Political Crossfire Forums

[John]

MG1962 wrote: Quote: Do you think that kids today are receiving a better education than they did before the establishment of public education?

You are seriously stupid. Before public education, the vast majority of kids got no education, period.

That just isn't true. I'm not talking about schools set up by communities...I'm talking about government funded education.

[Snake]

John wrote: Has the US been duped into accepting the ten planks to the Communist manifesto? I don't know, let's ask mr Turtle.....

Mr. Turtle, how many licks does it take to get to the center of America accepting the ten planks to the Communist Manifesto?



Quote: 1.Abolition of Property in Land and Application of all Rents of Land to Public Purpose. I still own a house, it's in my name, it's my property, it belongs to me, as well as all of my other possessions

Quote: 2. A Heavy Progressive or Graduated Income Tax. Ok, you win this round mister.

Quote: 3.Abolition of All Rights of Inheritance. ??? Nope, I can still inherit stuff from dead relatives...

Quote: 4.Confiscation of the Property of All Emigrants and Rebels. Damn.....

Quote: 5.Centralization of Credit in the Hands of the State, by Means of a National Bank with State Capital and an Exclusive Monopoly. Sh*t

Quote: 6.Centralization of the Means of Communication and Transport in the Hands of the State. F*ck

Quote: 7. Extension of Factories and Instruments of Production Owned by the State, the Bringing Into Cultivation of Waste Lands, and the Improvement of the Soil Generally in Accordance with a Common Plan. I haven't got a clue what this one means, do I get a hint?

Quote: 8.Equal Liability of All to Labor. Establishment of Industrial Armies, Especially for Agriculture. How does this apply to the hobos? They don't have liability to labor...

Quote: 9.Combination of Agriculture with Manufacturing Industries; Gradual Abolition of the Distinction Between Town and Country by a More Equable Distribution of the Population over the Country. mmm, you win this round as well..... *curses inaudibly*

Quote: 10. Free Education for All Children in Public Schools. Abolition of Children's Factory Labor in it's Present Form. Combination of Education with Industrial Production. Public schools suck, but it's better than no schooling at all. This right here doesn't prove anything, because many systems have adopted a public schooling, not just communist.

So, are you saying that after killing commies for the good of the nation, we actually are communists?

[John]

Quote: I still own a house, it's in my name, it's my property, it belongs to me, as well as all of my other possessions

No you don't. Stop paying your property taxes and the government will evict you.

[John]

Quote: ??? Nope, I can still inherit stuff from dead relatives...

Ever heard of the Death Tax?

[John]

John wrote: Quote: I still own a house, it's in my name, it's my property, it belongs to me, as well as all of my other possessions

No you don't. Stop paying your property taxes and the government will evict you.

And since you live in Texas...you don't have mineral rights. In other words...if you strike oil on your land, or find gold in the dirt. It ALL belongs to the government.

[Snake]

John wrote: Ever heard of the Death Tax? yup, but it never prevented me from collecting what's mine according to the will.

[John]

Kamel wrote: John wrote: Ever heard of the Death Tax? yup, but it never prevented me from collecting what's mine according to the will.

Not totally. But it does seem to be moving in that direction.

[Snake]

John wrote: No you don't. Stop paying your property taxes and the government will evict you. Propert tax has been around since the fuedal system. Long before Marx was born.

[John]

Kamel wrote: John wrote: No you don't. Stop paying your property taxes and the government will evict you. Propert tax has been around since the fuedal system. Long before Marx was born.

It matters not. It's still one of the planks. And the US practices it.

[JohnnyQ]

I'm glad I am not the only one who thinks this country is turning into a totalitarian state.

[Wizard From Oz]

I really dont think you guys understand what you are reading here. The ten planks where the foundations of creating a communist state in 1850, not 2006.

Example - the property tax. In 1850 - the vast majority of the urban population didn't own land. Hence they didn't pay tax So the idea is to suck money out of the upper and middle class to help begin the worker revolution.

This concept cant occur in 2006 because of the high percentage of home ownership - And in fact increasing the land taxes only helps strengthen the government position rather than weaken it.

