any move to the left ultimately, if always followed by a next step to the left, will end in full-on socialism, with full state ownership of everything. But there is no reason to make that full extrapolation; no-one in the left wing of the DNC has ever said they wanted to go there. So why impose this kind of thinking on them?
I do think there are stronger elements to point to fascist and racist tendencies in the GOP. A lot of their language is obvious and accepted code for racism ('protect good suburbs from an invasion of the poor' is a well-accepted euphemism for 'protect whites from having to live with blacks') and their attempts at oppression to censure and violence (like through this new federal police) are happening in broad daylight. You might argue that it's Trump and not the GOP as a whole that's advocating this, but given what's happening at the Republican Convention right now, it's hard to differentiate the two.
Can you quote or otherwise point to anyone that supported the rioting and looting? There's a difference between saying that you understand where people are coming from and condoining the actions.
Also, in response to your earlier point: if the rioting isn't Trump's fault because it is happening in DNC-led cities, how will anything change under another Trump presidency?
Yes, most people are just ridiculing your post, but a few have answered in detail, and you have mostly chosen to ignore those. You're contributing to that discussion climate that way. In particular, I'd love if you could engage seriously with the post below, which I thought was awesome:
Oh come on man you can't call the democrats a bunch of commies and expect any serious type of debate.
I'm just pointing out that maybe a guy who can sit through a 2 hour daysand 10 minute film about fascism and comes away thinking the people in the SS uniforms did nothing wrong might not have best "takes" on current US politics.
This poll is only relevant if the total number of republicans has stayed the same. I would venture to guess the number of self identifying republicans has shrunk. This is born out by the fact that Biden is +10 even though he is -10 for independents and only +2 for party voting. For me this suggests that a decent chunk has taken 1 (or 2) steps leftwards.
For hard identifiers, it's 26 now vs 27 in 2016 for GOP (31 vs 30 for Dems). The reason the end result of all this is so much better than the 2016 result is because Trump got ~9% of registered Dems.
Last edited:
- Status