Marx wrote the document as a European answer - I am not sure about the US. But in Europe only land owners could vote, therefore the more land owners you could bankrupt, the weaker the governments power base became

The concept of education in 1850 was different than today. An education at the basic level involved little more than reading and basic maths. In that era the only real media was print based. So an illiterate population is hard to expose to the percieved advantages over the exisiing government.

Basically you couldn't indoctornate a population unless they could read to begin with. The subtler concept behind this is to rob industrialists of cheap labour in the form of child labourers. In other words damage their profit margin

[Medius]

Kamel wrote:
Quote: 1.Abolition of Property in Land and Application of all Rents of Land to Public Purpose. I still own a house, it's in my name, it's my property, it belongs to me, as well as all of my other possessions


I'll agree that "abolition" would be a strong word to describe the current state of property ownership, however, I wouldn't say you really own it. You are charged rent for property (property tax) there are severe restrictions oftentimes on how you can use it (zoning). You have requirements to fulfill by owning it (local ordinances). The state can take it for many reasons, including failure to pay taxes and questionable public use. It can be declared a historical site, taking nearly all your property rights away. It can be declared a wildlife preserve, same as above...

Kamel wrote:
Quote: 3.Abolition of All Rights of Inheritance. ??? Nope, I can still inherit stuff from dead relatives...


Again with the abolition being a strong word. The estate tax would be a precursor to this however, as well as income tax. Inheritances often take a serious hit.

Kamel wrote:
Quote: 7. Extension of Factories and Instruments of Production Owned by the State, the Bringing Into Cultivation of Waste Lands, and the Improvement of the Soil Generally in Accordance with a Common Plan. I haven't got a clue what this one means, do I get a hint?


Basically, it is the governmental expansion into state owned production. There are small nibbles into this with subsidizing. The cultivation of waste lands and improvement of the soil could be linked closely with actions by the EPA and also the taking of land for the preservation of wildlife (or trees or marshes or whatever "needs" to be saved).

Kamel wrote:
Quote: 8.Equal Liability of All to Labor. Establishment of Industrial Armies, Especially for Agriculture. How does this apply to the hobos? They don't have liability to labor...


Hobos don't have to labor because they don't own anything. Owning a car or land brings a person to taxation which in turn forces them to labor. You cannot live in this country without a job, even if you own land and could grow enough food to survive, you would be required to give back to the state, which requires some manner of income. Hobos would be the "rebels" which would be automatically dispossesed of all things in their possession and most likely rounded up and put to labor forcibly. This, of course, has not happened.

Kamel wrote:
So, are you saying that after killing commies for the good of the nation, we actually are communists?

I wouldn't say that we are communists, but I would say we are getting pretty damn close. The dissolution of state powers set us down this road. The state level government has more power to invade your life than the federal (as far as the constitution is concerned) however there are fundamental rights that protect a citizen such as the ability to travel freely between the states. So if a state started down the road of communism, you could leave and find one that better suits your choice of government.

With the federal expansions and the uniform laws that have begun to form across all states, you pretty much begin to lose your right to self governance and are at the will of the majority.

Big government is bad.

[Medius]

John wrote: John wrote: Quote: I still own a house, it's in my name, it's my property, it belongs to me, as well as all of my other possessions

No you don't. Stop paying your property taxes and the government will evict you.

And since you live in Texas...you don't have mineral rights. In other words...if you strike oil on your land, or find gold in the dirt. It ALL belongs to the government.

This isn't true, you can own mineral rights in Texas. Oftentimes when someone sells land, however, they choose not to sell the mineral rights. This means that someone else gets the payoff for resources found, but you still get some for the use of the land.

[Medius]

MG1962 wrote: I really dont think you guys understand what you are reading here. The ten planks where the foundations of creating a communist state in 1850, not 2006.

Example - the property tax. In 1850 - the vast majority of the urban population didn't own land. Hence they didn't pay tax So the idea is to suck money out of the upper and middle class to help begin the worker revolution.

This concept cant occur in 2006 because of the high percentage of home ownership - And in fact increasing the land taxes only helps strengthen the government position rather than weaken it.

Marx wrote the document as a European answer - I am not sure about the US. But in Europe only land owners could vote, therefore the more land owners you could bankrupt, the weaker the governments power base became

The concept of education in 1850 was different than today. An education at the basic level involved little more than reading and basic maths. In that era the only real media was print based. So an illiterate population is hard to expose to the percieved advantages over the exisiing government.

Basically you couldn't indoctornate a population unless they could read to begin with. The subtler concept behind this is to rob industrialists of cheap labour in the form of child labourers. In other words damage their profit margin

I agree with your assessment, however, it also pertains specifically to the Marxist ideal of communism. The communism we see in practice is really a totalitarian state that uses communism as a guise to hold absolute power and provide an equal distribution of a small amount of wealth while accumulating to a few sources the remainder.

If you were to take a country that enjoys its freedom and firmly believes in capitalism and democracy, and attempt to drive it to a totalitarian communist state, you would need to do so with some finesse.

For instance, you create a consolidation of property by convincing the people that certain land needs to be protected (of course by the government). You convince the people that the state needs a share of the fruits of all labor in order to keep them safe. A standing military-industrial complex is necessary to protect the people from all manner of percieved threats. Public education must be in place and also should include indoctrination towards tolerance of all peoples and lifestyles by teaching that traditions are outdated and wrong.

While I'm not fully buying into the "America is Communist" theory, I will tell you that there are a lot of things accepted in today's society that look very much like subtle shifts towards a totalitarian socialist state in which only a few people will share the fruits of all labor.

Just because I can see that there is a pattern of degeneration of the fundamental ideals of our country that favor a socialist state, doesn't mean that they are necessarily engineered. I won't discount the possibility, but it isn't my primary concern. Whether engineered or natural, the results are just as dangerous.

[Rhoades]

Most people wrongly assume that without public education the children wouldn't get educated. That assumption is totally wrong. It relates back to people being taught to rely on the government for everything. You can't be self-sufficient, you need the government to take care of you. People think public education is the only way when in reality it's actually one of the worst ways.

[Wizard From Oz]

Quote: I agree with your assessment, however, it also pertains specifically to the Marxist ideal of communism. The communism we see in practice is really a totalitarian state that uses communism as a guise to hold absolute power and provide an equal distribution of a small amount of wealth while accumulating to a few sources the remainder.


I agree totally, which makes this ten planks arguement even more redundant.

And having spent some time in the US - I sensed it was moving closer to fascist ideology than socialist - simply because so much is driven by the right wing of politics. And yes both have things in common, though fascism has a lot more scope for capitialist activities

[Rhoades]

MG1962 wrote: Quote: I agree with your assessment, however, it also pertains specifically to the Marxist ideal of communism. The communism we see in practice is really a totalitarian state that uses communism as a guise to hold absolute power and provide an equal distribution of a small amount of wealth while accumulating to a few sources the remainder.


I agree totally, which makes this ten planks arguement even more redundant.

And having spent some time in the US - I sensed it was moving closer to fascist ideology than socialist - simply because so much is driven by the right wing of politics. And yes both have things in common, though fascism has a lot more scope for capitialist activities
i was under the assumption that extreme right wing ideals would mean less government and more emphasis on the individual, not fascism.

[Wizard From Oz]

Quote: i was under the assumption that extreme right wing ideals would mean less government and more emphasis on the individual, not fascism.

A hall mark of of right wing politics is strong central government. When you get out as far as fascism and national socialism, you are right off the scale

Say George Bush was a 10 - Franco would be a 70 - so a long way to go if that makes sense

[Rhoades]

MG1962 wrote: Quote: i was under the assumption that extreme right wing ideals would mean less government and more emphasis on the individual, not fascism.

A hall mark of of right wing politics is strong central government. When you get out as far as fascism and national socialism, you are right off the scale

Say George Bush was a 10 - Franco would be a 70 - so a long way to go if that makes sense
aren't libertarians/anarchists considered right on the political spectrum?

Left wing____________________________ Right Wing
Large government<---------------> Small government

[Wizard From Oz]

Quote: aren't libertarians/anarchists considered right on the political spectrum?

Left wing____________________________ Right Wing
Large government<---------------> Small government

Libertarians would be a little left of centre. Ananchists - who knows - they dont believe in any government.

left wing usually prefer a large government, but not as centrally controlled as the far right. If that makes sense. Typically they would have more levels of govenment than the right - though in truth the actual level of control would be about the same